KyussB wrote: » Yes it is a credible source - it represents Sanders views - and Sanders, being the main political proponent of the Green New Deal, is perhaps the most credible source out there. You have Economic Nobel Laureates backing the GND and everything, and a list of well over a hundred prominent/credentialed/influential people backing it - and more...This is just your usual tedious obstructionism.
KyussB wrote: » If there was nothing to sue the fossil fuel companies for, then they wouldn't get sued - so they'll only have themselves to blame if they are. They've been benefiting from subsidies and tax breaks for a long time - they can more than afford more taxes. Doesn't say anything about forcing out all private business from energy production. If the private sector isn't up to the task of providing enough renewable energy fast enough, then government is The Only Game in Town. Didn't say 'only' Union jobs - and the world needs way more unions, as workers don't generally stand up for themselves these days. Didn't say inceasing taxes on corporations, says make them pay their fair share - which is more readily interpreted as closing all the tax loopholes, which they're using to shift the tax burden off themselves and onto the rest of us. There was a massive wealth transfer to the wealthy a decade ago - time to transfer it back the other way. He hasn't said any of the last sentence, that is beyond hyperbole.
Justice for frontline communities – especially under-resourced groups, communities of color, Native Americans, people with disabilities, children and the elderly – to recover from, and prepare for, the climate impacts, including through a $40 billion Climate Justice Resiliency Fund. And providing those frontline and fenceline communities a just transition including real jobs, resilient infrastructure, economic development.
Expanding the climate justice movement. We will do this by coming together in a truly inclusive movement that prioritizes young people, workers, indigenous peoples, communities of color, and other historically marginalized groups to take on the fossil fuel industry and other polluters to push this over the finish line and lead the globe in solving the climate crisis.
due to the creation of millions of good-paying, unionized jobs.
The 16-year-old Swedish activist drew sympathy after posting the image with the comment that she was travelling through the country on "overcrowded trains" on her way home from the UN climate change conference in Madrid... But the company pointedly added: "It would have been even nicer if you had also reported how friendly and competent you were looked after by our team at your seat in first class.
gozunda wrote: » Back to the topic - Looks like greta is spouting again and it's backfired ... https://news.sky.com/story/greta-thunberg-tackled-over-overcrowded-train-tweet-by-deutsche-bahn-11887479
gozunda wrote: » Nope. Again a completely cicircular and illogical argument. Simply because Sanders is a politician pushing GND as part of his manifesto for election does not make the spiel on his party political website automatically credible. And as explained by way of example - Mein Kamp represented Hitlers view and Hitler was the the main political proponent of national socialism but that doesnt make him an credible source by any stretch of the imagination. And no that does not mean Sanders is Hitler or vice versa btw. Simple logic really.
Eric Cartman wrote: » sorry, its actually 40 billion, my mistake. All im reading is "white people are going to pay heavily for this " Im not getting a 'only some of them will be unionised' out of that at all.
KyussB wrote: » You have the full authoritative description of the plan from Sanders - and you have Economic Nobel Laureates backing it - Sanders absolutely is a credible source on the definition of his own policy proposals - and Nobel Economic laureates can be considered credible sources as to the feasibility of the plans. You have 1: A credible source on the definition of the GND, from the main sources, and 2: Loads of credible sources backing the feasibility of the GND.What you are saying, to use your own ridiculous analogy, is like saying Hitler isn't a credible source for saying what Mein Kampf consists of - and in the latter case, is like saying experts in a field aren't credible sources in their area of expertise (which if you make such a claim, you need to provide evidence of Conflicts of Interest or other discreditable conditions).
Eric Cartman wrote: » As suspected , its just manufactured pity.
Hunky Monster wrote: » A train? I hope it's not one of those diesel ones...
mit 100 Prozent Ökostrom
KyussB wrote: » Sanders is uncontestably a credible source on defining his own views - you can argue whether he's a credible source about the feasibiltiy of what he promotes, but you can't argue that he's a credible source for defining his own views. Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman both back the Green New Deal - they are both Nobel Economic Laureates - they are both credible sources on the economic feasibility of the Green New Deal.IF you want to explain to us exactly how Stiglitz/Krugman are not credible, go ahead...
"Our train from Basel was taken out of traffic. So we sat on the floor on 2 different trains. After Göttingen I got a seat.This is no problem of course and I never said it was. Overcrowded trains is a great sign because it means the demand for train travel is high!"
Thargor wrote: » Nope, already explained in the article: What a weird thread this is, and a weird issue in general, a child activist riling up all the worlds loons like catnip. Its honestly one of the most pathetic things Ive ever seen.
The company pointedly added: "It would have been even nicer if you had also reported how friendly and competent you were looked after by our team at your seat in first class."
jackboy wrote: » In fairness it was a carefully crafted picture and tweet (by Greta’s PR team). Do you really think it was anything other than propaganda? It backfired this time.
Akrasia wrote: » You’re posting in a climate change thread, a topic you say you don’t care about, the only other thing this thread is about is a bunch of grown men vilifying and mocking a teenager for daring to put herself in the public eye on an issue she clearly believes strongly in
Micky 32 wrote: » Firstly it’s not a climate change thread. It was Greta thread. Secondly i’ll re educate you on something, now listen it’s very important. If someone disagrees with someone it’s not mocking. If someone reveals the truth about someone ( her car for example) it’s not mocking. If someone is critical of someone it’s not mocking. I certainly wasn’t mocking anyone. Now do you understand? Or do i need to get a piece of chalk? Stop having a tantrum everytime me or someone else is critical or disagrees about Greta.
weisses wrote: » An obsession with a child is not healthy lads
Professor Moriarty wrote: » The ironing is delicious.
gozunda wrote: » How about searching if you are in any doubt. The comment author is detailed in that link btw. As for lack of objective argument - plenty have called you on that. And just because you dont like humour abour greta well fancy that ....;) Bah humbug ..
Akrasia wrote: » And yet this somehow doesn’t count as mocking her. Right
gozunda wrote: » Back to the topic - Looks like greta is spouting again and it's backfired ... Greta on a Train Mark 2 ...https://news.sky.com/story/greta-thunberg-tackled-over-overcrowded-train-tweet-by-deutsche-bahn-11887479
Akrasia wrote: » For the hard of thinking amongst you, Check the full facts of this story. Greta was found a seat 4hours into her journey that happened to be in 1st class. She didn’t have a 1st class ticket, she didn’t lie about the train being overcrowded, and she did say that she wasn’t angry about trains being overcrowded because it means there is a high demand for eco friendly travel.https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/15/greta-thunberg-in-twitter-spat-with-german-rail-firm
