• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Politics Nobody Cares

basketballjones

TRIBE Member
they promised no omnibus bills as part of their platform and failed to deliver yet again, then to hide the fact they dump a pot legalization bill that was written on the wrapper from a halls
amazing the gall these guys have
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Dont worry ndrwrld, we can just let our grandchildren pay the carbon debt we're leaving them. They're good for it. Oil patch execs and anti-climate change conservatives just have a lot of confidence in future generations to pay for the costs we pass onto them so we can live better now!

I mean thats whats most important right? However OUR LIVES RIGHT NOW ARE

Everything else can go fuck itself
 

basketballjones

TRIBE Member
Dont worry ndrwrld, we can just let our grandchildren pay the carbon debt we're leaving them. They're good for it. Oil patch execs and anti-climate change conservatives just have a lot of confidence in future generations to pay for the costs we pass onto them so we can live better now!

I mean thats whats most important right? However OUR LIVES RIGHT NOW ARE

Everything else can go fuck itself
who is the pearl clutcher now...bwahahaha
 

ndrwrld

TRIBE Member
Charlie J. Angus
19 mins ·
Despite being ordered to turn over the internal memos that explained why they suppressed police evidence of crimes committed against children at St. Anne's Residential School, the Justice Department has brought out the big black marker to protect their own. Click on the link to see the extent they are willing to go to protect those responsible and cover up this legal abuse against survivors

http://charlieangus.ndp.ca/sites/default/files/multisite/76282/field_content_files/a-2013-01931_1st_interim_release.pdf

wow.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Dont worry ndrwrld, we can just let our grandchildren pay the carbon debt we're leaving them. They're good for it. Oil patch execs and anti-climate change conservatives just have a lot of confidence in future generations to pay for the costs we pass onto them so we can live better now!

I mean thats whats most important right? However OUR LIVES RIGHT NOW ARE

Everything else can go fuck itself
who is the pearl clutcher now...bwahahaha
Your posts continue to make sense only to you.

I fail to see how pointing out an enormous debt we are leaving to future generations - a moral burden on OUR generation - is analogous to "Think of the Children" pearl-clutchers trained in Victorian Era morality to see the Drug War as a Moral Crusade and who believe, based on these imaginary delusions, that any drug liberalization is a dangerous threat "to the children".

Perhaps you can explain, but then I would imagine only you would truly understand your explanation.

Inside The Bubble, im sure it all is coherent, somehow, to you

Probably you have a delusion that Climate Change isn't real, based on your political and tribal loyalties to ideas that have come up in support of Climate Denialism.

Perhaps only then can I start to see where your reaction is coming from, because me pointing out that us not doing anything on Climate Change is an unconscionable burden to future generations would be me "pearl clutching" about an imaginary problem, similar to how old ladies and Stephen Harper are "pearl clutching" due to imaginary problems they believe about drugs.

But the error here in your thinking is the premise that Climate change isn't real, so your attempted retort fails on more than a few levels.
 

basketballjones

TRIBE Member
umm, we have already saddled future generations with a massive financial debt, to the tune of 300 billion, oh wait, wynne just upped it so she can try to buy votes by "lowering" our hydro bills. cap and trade is not going to fix a thing, it is simply a tax as i have pointed out to you before(do you forget your absurd assertion that bc was the standard as they were revenue nuetral but was found to be anything but). how do you fix a problem by taxing it and then give the biggest polluters free credits??? cap and trade is a tax a tax a tax. get your head out of your ass. you are pearl clutching. it used to be acid rain, then global warming, now climate change. what next. most of torontos smog has been proven to be coming from the states too.

crippling our economy to make you feel better is a fucking joke. you do realize the vast majority of canada is uninhabited right, full of trees and farm fields and such. co2 is not a problem, hot air from ppl like you is though
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
umm, we have already saddled future generations with a massive financial debt, to the tune of 300 billion, oh wait, wynne just upped it so she can try to buy votes by "lowering" our hydro bills. cap and trade is not going to fix a thing, it is simply a tax as i have pointed out to you before(do you forget your absurd assertion that bc was the standard as they were revenue nuetral but was found to be anything but). how do you fix a problem by taxing it and then give the biggest polluters free credits??? cap and trade is a tax a tax a tax. get your head out of your ass. you are pearl clutching. it used to be acid rain, then global warming, now climate change. what next. most of torontos smog has been proven to be coming from the states too.
Great, now I understand how you can percieve what I say as "pearl clutching" and you have validated my theory it's because you - incorrectly - believe climate change to be an imaginary problem.

