If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

 77 More: Obvious
•       •       •

4066 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 25 Oct 2020 at 4:25 AM (12 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:

 Paginated (1/page) Single page, reversed
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

And Covid has also shown that huge portions of the population will refuse to save themselves with disease and death littering the streets, literally.

Yeah but...

And then nobody drove anywhere all summer and emissions dropped on their own

Judging by the shiatshow threads that result whenever we talk about green energy or clean transport on this site, I imagine 90% of the difficulty lies in political will. Even people that do believe in global warming think we shouldn't do anything because it's too hard or they like the sound of a V8 or whatever the silly excuse is.

We need a consumer carbon tax ASAP. Like yesterday.

Fark yeah. I'm lucky enough to be 45, GenX and likely to be dead in 20 years before the climate shiat really hits the fan. I'm motivated to die relatively early in my case by my family history of Alzheimers, dropping dead due to overindulgence in beer and pork in 20 years will be perfect for me.

But I tell my step-kids and step-grandkids that climate is going to be the huge issue for their generations, and that today's politicians are full of shiat when it comes to reasons to avoid action on climate change.

If replacing old coal generated power stations with renewable resources as they come offline is so expensive (it's not) that it's impossible (it's not), but shutting down entire industries is fine to protect old people from COVID (it is but young people need economic support which is not being provided enough) then whoever is telling you this is a farking farkhead.

It's the Australian federal government's entire position though, also Trump's. Never listen to these arseholes, listen to scientists instead.

The skies got so clear this last spring.. driving home in the morning, I could see so far.. but it didn't last.

The argument from the fossil fuel guys has always been "We can't afford to do it"

My argument has always been "We can't afford not to"

COVID has done one thing well...

Expose how much money was being witheld from the people.

Now that the bottom line/hypercapitlist/neo liberal machine is at stake the purse strings semi sort of stingily open just enough to not let it entirely die at the source (the average consumer of their sh*t).

Unfortunately due to their Randian dogma their own bullsh*t is working against them via the dumbf*ck Tea Party and beyond types they worked so hard to get elected.

Sucks to be you, dicks.

Wallow in it!

It's funny that the people who extol the flexibility and creativity of people then say that we can't possibly use our markets and smarts to find alternatives. Price Carbon, it's simple market forces

Best case scenario, this pandemic leads to world-changing progress in the way that the Black Death helped to usher in the Renaissance. Worst case, we get our vaccines just in time to die in floods, wildfires, extreme weather, famine and Netflix outages.

Gordon Bennett: Best case scenario, this pandemic leads to world-changing progress in the way that the Black Death helped to usher in the Renaissance. Worst case, we get our vaccines just in time to die in floods, wildfires, extreme weather, famine and Netflix outages.

Thread done, I reckon. This is just about everything we need to know.

The problem is never the cost, it's who the money is going to. Not oil and gas, not defense contractors, not the Koch brothers, not the 1%. In fact it is making efforts to take money from those sources. So it's unacceptable.

Likwit: We need a consumer carbon tax ASAP. Like yesterday.

You're looking in the wrong direction, buddy.

Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions, study says

Covid 19 will result in the Progressives coming to power a decade ahead of when demographic changes would indicate.  President Biden will stop all fracking and oil drilling.  We will have a mandatory carbon tax and implement the smart cities initiative.   we will stop climate change

MaliFinn: And then nobody drove anywhere all summer and emissions dropped on their own

Whew! Dodged a bullet there! Now we don't have to do anything about climate change.

Likwit: Judging by the shiatshow threads that result whenever we talk about green energy or clean transport on this site, I imagine 90% of the difficulty lies in political will. Even people that do believe in global warming think we shouldn't do anything because it's too hard or they like the sound of a V8 or whatever the silly excuse is.

We need a consumer carbon tax ASAP. Like yesterday.

Impediments identified.

When the price of gasoline in the US doubles or triples in real terms, change will come really quickly. I am looking forward to seeing the Green New Deal.

