White House: Strong economy best way to combat Climate Change

[GaryDog]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

 

[NightFox]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

 

[GaryDog]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

If he had equivocated with that point, the remark MIGHT have been 3% less stupid. He did not. Fact is, the market is not designed to reduce carbon footprints, and reduce the size of the plastic island in the pacific.

 

[kiwiman127]

It appears that Trump has decided not to be a Christian now that he has been elected. He will again become a Christian during the 2020 election cycle, count on it.
Why do I say is he has decided not to be a Christian? Well, any true Christian understands that they are tenants of God's earth, all the way through the Bible it tells his followers take care of the environment. And the most profound warning in the Bible is God will destroy those who destroy God's earth. (Revelations 11:18).
Also, Christian are not to put money ahead of God's wishes.
Now look at Trump's and the GOP's actions and goals regarding the environment. What would Jesus do?

 

[GaryDog]

It appears that Trump has decided not to be a Christian now that he has been elected. He will again become a Christian during the 2020 election cycle, count on it.
Why do I say is he has decided not to be a Christian? Well, any true Christian understands that they are tenants of God's earth, all the way through the Bible it tells his followers take care of the environment. And the most profound warning in the Bible is God will destroy those who destroy God's earth. (Revelations 11:18).
Also, Christian are not to put money ahead of God's wishes.
Now look at Trump's and the GOP's actions and goals regarding the environment. What would Jesus do?

GOP Platform:

1. #FuckJesusGetMoney

 

[NightFox]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

If he had equivocated with that point, the remark MIGHT have been 3% less stupid. He did not. Fact is, the market is not designed to reduce carbon footprints, and reduce the size of the plastic island in the pacific.

Uh-huh and where do you figure the necessary resources & technology will come from to "reduce carbon footprints" if not from "the market"?

 

[GaryDog]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

If he had equivocated with that point, the remark MIGHT have been 3% less stupid. He did not. Fact is, the market is not designed to reduce carbon footprints, and reduce the size of the plastic island in the pacific.

Uh-huh and where do you figure the necessary resources & technology will come from to "reduce carbon footprints" if not from "the market"?

Government investment in technology. It's how we got to the moon, dipshit. Or did you think the first company to the moon won the rights to build a McDonald's there? NASA is a government program. Not a business.

A HUGE number of the greatest technological innovations in this country -- particularly the 20th century and later -- were due to govt. investment and tax incentives. When Al Gore said he "took initiative in inventing the Internet" he was actually being factual.

 

[NightFox]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

If he had equivocated with that point, the remark MIGHT have been 3% less stupid. He did not. Fact is, the market is not designed to reduce carbon footprints, and reduce the size of the plastic island in the pacific.

Uh-huh and where do you figure the necessary resources & technology will come from to "reduce carbon footprints" if not from "the market"?

Government investment in technology. It's how we got to the moon, dipshit. .

LOL, Where do the resources for "government investment in technology" come from? Try not to swallow your tongue while you're thinking about the answer, K?

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance." --- Murray N. Rothbard

 

[GaryDog]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

If he had equivocated with that point, the remark MIGHT have been 3% less stupid. He did not. Fact is, the market is not designed to reduce carbon footprints, and reduce the size of the plastic island in the pacific.

Uh-huh and where do you figure the necessary resources & technology will come from to "reduce carbon footprints" if not from "the market"?

Government investment in technology. It's how we got to the moon, dipshit. .

LOL, Where do the resources for "government investment in technology" come from? Try not to swallow your tongue while you're thinking about the answer, K?

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance." --- Murray N. Rothbard

OK I think I see what your dumb ass is saying. You agree that green technology is necessary to save the environment. In order to fund investment in green technologies, we need tax revenue. And the best way to get tax revenue is to pollute the environment further.

Your a fucking genius.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

I agree. You can't combat climate change, as it is a natural cycle of the planet.

 

[Dreadnaught1968]

Your a fucking genius.

Irony alert...

 

[NightFox]

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

If he had equivocated with that point, the remark MIGHT have been 3% less stupid. He did not. Fact is, the market is not designed to reduce carbon footprints, and reduce the size of the plastic island in the pacific.

