Young Republicans in USA
- Thread starter ILLYRIAN
- Start date
ChaseRules
When it comes to dating I the Slayer.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2012
- Messages
- 8,239
white avenger
white avenger
I haven't been a "young" Republican in a long time, but there are valid arguments showing that Obama's policies wouldn't be effective
Trump was right to repeal Obama's failing climate control scheme
but, speaking from personal experience, as a former Georgia Power employee, I can only say that, given the technology that we have today, coal is a viable, economical source of energy that simply cannot be replaced with anything that we have available at this time. Wind and solar power aren't currently efficient enough to replace the existing coal fired plants. Maybe they will be some day, or an alternate source of energy will be developed, like methane or cold fusion, but as of now, we just don't have it, and the alternatives are having more realistic environmental regulations on the use of coal and other fossil fuels (which is, certainly, at best a compromise) or staying with the over-regulations Obama's plan imposed, and learning to do without a whole lot of the conveniences that electricity provides. Right now, in order to maintain our current energy demands, we have to have coal and we have to have oil, and there just aren't that many more regulations that we can impose on either one and keep them affordable.
ILLYRIAN
Druish Pervonian Wizard
Oh dear, the figures in the article in The Hill are blatantly false, it states that levels of emissions for 2100 will be met. Who is making those levels, the rest of the world adheres to the Paris Protocol to try and save the world. The figures are similar to the anti - smoking claims, the tale was to avoid the bad from happening. Unlike Trump's thought processes. He thumbs his nose to climate change, he don't seem to mind that increased water levels are encroaching the lands of Florida.
How can America meet the year 2100 emission levels when the figures for 2020 have yet to be fixed.
But if Trump's trade war take's effect the resultant global trade war against America could mean so many Americans are put out of work that most Americans will not be able to afford power or oil, so the country might meet emission level figures for 2020.
Obama's policy may have been wrong, instead of correcting it Trump repealed it.
....................................................................................................................................................................................
Considering the warning I've had, and if you've had similar how about we
leave it at you've had your say and I've had my say.
How can America meet the year 2100 emission levels when the figures for 2020 have yet to be fixed.
But if Trump's trade war take's effect the resultant global trade war against America could mean so many Americans are put out of work that most Americans will not be able to afford power or oil, so the country might meet emission level figures for 2020.
Obama's policy may have been wrong, instead of correcting it Trump repealed it.
....................................................................................................................................................................................
Considering the warning I've had, and if you've had similar how about we
leave it at you've had your say and I've had my say.
We gotta accept the consequences of our global actions instead of pretending that science or space will save us.
Individuals do not need a government to tell them how to be environmentally aware. We can all choose to do it in our own daily actions.
Individuals do not need a government to tell them how to be environmentally aware. We can all choose to do it in our own daily actions.
Ethan Reigns
Scooby
Governments are responding to the public and in a democracy, this is the intent.
If you go to the nearest mall parking lot, take a look at what is there. I don't have to go back that many generations to see my ancestors living in a house smaller than a Ford F-150 quad cab long bed pickup. We have minivans but some have become giants. Where the sedan was king, now the SUV is the dominant mode of transportation and where the weight of cars was beginning to decline in the 1970's, it has now rebounded to much greater than it was before. I learned to drive in a 1963 Oldsmobile that weighed 4002 pounds and it was considered heavy then. Most trucks, SUV's and vans are more massive now with the Chevrolet Avalanche being 5455 pounds and the heaviest, the Dodge Power Wagon, crushing the scales at 7050 pounds. My 2375 pound Miata and 3299 pound Subaru Legacy wagon are actually lightweights in the modern scheme of things. Some of the weight gain can be accounted for by safety equipment but a lot of it is fat, lazy people picking fat, lazy cars.
Maybe these vehicles should only be available to people who need them. People who support reducing fuel usage often want other people to reduce fuel consumption so there will be more for them to waste. Perhaps we should not be surprised that governments are loath to make any moves to control fuel usage. I predicted that we would be embroiled in oil wars back in the 1950's when I was still in grade school and now we are. Do you think we would be in Iraq if their main export was pomegranates?
If you look at the infrastructure in the US, a typical example is Kennedy Airport in New York. Its four runways are at an altitude of 12 to 13 feet above sea level. It won't take much of a rise in sea level to close it down. Canada will introduce a carbon exchange soon with excessive users buying carbon credits on a market that sells them, so companies can introduce carbon consumption reductions and sell credits to companies that want them. The carbon tax that has existed the longest is the Norwegian carbon tax and no one really knows if it has made any difference but governments love a good excuse for another hand in everyone's pocket.
I see fuel usage as a problem of stewardship of scarce resources that cannot be replenished at anywhere near the rate of usage. I do not see this as a climate change problem because there is a lot more to climate change than carbon dioxide. A thousand years ago, the Vikings settled Greenland and grew crops of rye. You can't do that now - it's still too cold although research crops are being grown there now. The Little Ice Age of 1300 - 1850 gave us a false sense of normal and we can expect temperatures to rise with the main effect being drought where adequate water has existed before.
I wish the Young Republicans luck, but I have no hope whatsoever that they will be heard. Money talks and it is shouting them down.
If you go to the nearest mall parking lot, take a look at what is there. I don't have to go back that many generations to see my ancestors living in a house smaller than a Ford F-150 quad cab long bed pickup. We have minivans but some have become giants. Where the sedan was king, now the SUV is the dominant mode of transportation and where the weight of cars was beginning to decline in the 1970's, it has now rebounded to much greater than it was before. I learned to drive in a 1963 Oldsmobile that weighed 4002 pounds and it was considered heavy then. Most trucks, SUV's and vans are more massive now with the Chevrolet Avalanche being 5455 pounds and the heaviest, the Dodge Power Wagon, crushing the scales at 7050 pounds. My 2375 pound Miata and 3299 pound Subaru Legacy wagon are actually lightweights in the modern scheme of things. Some of the weight gain can be accounted for by safety equipment but a lot of it is fat, lazy people picking fat, lazy cars.
Maybe these vehicles should only be available to people who need them. People who support reducing fuel usage often want other people to reduce fuel consumption so there will be more for them to waste. Perhaps we should not be surprised that governments are loath to make any moves to control fuel usage. I predicted that we would be embroiled in oil wars back in the 1950's when I was still in grade school and now we are. Do you think we would be in Iraq if their main export was pomegranates?
If you look at the infrastructure in the US, a typical example is Kennedy Airport in New York. Its four runways are at an altitude of 12 to 13 feet above sea level. It won't take much of a rise in sea level to close it down. Canada will introduce a carbon exchange soon with excessive users buying carbon credits on a market that sells them, so companies can introduce carbon consumption reductions and sell credits to companies that want them. The carbon tax that has existed the longest is the Norwegian carbon tax and no one really knows if it has made any difference but governments love a good excuse for another hand in everyone's pocket.
I see fuel usage as a problem of stewardship of scarce resources that cannot be replenished at anywhere near the rate of usage. I do not see this as a climate change problem because there is a lot more to climate change than carbon dioxide. A thousand years ago, the Vikings settled Greenland and grew crops of rye. You can't do that now - it's still too cold although research crops are being grown there now. The Little Ice Age of 1300 - 1850 gave us a false sense of normal and we can expect temperatures to rise with the main effect being drought where adequate water has existed before.
I wish the Young Republicans luck, but I have no hope whatsoever that they will be heard. Money talks and it is shouting them down.