Medic Zero: MaliFinn: And then nobody drove anywhere all summer and emissions dropped on their own

Whew! Dodged a bullet there! Now we don't have to do anything about climate change.

Whee, hooray!  Silliness!
However there will be some good long-lasting effects from this.  Working from home has exploded, and nobody wants to uncork that bottle.  We can get the same things done with less carbon and people enjoy it.

MaliFinn: Medic Zero: MaliFinn: And then nobody drove anywhere all summer and emissions dropped on their own

Whew! Dodged a bullet there! Now we don't have to do anything about climate change.

Whee, hooray!  Silliness!
However there will be some good long-lasting effects from this.  Working from home has exploded, and nobody wants to uncork that bottle.  We can get the same things done with less carbon and people enjoy it.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out that the commercial real estate and commercial travel sectors had willingly and joyfully contributed to every "go back to work" campaign. People like Bob Kraft, for example, must be drowning in red with as far down as their revenue must be right now.

But nothing will be done for the next 30 years thanks to the Boomer's death grip on wealth and political power.

Alphax: The skies got so clear this last spring.. driving home in the morning, I could see so far.. but it didn't last.

Opiate of the Lasses: Likwit: We need a consumer carbon tax ASAP. Like yesterday.

You're looking in the wrong direction, buddy.

Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions, study says

A consumer-level carbon tax would be extremely effective. It's been shown to work in several real world trials. The biggest problem is that it's quite regressive. I've seen several papers with really cool solutions, but they'd be 100% impossible in the US.

Europe is gonna whip our asses in the next decade unless our private sector can save the day.

2fardownthread: Likwit: Judging by the shiatshow threads that result whenever we talk about green energy or clean transport on this site, I imagine 90% of the difficulty lies in political will. Even people that do believe in global warming think we shouldn't do anything because it's too hard or they like the sound of a V8 or whatever the silly excuse is.

We need a consumer carbon tax ASAP. Like yesterday.

Impediments identified.

When the price of gasoline in the US doubles or triples in real terms, change will come really quickly. I am looking forward to seeing the Green New Deal.

Which Green New Deal? There's like 40 of them.

Climate change is the #1 reason to vote for Biden. Now, I don't think he'll actually do much in the way of helping solve the problem, because he's beholden to big money just like every other politician, but at least he won't try to actively make things worse like the Republicans.

\in theory getting liberal\moderate judges in the courts would be #2, but Democrats have pretty much lost that battle for the foreseeable future.

Likwit: Opiate of the Lasses: Likwit: We need a consumer carbon tax ASAP. Like yesterday.

You're looking in the wrong direction, buddy.

Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions, study says

A consumer-level carbon tax would be extremely effective. It's been shown to work in several real world trials. The biggest problem is that it's quite regressive. I've seen several papers with really cool solutions, but they'd be 100% impossible in the US.

Europe is gonna whip our asses in the next decade unless our private sector can save the day.

Narrator: the private sector did not save the day, there was too much money to be made letting things get worse.

quatchi: The argument from the fossil fuel guys has always been "We can't afford to do it"

My argument has always been "We can't afford not to"

Yes, but that's long term, and I've got the upcoming quarterly report to think of!

\this message brought to you by capitalism

It was something when Trump bragged about reduced carbon emissions during the debate.

"My incompetence on Covid has a silver lining!"

No, it never was that expensive. Just like universal healthcare isn't. It just involved a minority making less money while the majority would have more. Can't have that in the neoliberal/neocon world

Blathering Idjut: It was something when Trump bragged about reduced carbon emissions during the debate.

"My incompetence on Covid has a silver lining!"

I'll take it. I have two daughters and I'm concerned for their future. If this slight pause in global warming means my baby girls will have to murder just one less person for water or bullets as they roam the apocalyptic hellscape, it will have been worth it.

Smoking GNU: And Covid has also shown that huge portions of the population will refuse to save themselves with disease and death littering the streets, literally.