Uh-huh and where do you figure the necessary resources & technology will come from to "reduce carbon footprints" if not from "the market"?

Government investment in technology. It's how we got to the moon, dipshit. .

LOL, Where do the resources for "government investment in technology" come from? Try not to swallow your tongue while you're thinking about the answer, K?

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance." --- Murray N. Rothbard

OK I think I see what your dumb ass is saying.

LOL, do you always get this angry when someone points out how flawed your idiotic arguments are? If so, you must spend your days in a constant state of agitation since I have yet to see you make an argument that isn't more full of holes than a ton of swiss cheese.

You agree that green technology is necessary to save the environment. In order to fund investment in green technologies, we need tax revenue.

Only government worshiping central planners think that "tax revenue" is a necessity for technology to advance, here's a hint : no amount of government "investment" will make any difference if the market isn't interested in consuming the fruits of said "investment", if consumers want "cleaner" technology private enterprise will provide it at a price consumers are willing to pay for it, if the market doesn't want it no amount of government "investment" and authoritarian posturing will make them want it.

On the bright side your childish tail wagging the dog arguments are amusing....

 

[GaryDog]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

I agree. You can't combat climate change, as it is a natural cycle of the planet.

There's nothing natural about the changes we've seen over the past half-century, and pretty much all climatologists agree on that, you fucking moron.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

I agree. You can't combat climate change, as it is a natural cycle of the planet.

There's nothing natural about the changes we've seen over the past half-century, and pretty much all climatologists agree on that, you fucking moron.

Scientists will agree to anything that keeps their funding coming in.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

The best way is to boot all the illegal aliens.

They'll release much less CO2 back home.
Build the wall, boot the illegals, save the planet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

I agree. You can't combat climate change, as it is a natural cycle of the planet.

There's nothing natural about the changes we've seen over the past half-century, and pretty much all climatologists agree on that, you fucking moron.

pretty much all climatologists agree on that,

75/77, very impressive!

 

[GaryDog]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

I agree. You can't combat climate change, as it is a natural cycle of the planet.

There's nothing natural about the changes we've seen over the past half-century, and pretty much all climatologists agree on that, you fucking moron.

Scientists will agree to anything that keeps their funding coming in.

That is by far the dumbest conspiracy theory ever devised.

 

[GaryDog]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

The best way is to boot all the illegal aliens.

They'll release much less CO2 back home.
Build the wall, boot the illegals, save the planet.

Are we handing them the Rio Grande, dipshit? Wow, all this "wall" bullshit (that only people as dumb as you didn't realize was bullshit) and no one ever considered that about 1,000 miles IS A FUCKING RIVER?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

Yeah but only if you believe that a weak economy generates the innovation and market incentives that lead to lower pollution production and goods & services.

If he had equivocated with that point, the remark MIGHT have been 3% less stupid. He did not. Fact is, the market is not designed to reduce carbon footprints, and reduce the size of the plastic island in the pacific.

Plastic Island is worth a separate thread

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

The best way is to boot all the illegal aliens.

They'll release much less CO2 back home.
Build the wall, boot the illegals, save the planet.

Are we handing them the Rio Grande, dipshit? Wow, all this "wall" bullshit (that only people as dumb as you didn't realize was bullshit) and no one ever considered that about 1,000 miles IS A FUCKING RIVER?

Wall, fence, minefield.
Whatever it takes to secure the border.

 

[RollingThunder]

There is literally nothing dumber than that statement.

I agree. You can't combat climate change, as it is a natural cycle of the planet.

It always amazes me that denier cult retards like this one are so stupid they can believe that the existence of "natural cycles" that influence the Earth's climate absolutely precludes the possible existence of un-natural factors, created by the activities of seven and a half billion humans, that also can affect the climate.

It's like believing that because forest fires were started naturally by lightning and volcanoes for hundreds of millions of years, no forest fires in our time have ever been started by humans.

Deniers are insane!

In the real world, the un-natural 46% increase in atmospheric levels of a powerful greenhouse gas, CO2, that is a result of human activities and that has happened mostly in the last half century or so, is the scientifically confirmed cause of the abrupt, rapid, and accelerating global warming and consequent changes that the world is experiencing.