The General Political Thread

[Kore]

Anything is possible after Biden's win

[MrTiki]

There are two separate issues here Skaenn.
One is the notion that the nations of the world, including international scientific and medical fields want to keep people locked inside, causing trillions of dollars of economic damage, somehow manufacturing both a plausible threat and killing off vast numbers of people through a mechanism which spreads much like a virus. If you believe that you're more paranoid than many psychiatric patients I see on the regular.

If you believe that rich people and those in power are profiteering off of an international catastrophe and are allowing people to die on vast scales for financial and political profit then I think you're pretty sensible.

[Theodin]

There are two separate issues here Skaenn.
One is the notion that the nations of the world, including international scientific and medical fields want to keep people locked inside, causing trillions of dollars of economic damage, somehow manufacturing both a plausible threat and killing off vast numbers of people through a mechanism which spreads much like a virus. If you believe that you're more paranoid than many psychiatric patients I see on the regular.

If you believe that rich people and those in power are profiteering off of an international catastrophe and are allowing people to die on vast scales for financial and political profit then I think you're pretty sensible.

yes
it is also sensible to believe that people in powerful positions are using the economic catastrophe to propose ways to implement different economic policies with the admirable attempt at a different (and what they hope is better!) economy at the end of it

[Furrnox]

Anything is possible after Biden's win

Wtf do you mean? Biden was leading in virtually every poll he was expected to win.

[~NickCole~]

I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 

[Cazasar]

I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 

What is happening?

[No0B]

Anything is possible after Biden's win

Wtf do you mean? Biden was leading in virtually every poll he was expected to win.

[Sgt.Winters]

I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 

What is happening?

Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.

Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.

Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.

Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.

Homeless people. Everywhere.

[Glenn]

I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 

What is happening?

Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.

Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.

Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.

Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.

Homeless people. Everywhere.

yeah pretty much

[Cazasar]

I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 

What is happening?

Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.

Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.

Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.

Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.

Homeless people. Everywhere.

yeah pretty much

OOF

Wait I remember I watched a Youtube Vid from a German living in California talking about how shit the state has become.

Is there a particular Reason why your politicians dont do shit against those issues?

[Sgt.Winters]

I'm just glad that I don't live in California right now. 

What is happening?

Our governor is a moron that contradicts himself at every turn.

Virus cases keep fluctuating since the state has no actual plan.

Wildfires are getting worse and no one is doing anything to address it.

Smelt, a species of fish that is commonly used to indicate overall environmental health in the Delta (and California as a whole), continue to spiral towards functional extinction.

Homeless people. Everywhere.

yeah pretty much

OOF

Wait I remember I watched a Youtube Vid from a German living in California talking about how shit the state has become.

Is there a particular Reason why your politicians dont do shit against those issues?

Much like the rest of the the country, we can’t implement effective precautions towards the virus since social and economic safety nets are extremely barebones. The federal government can not agree on any approach without it turning into a partisan bloodbath, effectively ensuring that no meaningful aid will be provided. This in turn leaves the state governments with no choice but to end the lockdowns so that more businesses don’t get permanently closed.


On top of that, you have rent moratoriums ending in a few months, leaving many with no choice but to move in with relatives/friends or end up on the streets. Of course, this could be avoided if the rents were simply suspended, but that would go against their ethical code of malignantly preying on the poor and marginalized till every last cent is squeeze out of them.


Environmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.


Homelessness? I don’t know the answer to that one. We’ve thrown billions at the issue and most of it goes unspent or towards pork barrel projects that do nothing but provide positive PR for its respective figurehead. I suppose a good first step would be to stop treating them like parasites and props for gubernatorial ads.

[Theodin]

Environmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.

California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes

the "exxon spends all this money in environmental disinformation" is a position straight out of 2005. at this point, the anti-fossil fuel movement is a multi billion dollar industry with influence and reach 10x the scale of anything pro fossil fuel. especially in a state like California, the influence pro-renewables groups have is wayyy bigger than Exxon or any group

[Sgt.Winters]

Environmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.