This at least allows me to think of how you could have written what you have written.

Your assumption here is in conflict with mine: we do not agree on the science of climate change, its risk profile to us economically and in terms of its potential damage to our security and health.

crippling our economy to make you feel better is a fucking joke. you do realize the vast majority of canada is uninhabited right, full of trees and farm fields and such. co2 is not a problem, hot air from ppl like you is though
Any meaningful conversation must establish that we are operating from a similar enough set of prior assumptions to make the conversation worthwhile - or even possible This here is a place where our prior assumptions conflict - so I do not agree that proper policy to address the environmental debt we are leaving our children must come at the expense of "crippling the economy".

So I cannot agree with your closer here, since it is not a zero-sum game and the thing you forget is that in many and intimate ways, environmental problems become economic ones. "Crippled economies" are entirely possible, and are in fact plausible, if we maintain the status quo and keep pushing out carbon at the current rate such that we say, recreate a dust bowl in the middle of America - which is just one, local and likely example of what's going to happen to our children. A dust bowl created by the actions of prior generations - a debt left to them to be paid by our kids. Billions of dollars of farmer revenue gone - higher import costs likely as staple food commodities will shoot through the roof because what will be happening in the middle of America will be happening in the Ukraine, Africa and Europe too, driving up prices. Heat resistant crops could take 20 years to get to market - and may be slower to come than the pace of change we will see.

As someone who espouses, regularly, the importance of current fiscal year deficits and current levels of debt - someone who thinks about the moral cost of this and the burden it places on our children, you should be well primed to understand the ways in which other debts and deficits we are leaving could harm the future economic prospects of our children's children. If you are not even considering the potential huge downsides of 4 degrees of warming this century, you are unfortunately missing a very important factor in your analysis.

While you sit around fretting about the proximate fiscal situation - a much bigger fiscal avalanche is on its way - making your present day prioritzation of present day debt levels over taking action that could keep warming at 2 degrees or less a rather trite concern - and a tragic one. Missing the forest for the trees is another way of putting it.

At the very least here bbj, we have outlined a few key places where our assumptions conflict:
- you assume climate change is overblown and deny that it is a serious thing to worry about - i disagree about this and think climate change is very real and that we are not taking the necessary steps to reduce its potential future impact on us
- you assume climate change policy is only bad for the economy - i disagree and recognize where climate change policy and economics intersect - how actions today to limit even one degree of warming actually means billions and billions of potential economic harm avoided. The math is out there, you can continue to choose to igore it if you wish.​

This mismatch in prior assumptions explains our talking past each other - and our likely inability to ever reconcile our positions, or achieve any kind of alignment.
 
Last edited:

praktik

TRIBE Member
From the google link:

Delaying Innovation = Delaying Benefits
Breakthroughs in clean energy can provide enormous benefits to the economy, security, environment, and jobs. But the longer we delay achieving those breakthroughs, the greater benefits we stand to give up.

In our model, a mere five year delay in starting aggressive cost curves could cost the economy an aggregate $2.3-3.2 trillion in unrealized GDP gains, 1.2-1.4 million net jobs, and 8-28 gigatons in avoided greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

explore data
 

praktik

TRIBE Member
Pick your pain canada - who will be sacrificed so Trump can claim a better deal and we can save an industry we deem more important?

Fuck the lumber guys to save dairy?

Save dairy to fuck lumber?

Fuck them both to save auto?

We pretty much only have bad choices, if Trump throws out NAFTA and says "what you giving me to stop me from fucking you where you don't want to be fucked?"
 
Top