- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: I see some conservative are having issues accepting environment issues
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:42 pm to Flats
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:42 pm to Flats
We do, but using that ball of nuclear fusion in the sky as the eventual sole energy source is the end goal. Mastering control of the sun will also allow us to actually have power over climate change. That may be more like 300 years away, but that's the blink of an eye on the grand scale.
1
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:43 pm to Penrod
quote:
That’s nonsense. Pollution is a cost of certain activities.
Bs. He's right. Nobody should be taxed for climate change.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:45 pm to Froman
quote:
told we are the bad guys
I mean, this part is accurate at least.
Chicks dig bad guys
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:48 pm to BCreed1
Conservative = conservation
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:49 pm to GRTiger
quote:
We do, but using that ball of nuclear fusion in the sky as the eventual sole energy source is the end goal.
Solar has hard limits on power density. We’re not going to invent our way out of that limitation.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:50 pm to Flats
quote:
We’re not going to invent our way out of that limitation.
Yes we are. Or I should say, we better.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:57 pm to Penrod
quote:By this “logic” we should tax dumb people. Sick people, tax them! Old people. Tax them!
That’s nonsense. Pollution is a cost of certain activities. But it’s a cost borne by society at large rather than the person emitting the pollution
They are all a “cost” to society.
And now you know why socialism always devolves into forced labor, eugenics, and genocide.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 2:59 pm to Penrod
quote:The burden falls on the person trying to confiscate other people’s wealth.
We don’t know this. You saying it is negligible is equally as unsupported as them saying it is the dominant factor. Neither one of you can prove your assertion.
Oddly are arguing that a “social” cost exists, while arguing the link is unproven. Telling.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 3:15 pm to Floyd Dawg
quote:
Add to that the biggest polluters (China, Russia, India) are exempt from all of the "green" requirements in the interests of "fairness" and that tells me what I need to know about climate change/global warming/etc.
This is what gets me. People in 1850 didn't know Antarctica existed. They couldn't fly planes, yet alone launch satellites & observe the atmosphere in granular detail. They had no idea what pollutants would do, they just flushed it dowbstream. If they get a pass, it can at least be somewhat justified.
Why do China & India still get to belch smoke TODAY when we know it's bad?? Why don't they have to figure out a new way forward like the rest of us?
This post was edited on 8/27/24 at 3:16 pm
Posted on 8/27/24 at 3:19 pm to Penrod
quote:
That’s nonsense. Pollution is a cost of certain activities. But it’s a cost borne by society at large rather than the person emitting the pollution. Therefore taxes on the pollution are needed in order for the capitalist economy to function properly and efficiently. The taxes assign the costs to the proper activity, which is desirable.
Yikes. Always knew you weren’t conservative. I didn’t know you were a full blown commie.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 3:20 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
By this “logic” we should tax dumb people. Sick people, tax them! Old people. Tax them! They are all a “cost” to society. And now you know why socialism always devolves into forced labor, eugenics, and genocide.
100 percent this. That dude is a faux intellectual that outed himself in this thread.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 3:47 pm to troyt37
The solution is to have individuals do this. If we are talking environment, this is saving space, and it's more feasible.
Having companies take large secrions of land is not the way to go.
I know a guy studying the implementation of nuclear on a small scale. They don't have smoke stacks and are more so in containers.
The down side to that is terror attacks. How do you protect all of them?
Having companies take large secrions of land is not the way to go.
I know a guy studying the implementation of nuclear on a small scale. They don't have smoke stacks and are more so in containers.
The down side to that is terror attacks. How do you protect all of them?
Page 5 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News