Random Thoughts (Political Edition)


I am posting this as an example of how the Republicans have simply decided it is their way, or the highway.
Republicans Keep Admitting Everything They Said About Obama Was a Lie

White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, appearing on Fox News Sunday, repeated the official administration line that Democrats had to choose between legislation and investigation. Chris Wallace reminded Mulvaney that he had supported a Republican Congress that had engaged in continuous investigations of the White House, reopening probes to chase conspiracy theories even after they had been conclusively debunked.

This prompted Mulvaney to make an interesting confession. The Republican Congress never wanted to pass laws in the first place:

WALLACE: You were there, of what the Republicans did to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on Benghazi, on Fast and Furious. And they got some things done despite the fact that these were aggressive partisan investigations.

MULVANEY: Well, we didn’t get very much done. Listen, I’ll be the first to admit that when the tea party wave, of which I was one, got here in 2011, the last thing we were interested in was giving President Obama legislative successes.

He will also go on to say that many of the Democrats ran on reaching across the isle, and this is their opportunity to do so. Yet they still don't seem to be wiling to do so at the same time.

Here is the complete interview. The relevant section starts about 9:55 and continues to nearly the 13 minute mark.


 
AOC just cost NYC 25k jobs and $2.5bil of investments. Amazing specifically cited her as influencing their decision to not build their new HQ in the city. She responded by blabbering something about "worker exploitation" - must not know what the average salary would've been $150k. What a tool.
 
Since Amazon was going to get $3 billion in subsidies and tax breaks to build there in the first place, it came under scrutiny from other sources and AOC was simply a scapegoat for them.

Besides, look at the Foxconn deal in Wisconsin as to how the situation can go wrong in the first place.
 
Direct and indirect emissions are massive, especially methane created by their digestion processes. The EPA claims methane from livestock digestion alone makes up about a third of the US agriculture greenhouse gas emissions: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
It's not that the farming industry doesn't produce a shit ton of emissions, it's the fact that it's an animal and unless you put it in a special warehouse that will suck all the methane out of the air and put it to some other use, it is impossible to curb those emissions.
 
AOC just cost NYC 25k jobs and $2.5bil of investments. Amazing specifically cited her as influencing their decision to not build their new HQ in the city. She responded by blabbering something about "worker exploitation" - must not know what the average salary would've been $150k. What a tool.
It was actually more the unions than AOC in this case along with a lot of local push back due to fears over increase in living costs. Personally fuck Queens :p
 
It's not that the farming industry doesn't produce a shit ton of emissions, it's the fact that it's an animal and unless you put it in a special warehouse that will suck all the methane out of the air and put it to some other use, it is impossible to curb those emissions.

Make fewer animals, and use the poop in biogasplants.
 
I wouldn't say "give up", just "less" until we can reduce their impact. Synthetic fuel and lab burgers for you :p
 
I doubt synthetic fuels could be made to not have any CO2 output, though perhaps some sort of cat 2.0 could be made to deal with it. I like the idea of lab grown meat though, being able to synthesize food would be an amazing achievement.
 
There are plant based fuels that make plenty of power. They do require more energy to make though...
 
There are plant based fuels that make plenty of power. They do require more energy to make though...
They have their own problems:
  1. You are taking away food to make fuel
  2. Ethanol has crap energy content so mileage goes to shit, it is also very prone to gathering water in colder climates
  3. Biodiesel creates more NOx emissions, which are worse than CO2 in just about every measurable way

Realistically reducing transportation related emissions requires extensive electrification along with nuclear and renewable power generation. But since electric cars are boring I'd rather eat lab grown meat.
 
Last edited:
1 is not necessarily true. Waste foods, or crops can be used to make alcohol based fuels. There are also cover crops that can be used to make fuel that improve soil conditions and reduce the amount of fertilizer and or pesticides needed for when food crops are grown, further reducing emissions. There is another bonus with using cover crops, less topsoil is lost, and that is huge.

2 is most definitely a problem.

3, while true, the reductions in other emissions can be worth it if you are using the right plant to derive the fuel from.
 
Don't know if I agree with you on 3, NOx are some of the worst emissions especially for situations like Blind has with the smog in his city.
 
I know this, but it is not only NOx that causes smog.
 
Top