I voted Jill Stein Green Party. She was the only candidate that said one solitary word about sustainable agriculture. The Democrats are touting the carbon stock exchange system that will get them all rich and tax the crap out of everyone without accomplishing a damned thing to change the global temperature even one tenth of one degree. The GOP, they just want war uber alles.

Big Energy is oft diametrically opposed to everything I believe in.

We wouldn't need controls if people behaved decently but many people don't. When an entire political movement is pretty much predicated on the philosophy of "be as big an asshole as possible at all times" like over grown spoiled brats, then yeah, we need to address those people.

You arent wrong eturnage and I agree with you but its also not enough. There is not a political party capable of winning that will put the environment first - energy that is clean - safe and reliable 'second'

@ogion ridicule and insults reflect the SJW mentality. Supress free speech. Attack anyone who engages in critical thought and disagrees with the mob.

PGA Stein voter. Yep, as I was saying a total fucking moron.

@"As for farming theres many instances where farm subsidies get spent on corvettes for the kids and big screen TVs for the family room."

So you have a problem with farmers making money. Afaik, farming subsidies are 20 times higher in Europe, and that is mostly because farmers have a significant voting block. But still, people deserve to live, no matter what...

Getting rid of subsidies because you believe in free markets is one thing (and perhaps reasonable, given your belief in markets) but shitting on farmers because they choose to make money (with the govt as customer instead of the public consumer) is pretty deplorable, imho.

This is a question for James Yanik.

@Yanik you are the strictest advocate on this forum for a free narket economy. Does the free market care if entire species go extinct as long as profit flows? Does the free market approve of big energy blasting whales and killing them for blood oil? Does the free market differentiate between regulating energy to protect endangered animals - and regulating energy to steer markets?


Sometimes what is right to do is never profit-able.
Sometimes regulation is protecting something that is valuable to protect: whales, wolves, air, water, caribou, forests, marshes, fish, bears, seals, coyotes, glaciers

Ridicule and mockery reflect a scientist's view of lazy idiots who can't be bothered to understand science or policy. As a former evolutionary biologist, I am done trying to have rational debate with ignoramuses. We have seen barely literate religious zealots claim there is a "debate" about evolution for ages, and now we see it in climate change. Sorry, but treating unfounded nonsense as if stupidity is equal to learning to be "balanced" is extremely harmful. If you're in the process of doing harm, then, you should expect a strong response. I'm sorry if that hurts your special snowflake feeling. No, not really. I'm not sorry.

Mockery is the only rational and moral response to this kind of tripe.

If the Paris accords were actually talking about eliminating subsidies for the corporations, then maybe it would do something good. But the agenda for the talks are intentionally limited in scope so that kind of root issue will likely never be addressed. Even if it would, do you really have faith that a leader from one of the US's two political parties would actually do something adverse to the interests of their biggest campaign donors?

@orthaic its that I dislike the idea that farmers get a handout in addition to naturally made profits and the handout in America - on a regular basis is spent on luxury items that have nothing to do with what-subsidy was for.

I'd like to see farmers earn more and bankers less, but that's another story

The market does an abysmal job of delivering public value and externalities costs at every opportunity, so that often the only way to get markets to operate efficiently is through subsidies, taxes or regulations to generate actual value. The market can work brilliantly but only under fairly narrow conditions and markets go off the rails pretty quickly left to their own devices.

And frankly any moral person should be a social justice warrior. Sadly many people absolutely love injustice

@ogion mockery is great fun when your a member of a cult. In other words, cult members do not allow doubt, and dissent. Those things are discouraged or even punished. Mockery is a great tool in your box. I'm enjoying it.

@"The problems we have now with the use of petro chems are caused by distortions from government subsidizing those industries and not a functioning anarcho-capitalist model. The solution isn't more government control, it is less. "

Still not relevant to the discussion of climate change.

@" most of the climate change in environment is due to factors beyond our control--such as the sun cycling through a hotter phase."

It is not.

So, it's ok for you and your gang to crush people for the audacity of dissenting against your accepted ideology ... maybe even one you cling to with so much religious zealotry that obligates one to engage in even perhaps physical violence against any dissenters.