Covid has also shown that mother nature isn't going to wait for our ass to fix global warming and will take action on it's own.  And of course people fight it.

I was listening to one of the right-wing talking turds being interviewed this morning and it struck me how similar the virus talk is tho there climate talk. "We can't slow the spread but a vaccine will save us" "We can't slow fossils fuel use but innovation will save us".

I really really liked hearing Biden say that we are going to phase out fossil fuels and eliminate drug abuse offenses. I thought he was in danger of compromising with the RS on everything, so farkit, he's libby enough for me!

Aussie_As: Fark yeah. I'm lucky enough to be 45, GenX and likely to be dead in 20 years before the climate shiat really hits the fan. I'm motivated to die relatively early in my case by my family history of Alzheimers, dropping dead due to overindulgence in beer and pork in 20 years will be perfect for me.

But I tell my step-kids and step-grandkids that climate is going to be the huge issue for their generations, and that today's politicians are full of shiat when it comes to reasons to avoid action on climate change.

If replacing old coal generated power stations with renewable resources as they come offline is so expensive (it's not) that it's impossible (it's not), but shutting down entire industries is fine to protect old people from COVID (it is but young people need economic support which is not being provided enough) then whoever is telling you this is a farking farkhead.

It's the Australian federal government's entire position though, also Trump's. Never listen to these arseholes, listen to scientists instead.

There's already the beginnings of crop failures around the world and the Arctic is probably going to be ice free in the summer in the 2030s. You're going to be alive when the shiat starts really spraying.

hugadarn: I was listening to one of the right-wing talking turds being interviewed this morning and it struck me how similar the virus talk is tho there climate talk. "We can't slow the spread but a vaccine will save us" "We can't slow fossils fuel use but innovation will save us".

"Do nothing while the status quo gets actively worse."

Opiate of the Lasses: Likwit: We need a consumer carbon tax ASAP. Like yesterday.

You're looking in the wrong direction, buddy.

Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions, study says

Carbon VAT. Companies make products for people. That's the whole idea of VAT.

Darfur Parkour: I really really liked hearing Biden say that we are going to phase out fossil fuels and eliminate drug abuse offenses. I thought he was in danger of compromising with the RS on everything, so farkit, he's libby enough for me!

Are you interested in the ocean front property he's selling in Minnesota too?

It didn't get any cheaper, we just spent a chunk of the cost incidental to something else.

Jeebus Saves: Smoking GNU: And Covid has also shown that huge portions of the population will refuse to save themselves with disease and death littering the streets, literally.

Covid has also shown that mother nature isn't going to wait for our ass to fix global warming and will take action on it's own.  And of course people fight it.

Maybe COVID is the Earth's evolutionary response to humans not doing anything about climate change?  "Well, if humans aren't gonna do anything, then maybe I'll kill off 10% of 'em with this virus."  Thanos-light style.

Covid is an byproduct of climate change. Whether you want to change or not, it is going to happen.

hissatsu: Yeah but...

[Fark user image 850x566]

I feel like I want this cartoon to be updated, with the dude on stage being replaced with an artistic rendering of that Swedish girl that became the postergirl for Climate Change efforts.

2fardownthread: When the price of gasoline in the US doubles or triples in real terms, change will come really quickly.

You're a kid aren't you?  I remember when gas was 50 cents a gallon. I remember people swearing that if it ever got above 1 dollar they would stop traveling. And the same at $2, and$3, and even you must remember people saying that about $4 gas. Absolutely nobody is going to change anything no matter how expensive it gets. At$40 a gallon they will complain that it's taking half their paycheck but they will keep driving.

Jeebus Saves: Are you interested in the ocean front property he's selling in Minnesota too?

Here's hoping that the news stories about Biden vetting right wing people for his cabinet is just a pre-election stunt to trick conservatives into thinking he's willing to work with them.

What's wrong with him saying he is going to phase out fossil fuels. Even if he never gets around to it. At least someone still in the running is actually farking saying it.

