Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Presidential Election Polls
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="helmut" data-source="post: 75523063" data-attributes="member: 206559"><p>You can do it only for 2 years, unless you have special cases (what has to be proven). But for the first year almost everything in the economy is the result of what happened before. Like a large ship needs time to change the course (you can stop the machines miles before the harbor).</p><p></p><p></p><p>Define "unwarranted". Environmental danger is mostly a thing of the future. We now suffer from plastic n fish that reached the oceans in the last decades, we suffer from climate change that has started about 200 years ago, and accelerates because now some critical points have been crossed ... two examples were damage was not prevented because regulations who could do it were "unwarranted" (China told the world climate change was an US invention to hamper the Chinese economy, when the Chinese got caught by the reality, and the Paris agreement could be achieved, Trump began to repeat this slogan, with only a slight change).</p><p></p><p></p><p>What evidence? You seem to have no arguments against the evidence I mentioned.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You certainly have to do some effort to reduce the amount of energy you consume. One reason American cars do not sell well in the world is that they consume too much gas without giving more power to the engine ...</p><p></p><p>It is clear you cannot stop using fossil carbon at once. Even the countries with the most ambitious plans will do in only in a few years. But every reduction is helpful. What you said sounds like "we can't do everything, so lets do nothing".</p><p></p><p></p><p>The last sentence is true in almost every part of the world. Perhaps a good welfare system will help to persuade the people that a change will give more benefits in the long run than harms in the present.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="helmut, post: 75523063, member: 206559"] You can do it only for 2 years, unless you have special cases (what has to be proven). But for the first year almost everything in the economy is the result of what happened before. Like a large ship needs time to change the course (you can stop the machines miles before the harbor). Define "unwarranted". Environmental danger is mostly a thing of the future. We now suffer from plastic n fish that reached the oceans in the last decades, we suffer from climate change that has started about 200 years ago, and accelerates because now some critical points have been crossed ... two examples were damage was not prevented because regulations who could do it were "unwarranted" (China told the world climate change was an US invention to hamper the Chinese economy, when the Chinese got caught by the reality, and the Paris agreement could be achieved, Trump began to repeat this slogan, with only a slight change). What evidence? You seem to have no arguments against the evidence I mentioned. You certainly have to do some effort to reduce the amount of energy you consume. One reason American cars do not sell well in the world is that they consume too much gas without giving more power to the engine ... It is clear you cannot stop using fossil carbon at once. Even the countries with the most ambitious plans will do in only in a few years. But every reduction is helpful. What you said sounds like "we can't do everything, so lets do nothing". The last sentence is true in almost every part of the world. Perhaps a good welfare system will help to persuade the people that a change will give more benefits in the long run than harms in the present. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Presidential Election Polls
Top
Bottom