@"I voted Jill Stein Green Party. She was the only candidate that said one solitary word about sustainable agriculture. "

Well done, did she win? did voting for her in any way improve the world? Will you actually go out and do something other than confusing issues here.

Sustainable agriculture is a huge issue, but not the only one. Transport and Energy are also huge sectors or the economy. So yes, definitely, address issues in agriculture aswell. No doubt, but currently the Paris Climate accords aren't even guaranteeing countries will do anything... so, what good does you spouting on about this do?

About as much as voting for Jill Stien, or less (though i doubt someone like you actually voted).

https://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/urgentissues/global-warming-climate-change/the-paris-agreement-what-does-it-mean.xml

Point #5 matters to me significantly.
Point #8 does as well.

I am also in favor of giving all signees autonomy to decide how to proceed. So why the fuck is Trump leaving if we can decide how to proceed?

Brain bomb if you think having totally free markets for food is a good idea, I'd encourage you to read about Enron. One thing the market would find totally acceptable is starving people to death if it leads to higher profits. Any free market is a manipulated market and whether it is good, electricity, or health care, an ideological commitment to free markets is an acceptance that it is ok for people to starve, die of easily treated diseases, or freeze to death because you see profits as more important

@"But the agenda for the talks are intentionally limited in scope so that kind of root issue will likely never be addressed. "

So it is an incredibly government power grab, while at the same time being intentionally limited in scope... interesting turn around. Again, you can't seem to keep your views straight. Please go away.

Greenhouse gasses are only one factor in climate change. That is the only issue in Paris. Deforestation and increased use of annual crop farming are two others. Why aren't they being discussed there? There are also numerous other factors causing global warming beyond our control such as the sun, volcano eruptions, earth tilt, waves, etc.

The only issue that they are addressing is the one that will give them more power over us.

@"@orthaic its that I dislike the idea that farmers get a handout in addition to naturally made profits and the handout in America - on a regular basis is spent on luxury items that have nothing to do with what-subsidy was for."

What counts as a luxury items? I ask this because i'm tired of people shitting on the poor for 'having an iphone' or refugees for 'coming here with their smartphone' - like you can't be really poor or in desperate need if you own a phone (i can tell you, i own two, but both were second hand, and i paid apple literally nothing for either of them)

So yeah, if you want to criticise farmers for owning productive land - which they stole - and call all the productive agriculture that they grow blood money. That seems fairly straight forward.

But if you believe they are just doing their best to make a little money, and some of them happen to be massive agri-businesses, to the scale where the 'farmer' is in fact making millions each year, then of course he's going to have some spare for his kid's car...

I'd be railing against subsidies for the unnecessary redistribution of wealth, rather than because people can get rich off them. People getting rich off of the work of others is what the US is all about.

Farming subsidies are either about food security, or that is a great excuse to buy the votes of the farmers (in europe at least)... but the effect of massive farms being hugely productive and farmers being wealthy is simple consequence of State-Capitalism (as opposed to Free-Market Capitalism, which has never existed).

I never imagined in all my wildest dreams that being against govt handouts to wealthy farmers would make me a Libertarian. Having lived in Rural nebraska for a time I can tell you first hand - there are no poor ranchers in western nebraska. Theyre families that have multiple cars- mansions- ability to send kids to college without need for loans. These people get huge subsidies to buy satillite tv, swimming pools. Look up Hyannis Nebraska sometime. The people take their kids to school in helicopters.

Switching to a perennial system, such as growing chestnut trees instead of corn, does not help the politicians. It helps the people. Thus, they don't want to talk about it.

Earth tilt? Are you attributing global wobbling to global warming and ice cap deterioration?

"Yeah, etunrage, you're a fucking idiot."

That's what you get when you take Ogion seriously.

@"And frankly any moral person should be a social justice warrior. Sadly many people absolutely love injustice"

I think you'll find there is an overabundance of Social Justice Warriors, we need a more balanced approach, I would recommend some people take up as Social Justice Clerics, and maybe a few Social Justice Rogues, the odd Social Justice Wizard wouldn't go too far astray either..

The USA farm subsidies go into the hands of huge corporate farms that use the funds to pay money to oil and chemical companies. All three give money to the Democrats and GOP to preserve and enlarge their system.