Nadie_AZ: Covid is an byproduct of climate change. Whether you want to change or not, it is going to happen.

Uhm, what? COVID is a byproduct of climate change? How do you figure that? Viruses are organisms, and as such, mutate/develop new strains all the damn time, as mutation/evolution in simple organisms such as Viruses and Bacteria is extremely simple compared to change in higher organisms.

Combine that with the fact that there is a very high probability of any number of unknown strains or unique viruses/bacteria that only exist in very specific ecosystems that we'll only discover through the encroachment of humanity on these ecosystems, and you've got, under any circumstances, an extremely high probability of encountering illnesses that are new or unique.

Climate change can certainly impact the number and variation of viruses and bacteria as the change to environments will inevitably provoke new alterations in response as a natural part of survival, just the same as it has for the span of history.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Climate Change is directly responsible for this mutation/variation, though, since it's next to impossible to track back and identify the specific factors that caused it. That's really only possible with mutations that occur in a closed/controlled environment, such as the creation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Darfur Parkour: Jeebus Saves: Are you interested in the ocean front property he's selling in Minnesota too?

Here's hoping that the news stories about Biden vetting right wing people for his cabinet is just a pre-election stunt to trick conservatives into thinking he's willing to work with them.

What's wrong with him saying he is going to phase out fossil fuels. Even if he never gets around to it. At least someone still in the running is actually farking saying it.

Talk is cheap what he said is typical election year promises that he'll never deliver on.  The most he will do if elected is issue an executive order with the goal of phasing out fossil fuels by 2035.  A date that will be moved by a future president via executive order.  Well, unless someone with more money and politicians in their pocket than the oil companies have come along.  Once there is more money in an alternative fuel source is when we make the transition away from fossil fuels, not when a politician says we do.

Jeebus Saves: Darfur Parkour: Jeebus Saves: Are you interested in the ocean front property he's selling in Minnesota too?

Here's hoping that the news stories about Biden vetting right wing people for his cabinet is just a pre-election stunt to trick conservatives into thinking he's willing to work with them.

What's wrong with him saying he is going to phase out fossil fuels. Even if he never gets around to it. At least someone still in the running is actually farking saying it.

Talk is cheap what he said is typical election year promises that he'll never deliver on.  The most he will do if elected is issue an executive order with the goal of phasing out fossil fuels by 2035.  A date that will be moved by a future president via executive order.  Well, unless someone with more money and politicians in their pocket than the oil companies have come along.  Once there is more money in an alternative fuel source is when we make the transition away from fossil fuels, not when a politician says we do.

He's saying 2050 at the moment and he's letting Trump goad him into full-throated support of fracking. I'm also pretty sure that he'll raise the military budget, so...

Poop.

The whole "we can't pay for green energy because it's too expensive" line was always clearly belied by the fact that we can just literally print as much money as we want for zero cost now using computers. When they start printing up trillions of dollars and handing it to billionaires to maintain the status quo even the least-informed start to take notice.

Nonpo: The whole "we can't pay for green energy because it's too expensive" line was always clearly belied by the fact that we can just literally print as much money as we want for zero cost now using computers. When they start printing up trillions of dollars and handing it to billionaires to maintain the status quo even the least-informed start to take notice.