California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes

the "exxon spends all this money in environmental disinformation" is a position straight out of 2005. at this point, the anti-fossil fuel movement is a multi billion dollar industry with influence and reach 10x the scale of anything pro fossil fuel. especially in a state like California, the influence pro-renewables groups have is wayyy bigger than Exxon or any group

You’re right in that the state has a lot of renewable sources (almost 40% last I checked) but I simply do not buy the government’s statements that they are taking the issues that fossil fuels present seriously. The time to act was 20 years ago. I hope you’re right in the sense of their influence, but it better pick up its pace in a world that is still run largely by fossil.

Even if the Exxon point is a bit outdated, the relevance still holds. They knew in the 80s that emissions needed to drop and still kept going. I try to avoid going down the deep ecology route, but if the reports are right and planet turns into a hellhole, then justified or not they are going to be as equally reviled as some of the biggest mass murderers in history.

[Theodin]

Environmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.

California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes

the "exxon spends all this money in environmental disinformation" is a position straight out of 2005. at this point, the anti-fossil fuel movement is a multi billion dollar industry with influence and reach 10x the scale of anything pro fossil fuel. especially in a state like California, the influence pro-renewables groups have is wayyy bigger than Exxon or any group

You’re right in that the state has a lot of renewable sources (almost 40% last I checked) but I simply do not buy the government’s statements that they are taking the issues that fossil fuels present seriously. The time to act was 20 years ago. I hope you’re right in the sense of their influence, but it better pick up its pace in a world that is still run largely by fossil.

Even if the Exxon point is a bit outdated, the relevance still holds. They knew in the 80s that emissions needed to drop and still kept going. I try to avoid going down the deep ecology route, but if the reports are right and planet turns into a hellhole, then justified or not they are going to be as equally reviled as some of the biggest mass murderers in history.

the most effective way to reduce fossil fuel emissions from power generation is invest in nuclear generation. this is not disputed, but the anti-nuclear lobby is very powerful. i mean, they could also invest in clean tech and encourage innovation while admitting that electricity is only effectively generated by fossil fuel sources, but since that's not ideologically helpful enough they won't

at this point emissions are less of a problem than loud voices make them out to be. models regularly run warm and the lower rcp's are the most likely. instead of spending millions on misguided climate actions or donating to already wealthy groups the gov could, just maybe, invest in getting better at forest fire management or something like that

[MikeyBruh]

Environmentally speaking, it simply isn’t profitable and/or practical enough yet for the switch to more sustainable energy. You have bastards like Exxon who funnel millions into worldwide disinformation campaigns meant to discredit wind, air, and solar so that their competition remains non-existent.

California has an incredible amount of solar power generation. unfortunately the technology doesn't exist to make it a) worth the cost and b) consistent enough to power the grid. there are a lot of examples of jurisdictions that spend a lot of money and time trying to make their grids run on renewables but it doesn't work because renewables can't provide baseline supply to match demand changes

the "exxon spends all this money in environmental disinformation" is a position straight out of 2005. at this point, the anti-fossil fuel movement is a multi billion dollar industry with influence and reach 10x the scale of anything pro fossil fuel. especially in a state like California, the influence pro-renewables groups have is wayyy bigger than Exxon or any group

You’re right in that the state has a lot of renewable sources (almost 40% last I checked) but I simply do not buy the government’s statements that they are taking the issues that fossil fuels present seriously. The time to act was 20 years ago. I hope you’re right in the sense of their influence, but it better pick up its pace in a world that is still run largely by fossil.

Even if the Exxon point is a bit outdated, the relevance still holds. They knew in the 80s that emissions needed to drop and still kept going. I try to avoid going down the deep ecology route, but if the reports are right and planet turns into a hellhole, then justified or not they are going to be as equally reviled as some of the biggest mass murderers in history.

the most effective way to reduce fossil fuel emissions from power generation is invest in nuclear generation. this is not disputed, but the anti-nuclear lobby is very powerful. i mean, they could also invest in clean tech and encourage innovation while admitting that electricity is only effectively generated by fossil fuel sources, but since that's not ideologically helpful enough they won't

at this point emissions are less of a problem than loud voices make them out to be. models regularly run warm and the lower rcp's are the most likely. instead of spending millions on misguided climate actions or donating to already wealthy groups the gov could, just maybe, invest in getting better at forest fire management or something like that

or you could just