‘Moron begs moron to help the free world commit economic suicide.’

Counselor706

Literotica Guru
Joined
Apr 24, 2011
Posts
2,665
'PM to press Biden for bold climate deal,’ says a headline in the Mail. It describes how Prime Minister Boris Johnson has flown to the U.S. in the hope of galvanising President Biden into reaching an ‘historic’ agreement at the UN’s COP26 climate summit which the United Kingdom is hosting in Glasgow this November.

But a more accurate headline would be ‘Moron begs moron to help the free world commit economic suicide.’

That will be the inevitable effect of whatever desperate fudge the various member nations come up with at the COP26 summit. China (by far the world’s biggest emitter of industrial CO2) won’t sign up to anything that affects its economic growth; nor will its rival India. (Neither country’s leader attended Biden’s Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate at the White House last week. That’s how seriously they take it…)

To see what that economic suicide looks like, here’s a snapshot from Europe:
Link for the list
 
How are they going to fix climate change?

Regulating what's left of the middle class out of existence, tax the shit out of the slave class some more and fill their pockets with the "profits" from all their special programs. LOL

And the suckers will lap it up.
 
They aren't going to fix the climate they're going to tax the shit out of people and solidify their political grip on their civil societies.
 
How are they going to fix climate change?

Regulating what's left of the middle class out of existence, tax the shit out of the slave class some more and fill their pockets with the "profits" from all their special programs. LOL

And the suckers will lap it up.

You seem to be confusing one "they" with another. The pols who make the relevant decisions will not "fill their pockets with the "profits" from all their special programs" -- somebody might, but not they.
 
Leadership works towards solving global climate issues, supported by scientific community.


There, fixed it for ta
 
You seem to be confusing one "they" with another. The pols who make the relevant decisions will not "fill their pockets with the "profits" from all their special programs" -- somebody might, but not they.

Keep chugging that Kool-Aid and ignoring the long and ubiquitous history of greed in politics buddy. :D

The Gandhi and Washington types... the truly altruistic GREAT leaders, politicians and activist who put their nations/causes above themselves instead of being corrupted by power and greed?? Are exceedingly rare and NOWHERE to be seen in modern 1st world politics.
 
Last edited:
Keep chugging that Kool-Aid and ignoring the long and ubiquitous history of greed in politics buddy. :D

The Gandhi and Washington types... the truly altruistic GREAT leaders, politicians and activist who put their nations/causes above themselves instead of being corrupted by power and greed?? Are exceedingly rare and NOWHERE to be seen in modern 1st world politics.

No doubt. Nevertheless, the politicians who make the decisions will not be in a position to fill their own pockets from anything done to mitigate climate change. At most, taking action will help their re-election prospects -- which is how it's all supposed to work anyway.
 
No doubt. Nevertheless, the politicians who make the decisions will not be in a position to fill their own pockets from anything done to mitigate climate change. At most, taking action will help their re-election prospects -- which is how it's all supposed to work anyway.

Your head is in the sand......why are you so against acknowledging the reality you live in??? :D
 
Your head is in the sand......why are you so against acknowledging the reality you live in??? :D

I live in a reality where there is a known and limited number of ways for pols to make money -- for themselves, not their governments -- and what you are assuming is none of those.
 
I live in a reality where there is a known and limited number of ways for pols to make money -- for themselves, not their governments -- and what you are assuming is none of those.

That's not reality buddy. There are lots of ways to move money and wealth around pols take part in all the time.

How else do you think these poor folks go to congress, make 180k/yr and wind up with million in no time???

It's not because they are altruistic do-gooders. :D
 
Last edited:
That's not reality buddy. There are lots of ways to move money and wealth around pols take part in all the time.

How else do you think these poor folks go to congress, make 180k/yr and wind up with million in no time???

It's not because they are altruistic do-gooders. :D

Nor is it because they are skimming from the treasury.
 
Leadership works towards solving global climate issues, supported by scientific community.


There, fixed it for ta

Politicians don't fix problems. They create problems so they can campaign against them in hopes of getting re-elected.
 
I never said skimming the treasury.... filling their pockets was the standard.

You can put the goalpost down now.

They fill their pockets by book deals, speaking fees, post-office employment with lobbying or consulting firms -- nothing anyone objects to as unethical.
 
Politicians don't fix problems. They create problems so they can campaign against them in hopes of getting re-elected.

And yet here we are...discussing policy decisions between leaders to advance climate effort

But feel free to talk more about.libertarianism
 
They fill their pockets by book deals, speaking fees, post-office employment with lobbying or consulting firms -- nothing anyone objects to as unethical.

And board positions with companies that profited heavily from government legislation/contracts done in the name of being "green". :D

I never said anything about ethics either.

Team (D) and team "green energy" are on the same page together because the same reason big Oil and team (R) are together..... there is a shit load of money there and they want control of it. :)
 
And board positions with companies that profited heavily from government legislation/contracts done in the name of being "green". :D

I never said anything about ethics either.

Team (D) and team "green energy" are on the same page together because the same reason big Oil and team (R) are together..... there is a shit load of money there and they want control of it. :)

That does not invalidate anything in either side's arguments or efforts. To the extent it does, you are drawing a false equivalence. There is a lot more money to be made selling fossil fuels than in interfering with the market for them.
 
That does not invalidate anything in either side's arguments or efforts.

Sure it does, because it's ABOUT THE MONEY.

And for some reason (D)'eez just can't be directly honest about it.

To the extent it does, you are drawing a false equivalence.

Not at all...both sides are supportive of their energy markets.

There is a lot more money to be made selling fossil fuels than in interfering with the market for them.

Not after the (D)'s regulate them out to be "green". :D

Thus the lefts big push against anything they aren't selling, even if it is NOT the most viable and affordable clean energy option available.

It's about the money.
 
Last edited:
And yet here we are...discussing policy decisions between leaders to advance climate effort

But feel free to talk more about.libertarianism

We've been discussing it since the 70, yet no real solution.
 
Back
Top