$7T and counting 👍 farking assholes. Noah_Tall: 2fardownthread: When the price of gasoline in the US doubles or triples in real terms, change will come really quickly. You're a kid aren't you? I remember when gas was 50 cents a gallon. I remember people swearing that if it ever got above 1 dollar they would stop traveling. And the same at$2, and $3, and even you must remember people saying that about$4 gas.  Absolutely nobody is going to change anything no matter how expensive it gets.  At $40 a gallon they will complain that it's taking half their paycheck but they will keep driving. The price of gasoline is going to be falling through the floor (again) in a few scant years. There's so much overcapacity and a diminishing requirement, so it'll end up being too cheap to sell. Kit Fister: Nadie_AZ: Covid is an byproduct of climate change. Whether you want to change or not, it is going to happen. Uhm, what? COVID is a byproduct of climate change? How do you figure that? Viruses are organisms, and as such, mutate/develop new strains all the damn time, as mutation/evolution in simple organisms such as Viruses and Bacteria is extremely simple compared to change in higher organisms. Combine that with the fact that there is a very high probability of any number of unknown strains or unique viruses/bacteria that only exist in very specific ecosystems that we'll only discover through the encroachment of humanity on these ecosystems, and you've got, under any circumstances, an extremely high probability of encountering illnesses that are new or unique. Climate change can certainly impact the number and variation of viruses and bacteria as the change to environments will inevitably provoke new alterations in response as a natural part of survival, just the same as it has for the span of history. That doesn't necessarily mean that Climate Change is directly responsible for this mutation/variation, though, since it's next to impossible to track back and identify the specific factors that caused it. That's really only possible with mutations that occur in a closed/controlled environment, such as the creation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Blah, blah, blah. Everyone knows the China virus was made in a Chinese bio-warfare lab and deliberately unleashed on us. "If just 12 percent of currently pledged COVID-19 stimulus funding were spent every year through 2024" Huge difference between one time costs and recurring costs. You've got to prove we can afford that, on top of what we've already spent, to make your argument make any sense. Xenu's Giant Pink Replicock: "If just 12 percent of currently pledged COVID-19 stimulus funding were spent every year through 2024" Huge difference between one time costs and recurring costs. You've got to prove we can afford that, on top of what we've already spent, to make your argument make any sense. Let me do some difficult math for ya - 2020 though 2025 = 5 years 5 X 12% of current Covid stimulus funding = 60% of current Covid stimulus funding To save the farking world with a massive jobs program that will massively boost our economy. How can we afford to not do that? Speaking of can we afford it, how much money does the U.S. federal government have? This entire country could live in caves and stop driving cars, traveling and curb its consumerism and it would have zero effect on global warming. India, china, etc negate everything we try and do. Smoking GNU: And Covid has also shown that huge portions of the population will refuse to save themselves with disease and death littering the streets, literally. I work outside and in the public. I haven't seen any bodies in the streets. dailygrinds You forgot the totals, and can we afford it? Not just the US as well, but the USG currently has negative 20 trillion dollars. This guy is saying "we can afford it" based on a one time emergency spend. And isn't backing up that assertion. I don't think Biden's tax plan will cover this, and I'm not savvy to the other 200 countries' finances to speculate. Care to have a go? The fossil fuel economy itself exists through extensive government support - basically industrial policy, which every government has. What the argument is about is changing the focus of industrial policy, and of course existing industry doesn't like that one bit. adamatari: The fossil fuel economy itself exists through extensive government support - basically industrial policy, which every government has. What the argument is about is changing the focus of industrial policy, and of course existing industry doesn't like that one bit. One proven dirty industry to a new industry that has a proven track record of failure. It really is no choice at all. Kit Fister: hissatsu: Yeah but... [Fark user image 850x566] I feel like I want this cartoon to be updated, with the dude on stage being replaced with an artistic rendering of that Swedish girl that became the postergirl for Climate Change efforts. The title of the cartoon should be, "I don't understand opportunity cost." Alternatively, "Pascal's wager: not just for fundies anymore." Xenu's Giant Pink Replicock: dailygrinds You forgot the totals, and can we afford it? Not just the US as well, but the USG currently has negative 20 trillion dollars. This guy is saying "we can afford it" based on a one time emergency spend. And isn't backing up that assertion. I don't think Biden's tax plan will cover this, and I'm not savvy to the other 200 countries' finances to speculate. Care to have a go? You bring up an interesting point, the U.S. national debt is around$20 trillion. What you're missing is that the debt is denominated in U.S. dollars. This graphic shows how many U.S. Dollars the U.S. federal government has -

The federal government has the unique ability to spend money into existence. Spending federal dollars on green energy initiatives puts money directly into consumers pockets. It will boost the economy at all levels as the rest of the economy ramps up to meet new demands. The fed has recently acknowledged that no amount of federal spending yet has increased inflation. I fail to see any impediment besides political will due to the poisoning of the conversation by fossil fuel industry propaganda and the politicians they employ.

dailygrinds: To save the farking world with a massive jobs program that will massively boost our economy. How can we afford to not do that?

