EatATaco @ EatATaco @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

2,804

Joined

2 yr. ago

Sounds like something an idiot would brag about.

The funny thing is that most people in the Western worlds would say the same thing you are hear, while there are probably billions of people who see their problems and would say that they were be feeling pretty great right now if they had them.

We look at things like this as way "stupid kid with a narrow view" and don't ask ourselves "man, how narrow is my own view and what an I missing about my own blessings?"

I think it's fair to call The Useful Idiot a victim.

why this is the most effective climate legislation

When a poster blatantly misrepresents what I've said, I view that as them just admitting they realize I'm right.

other than Biden claiming so

lol you act like I didn't just link you the analysis of some third party.

If passing the largest climate legislation in us history is a non metric, yes you do got me.

Can someone please add "they are not wrong" to the image please?

After decades of effort ending in failure, near-misses or small wins, Congress finally delivered transformative legislation to tackle the climate crisis in 2022. This would not have happened without Biden’s leadership, as well as the efforts of Congressional champions and countless climate action advocates and analysts.

Of course, the hard work of deploying climate solutions at the necessary speed and scale has only just begun. This task is now more difficult due to the divided 118th Congress, but the landmark legislation enacted by the 117th is secure for at least the next year. There are opportunities for the 118th Congress to deliver incremental progress through bipartisan clean energy permitting reform and Farm Bill reauthorization.

We either get this, or we get full steam the other way. I'm not blown away by what he has done, but arguing that he is going in the wrong direction just doesn't align with the facts.

https://www.wri.org/insights/biden-administration-tracking-climate-action-progress

We need more people like you.

The main goal of learning is learning how to learn, or learning how to figure new things out. If "a tool can do it better, so there is no point in not allowing it" was the metric, we would be doing a disservice because no one would understand why things work the way they do, and thus be less equipped to further our knowledge.

This is why I think common core, at least for math, is such a good thing because it teaches you methods that help you intuitively figure out how to get to the answer, rather than some mindless set of steps that gets you to the answer.

As another poster questioned, if it saved them tine then, yes, it is absolutely a win. But if they spent the same amount of time, I would agree with you that it's not a win.

Interesting thought, I would be curious about this too.

One metric is the only thing you go by? Do you really think that climate change is driven solely by how much natural gas we export?

It certainly wouldn't be surprising.

So the escalation stems from the disregard of an order that everyone was required to obey

You've got it backwards. Right in the article, it notes "The decision to freeze Starlink's accounts stems from a separate dispute over unpaid fines X was ordered to pay due to its failure to turn over some documents." The escalation of Starlink not complying comes from that, not the other way around.

ut the intertwined nature of both companies being controlled by Musk is both part of the reason why SpaceX would even consider not complying with local law in a country it operates in

Again, seemingly backwards. It was the government of Brazil that used their "intertwined nature" to freeze Starlink accounts, and Musk has, in turned, used that "intertwine nature" as leverage.

To be clear, I hate defending Musk, but I don't see why it makes sense to freeze Startlink accounts if it's X that hasn't paid the fines. Can they go after any company that he owns stock in? Can they start seizing Teslas? How about MS infrastructure, if he holds some ownership in that company too? I'm just not sure the government of Brazil is on the right side of this, and not simply using their power to punish Musk. If people said "I don't really care and I'm glad they are holding his feet to the fire" that would be one thing, but people are arguing that it's actually Musk who is doing all of this, while it appears that it's actually the Brazilian government that "intertwined" them and Musk just responding in kind.

You are.

Blatantly lying about what I've said just indicates to me that you have no interest in getting to the truth, so I won't bother any further.

Nor did I say anyone was suing anyone. I was just drawing up an example of a case how they could go after both entities. In this case, it appears the fine was levied against X, and not Musk.

And no one is talking about "avoiding fines." WTF are you even on about? We are talking about them seizing Starlink assets because of fines levied against X. Musk doesn't even own a majority share of SpaceX (who owns starlink). You are confusing "the face of" with "the legal entity."

You can limit liability by creating separate entities and this is absolutely the standard, at least in the US. You would have to be very ignorant, or have sought no outside counsel, if you have some kind of decently profitable business and haven't done so. It's the whole point of these legal structures, such as LLCs. I don't know the particulars of the case, nor the particulars of Brazilian law, so I don't really know if it the case here.

That being said, speaking from an only slightly informed US perspective, if they are suing Musk himself, then yes they can absolutely go after his assets, which would include ownership in Starlink and X. However, if they fined X, it wouldn't even remotely be a stretch that they do not have the legal authority to lock down Starlink accounts, as they are two separate entities that are presumably linked only by common figurehead.

Iirc, it was a compromise between those who wanted a direct election, and those who wanted Congress to choose the POTUS. Including concessions to the southern States because they were outnumbered when it came to free people.

I could be missing something about some wanting state legislatures to choose, but I'm pretty sure the bulk was what I said above.

More importantly, if you are voting for her because of the environment, voting for stein is actually harmful to that goal because it helps trump win, which means instead of making baby steps in the right direction, we'll run full steam in the wrong direction.