Once again, it's commit crimes or you are a bootlicker. Your lying hypocrite ass has destroyed zero cameras. Guess what your own rule says about you, fraud.
I never said anything about destroying cameras. I said voicing opposition to them. And because I (and many others) have done so, they are being removed very quickly across the entire state of Florida.
If protesters are sissy, sissy, fag, fag, fag, sissy, sissy, fag-fag-fags, then what does that make a government that backs down to them? And what does that make propagandists for that government? And what does that make dupes of those propagandists? Gee, I guess it all falls apart into bullshit, doesn't it?
There are those laws that respect my rights, and those laws that are ignored. Contrary to popular belief, none of that necessitates a grand performative display.
And I never said anything to defend them, but because all you know is noisy moral preening, everyone supports <current bad thing> until they bitch about it to YOUR satisfaction. Yeah, I'm sure you were essential to the process.
Buddy, you purposefully put on the floppy clothes stuffed full of straw. That doesn't in turn give you portable gools.
Ah, disobedience to the state is to be done in secret behind pulled blinds. I remember my folks telling me about those quiet orderly private Vietnam protests. They really got the job done. Very effective.
Because I know how you think, I will always assume you support something until you state you don't. No one, for instance, has to wonder about your stance on the transes Nevada you won't shut up about it. Every vote counts. But I'm not surprised you disagree.
You keep standing on past events to elevate the tantrums of trifling present day kids with no real agenda but to take advatage of chaos to get away with some destructive mayhem.
They were saying that about the Kent State kids. This is always the fucking play by the fascists, and you're injecting it into your veins.
Why is that the question, when they are already at a higher standard? This is like saying "I refuse to stop shitting in the street until you show me that my neighbor will also be prohibited from shitting in the street," and ignoring the fact that he isn't.
To be fair, there are two parts to it. It is true that China is leading the way in areas like EV development and infrastructure adoption. They are also building massive amounts of renewable power supply. At the same time they are also still building new coal plants where they need them and until recently their annual CO2 emissions were increasing. It's not ideal, but in this area China seem to be adopting the principle of not letting perfect be the enemy of good. While the West has been talking about how to transition while maintaining a first world standard of living, China has been figuring out how to reduce emissions while lifting their population to a modern standard of living. I absolutely am not "you gotta hand it to 'em", but based on their current trajectory I expect it's extremely likely that a decade from now Chinese emissions will be much lower, all while putting to bed the argument that doing so requires sacrificing quality of life. There is obviously the problem that we've already fucked the climate, but no solution which required China to keep their population impoverished was ever gonna be acceptable for them.
Tldr version is that it's like complaining that you're being asked to send less trash to landfill from your house, and pointing to the dumpster on your neighbors driveway, completely ignoring that the dumpster is there because they are currently still building their house.
If that is the case-and I am only taking you at your word-there should be no problem with any binding international treaty reflecting it IN EVERY AREA. Not some bullshit shell game con job like "carbon credits." And I have my doubts. China's coal industry was in overdrive not long ago, and they dump garbage in every street and ditch in India.
See, there the fuck it is. They're still developing, so they can't be held to the same standard, and any "just" treaty must also restribute funds to them to aid in their development. Watermelon "environmentalism."
Since you are doing your old man yells at clouds things about any of the other ideas, can you share your implementable ideas on how you would go about limiting carbon emissions?
Genuinely interested if you actually have any ideas @Uncle Albert, because vague hand waving about the "same standard" is actually really hard to nail down what the same standards are. Should the overall emissions of the country be the standard all are held to? Per capital? Baseline comparison years? If so which years?
UA does not have 'ideas' he follows the 2 bucket life mentod....i bucket of piss and 1 bucket of shit depending on the situation one or the other and if he is feeling REALLY SHORT that day both!!!!!! edit to add..... he carries around these buckets every minute of every day but i still got no pity for him
On paper, it's a great idea, and I wholly agree. The time and cost to bring a reactor online is onerous, though, and the regulatory oversight is just a component of that to prevent Chernobyls, as is architectural design to prevent Fukushimas. In the years of design and construction, however, power needs need to be met otherwise, and dirtier power fills that role (I'll include hydro here because how it affects the geography and habitats). One other problem was highlighted in Romania, which had to completely shutdown it's only nuclear power plant last month because the Danube was at record low water level. If a plant has to shut down because its cooling mechanism is unavailable, we're temporarily back to square one. Personally, I'd supplement the nuclear facility mandate with a robust solar, wind, and geothermal. As for shipping barges, I like the idea, but I'm concerned logistics companies would balk at having to staff specialist sailors, and there's also the regional geopolitical issues that would pose a massive risk -- Strait of Aden, Horn of Africa, and currently, Straight of Hormuz, to name a few. The Jolly Roger causing a nuclear incident is something to be considered.
For some countries that is a good solution. In line with your suggestion China is basically rolling out nuclear plants as fast as they can build them.