Hurr durr trickle down magical thinking.

BMFPitt: dailygrinds: To save the farking world with a massive jobs program that will massively boost our economy. How can we afford to not do that?

Hurr durr trickle down magical thinking.

Federal government places order for fleet of hydrogen fuel cell powered forklifts for the military. Stipulates in bid request that production must be in the U.S. by a U.S. owned corporation and that employees must be compensated to a certain level and receive adequate benefits. This is not trickle down economics.

dailygrinds: Federal government places order for fleet of hydrogen fuel cell powered forklifts for the military. Stipulates in bid request that production must be in the U.S. by a U.S. owned corporation and that employees must be compensated to a certain level and receive adequate benefits. This is not trickle down economics.

It's every bit as much of a pure fantasy.  Finding an economist to tell you otherwise would be about as easy as finding a climatologist to say everything is fine and there's nothing to see here.

BMFPitt: dailygrinds: Federal government places order for fleet of hydrogen fuel cell powered forklifts for the military. Stipulates in bid request that production must be in the U.S. by a U.S. owned corporation and that employees must be compensated to a certain level and receive adequate benefits. This is not trickle down economics.

It's every bit as much of a pure fantasy.  Finding an economist to tell you otherwise would be about as easy as finding a climatologist to say everything is fine and there's nothing to see here.

How is this a fantasy? Biden explicitly stated that he would use the purchasing power of the federal government in this way.

dailygrinds: How is this a fantasy? Biden explicitly stated that he would use the purchasing power of the federal government in this way.

Not the part about him doing it.  The part about it boosting the economy.

Kit Fister: Nadie_AZ: Covid is an byproduct of climate change. Whether you want to change or not, it is going to happen.

Uhm, what? COVID is a byproduct of climate change? How do you figure that? Viruses are organisms, and as such, mutate/develop new strains all the damn time, as mutation/evolution in simple organisms such as Viruses and Bacteria is extremely simple compared to change in higher organisms.

Combine that with the fact that there is a very high probability of any number of unknown strains or unique viruses/bacteria that only exist in very specific ecosystems that we'll only discover through the encroachment of humanity on these ecosystems, and you've got, under any circumstances, an extremely high probability of encountering illnesses that are new or unique.

Climate change can certainly impact the number and variation of viruses and bacteria as the change to environments will inevitably provoke new alterations in response as a natural part of survival, just the same as it has for the span of history.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Climate Change is directly responsible for this mutation/variation, though, since it's next to impossible to track back and identify the specific factors that caused it. That's really only possible with mutations that occur in a closed/controlled environment, such as the creation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

You never heard the intro to Phoenix Point?

"In what may be the hottest year on record..." BOOM. Pandoravirus.

BMFPitt: dailygrinds: How is this a fantasy? Biden explicitly stated that he would use the purchasing power of the federal government in this way.

Not the part about him doing it.  The part about it boosting the economy.

Are familiar with The New Deal or perhaps WWII? Both were massive federal jobs programs funded by deficit spending that most economists agree had a measurably positive effect on the economy.
How do suppose creating more and better paying jobs will not boost the economy?

dailygrinds: Are familiar with The New Deal or perhaps WWII? Both were massive federal jobs programs funded by deficit spending that most economists agree had a measurably positive effect on the economy.
How do suppose creating more and better paying jobs will not boost the economy?

The consensus on the New Deal isn't quite what you think it is, and that's in the context of the Great Depression.  Doing that in "normal" times would be a terrible, terrible policy.

As far as I'm aware, no economist anywhere sees war as economically beneficial.

This will change things
And this won't change things.

One consistent thing about humans is our inconsistency.
Much less conflict of interest and neglect for bonus.

BUT, at least this has shown it's possible and not pie in the sky.
Both the funding/logistcs and the planet showing it can recover fairly rapid.
This puts the skeptics back on their heels.

It won't be a all or nothing scenario
But it will be a war of attrition...but one that been shown doable.

Just like any battle worth winning...gotta get out the vote, collect the donations, ramp up the workers, create the programs, etc.
It will be a long war, but it can be won.
For the right reasons.
A good war.

BMFPitt: dailygrinds: Are familiar with The New Deal or perhaps WWII? Both were massive federal jobs programs funded by deficit spending that most economists agree had a measurably positive effect on the economy.
How do suppose creating more and better paying jobs will not boost the economy?

The consensus on the New Deal isn't quite what you think it is, and that's in the context of the Great Depression.  Doing that in "normal" times would be a terrible, terrible policy.

As far as I'm aware, no economist anywhere sees war as economically beneficial.

The New Deal inched us towards recovery, WWII clinched it. The "failure" of The New Deal was the same as the "failure" of the Obama recovery - it didn't go far enough, didn't spend enough money. I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that WWII wasn't a tremendous benefit to our economy, and that was focused on spending money moving things around and blowing stuff up. Imagine that kind of work put towards positive things.

There was never an option to not pay for climate change, it was just a choice between paying now in money, or paying later in money, lives, and destroyed infrastructure. We've largely been going with the pay later option for 40 years now.

Likwit: I'll take it. I have two daughters and I'm concerned for their future. If this slight pause in global warming means my baby girls will have to murder just one less person for water or bullets as they roam the apocalyptic hellscape, it will have been worth it.

Even better, your girls could star in a post-apoc music video

dailygrinds:
The federal government has the unique ability to spend money into existence. Spending federal dollars on green energy initiatives puts money directly into consumers pockets. It will boost the economy at all levels as the rest of the economy ramps up to meet new demands. The fed has recently acknowledged that no amount of federal spending yet has increased inflation. I fail to see any impediment besides political will due to the poisoning of the conversation by fossil fuel industry propaganda and the politicians they employ.

IIRC inflation is caused by excess money circulating, so I think I know why there hasn't been any inflation:

There is no money circulating, the federal bailouts went to people who save money and don't spend it

dailygrinds: The New Deal inched us towards recovery, WWII clinched it. The "failure" of The New Deal was the same as the "failure" of the Obama recovery - it didn't go far enough, didn't spend enough money.

That's what your want to be true.  Wanting it doesn't make it actually true.

I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that WWII wasn't a tremendous benefit to our economy,

You know how I know you've never read an economic analysis of WW2?

and that was focused on spending money moving things around and blowing stuff up.

Yeah.  Essentially all of which is a deadweight loss to the actual economy.

Imagine that kind of work put towards positive things.

Yeah, imagine if you could actually just get a booming economy like that.  Despite at the times it was ever tried but working.  Imagine if ice cream cured COVID.  Imagine if Republicans could be reasoned with.

BMFPitt: dailygrinds: The New Deal inched us towards recovery, WWII clinched it. The "failure" of The New Deal was the same as the "failure" of the Obama recovery - it didn't go far enough, didn't spend enough money.

That's what your want to be true.  Wanting it doesn't make it actually true.

I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that WWII wasn't a tremendous benefit to our economy,

You know how I know you've never read an economic analysis of WW2?

and that was focused on spending money moving things around and blowing stuff up.

Yeah.  Essentially all of which is a deadweight loss to the actual economy.

Imagine that kind of work put towards positive things.

Yeah, imagine if you could actually just get a booming economy like that.  Despite at the times it was ever tried but working.  Imagine if ice cream cured COVID.  Imagine if Republicans could be reasoned with.

Imagine responding to a comment with anything more insightful than "nuh-huh".

Nonpo: The whole "we can't pay for green energy because it's too expensive" line was always clearly belied by the fact that we can just literally print as much money as we want for zero cost now using computers. When they start printing up trillions of dollars and handing it to billionaires to maintain the status quo even the least-informed start to take notice.

You should take a grade school level econ course

dailygrinds: Xenu's Giant Pink Replicock: "If just 12 percent of currently pledged COVID-19 stimulus funding were spent every year through 2024"

Huge difference between one time costs and recurring costs. You've got to prove we can afford that, on top of what we've already spent, to make your argument make any sense.

Let me do some difficult math for ya - 2020 though 2025 = 5 years
5 X 12% of current Covid stimulus funding = 60% of current Covid stimulus funding
To save the farking world with a massive jobs program that will massively boost our economy. How can we afford to not do that?
Speaking of can we afford it, how much money does the U.S. federal government have?

Don't do math for anyone if you can't count

dailygrinds: BMFPitt: dailygrinds: Are familiar with The New Deal or perhaps WWII? Both were massive federal jobs programs funded by deficit spending that most economists agree had a measurably positive effect on the economy.
How do suppose creating more and better paying jobs will not boost the economy?

The consensus on the New Deal isn't quite what you think it is, and that's in the context of the Great Depression.  Doing that in "normal" times would be a terrible, terrible policy.

As far as I'm aware, no economist anywhere sees war as economically beneficial.

The New Deal inched us towards recovery, WWII clinched it. The "failure" of The New Deal was the same as the "failure" of the Obama recovery - it didn't go far enough, didn't spend enough money. I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that WWII wasn't a tremendous benefit to our economy, and that was focused on spending money moving things around and blowing stuff up. Imagine that kind of work put towards positive things.

The benefit to our economy was that our manufacturing infrastructure wasn't destroyed like everyone else's.

Shakin_Haitian: dailygrinds: BMFPitt: dailygrinds: Are familiar with The New Deal or perhaps WWII? Both were massive federal jobs programs funded by deficit spending that most economists agree had a measurably positive effect on the economy.
How do suppose creating more and better paying jobs will not boost the economy?

The consensus on the New Deal isn't quite what you think it is, and that's in the context of the Great Depression.  Doing that in "normal" times would be a terrible, terrible policy.

As far as I'm aware, no economist anywhere sees war as economically beneficial.

The New Deal inched us towards recovery, WWII clinched it. The "failure" of The New Deal was the same as the "failure" of the Obama recovery - it didn't go far enough, didn't spend enough money. I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that WWII wasn't a tremendous benefit to our economy, and that was focused on spending money moving things around and blowing stuff up. Imagine that kind of work put towards positive things.

The benefit to our economy was that our manufacturing infrastructure was destroying everyone else's.

FTFY

Daer21: Shakin_Haitian: dailygrinds: BMFPitt: dailygrinds: Are familiar with The New Deal or perhaps WWII? Both were massive federal jobs programs funded by deficit spending that most economists agree had a measurably positive effect on the economy.
How do suppose creating more and better paying jobs will not boost the economy?

The consensus on the New Deal isn't quite what you think it is, and that's in the context of the Great Depression.  Doing that in "normal" times would be a terrible, terrible policy.

As far as I'm aware, no economist anywhere sees war as economically beneficial.

The New Deal inched us towards recovery, WWII clinched it. The "failure" of The New Deal was the same as the "failure" of the Obama recovery - it didn't go far enough, didn't spend enough money. I've never heard anyone attempt to argue that WWII wasn't a tremendous benefit to our economy, and that was focused on spending money moving things around and blowing stuff up. Imagine that kind of work put towards positive things.

The benefit to our economy was that our manufacturing infrastructure was destroying everyone else's.

FTFY

Nothing screams roaring economy more than rations.

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest