Can't do that, because according to Saint Brewster the Environmental Saint of Lost Causes, you would probably drive the cans to hobos creating CO2, plus the beer they'd buy would be grown with wheat that does not meet the HIV positive Walk Score for Global Enviro Awareness, so you'd be better off just throwing them into the lake like I did in high school. A lot of those beer cans become houses for low income minnows, so it actually does benefit local fauna. Just throw them into the lake, off to the side, closer to your neighbor's dock.
Socialism
-
- Posts: 7571
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:54 pm
Re: Socialism
Shikata ga nai
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: Socialism
No I don't litter. That's real pollution. I only do carbon pollution.
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 7571
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:54 pm
Re: Socialism
I consider it a housing initiative for non humans, but its not my fault that they don't like the floorplan of the house I gave them.
A lot of those sea-turtles look fly as hell with those plastic 6 pack rings on their necks that those Fisherman tossed into the ocean. They are like a swimming Jared's Commercial with all that bling. Shit, they could get into the rap game. The real baller reptilians could be in Cash Money Millionaire vids decked out like that. I wouldn't go that far and throw plastic beverage rings into the drink, because it is unethical to own those. They are conflict rings, which come from Sierra Leone breweries that profit on the sale of that sea turtle bling just like in that Blood Diamond movie.
Shikata ga nai
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: Socialism
I'm not doing it for the turtles, it's entirely for the aesthetic. I enjoy a pastoral view from my McMansion.
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 7571
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:54 pm
Re: Socialism
Only aluminum is cost effective to recycle. Even then, fuck it. There's more where that came from. A lot more. Not gonna run out, why bother? I use plasstic silverware at least 2x per day, and I will keep doing that indefinitely. Its easy, cost effective, and saves me time. Why wash something that you can toss and get another of? Waste of time.Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:10 pmYeah, I stopped recycling too after the vegan thread recently. It convinced me to toss everything out in the same bag.
Shikata ga nai
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Socialism
JD and Brewster convinced me. You can only entice me with submerging coastal cities for so long before I join the cause.
-
- Posts: 7571
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:54 pm
Re: Socialism
Well, so far environmentalists can't even get themselves to stop consuming and being addicted to growth, so I wish them good luck in convincing others to sign on.SuburbanFarmer wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:05 pmWe only require infinite growth due to over-leveraging. Otherwise, the system would be quite stable.
If more people come into existence, they won’t have any new work to do. If existing people use more, they produce more waste.
The Malthusian trap is created by thinking that things just get bigger forever, and banking everyone’s future on it.
The pie Is finite.
Human nature 101. If we have something, we use it. It didn't take more than a few hundred thousand hunter-gatherers to wipe out all the big game in the Northern Hemisphere, Australia, and EurAsia. Its a done deal. When we run out of resources, we wil hunt environmentalists to extinction and use their tallow for our candles and whatnot.
Shikata ga nai
-
- Posts: 1848
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:33 pm
Re: Socialism
This is the same "all or nothing" bullshit. There's nothing wrong with doing what you can, it's not a lottery where you either win or don't. If everyone cut their personal emissions 10%, that's 10% closer we are to the goal. Nobody said $20/gal. That's your 'all or nothing' false choice. Even 30% more would significantly change people's energy habits. Maybe people don't need to work 2 hrs from where they live in a 4000 sq ft house they don't need. The "poor people" argument is ignoring what was already proposed, that there be tax credits making it revenue neutral for many people. You just want excuses to do nothing and not care.heydaralon wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:00 pmYou want gas to be $20 per gallon or whatever. You want BP to be destroyed. How far are you willing to take your environmentalism? Obviously you aren't going to kill your family, but would you be willing to demolish your property? Stop buying products made with petroleum period? Not use electricity anymore? Not have anymore kids? Not drive anymore? You want poor people to go bankrupt paying fuel costs, when you are just as guilty as anyone is for "climate change" etc. Whatever environmental solution that we come up with will be meaningless, because oil is used in everything. Everything. Your lifestyle is more decadent than Kings of centuries before. Everyone's is. Yet we wring our hands and pretend like we are not all complicit.
We are only accustomed to dealing with like twenty online personas at a time so when we only have about ten people some people have to be strawmanned in order to advance our same relative go nowhere nonsense positions. -TheReal_ND
-
- Posts: 36399
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am
Re: Socialism
The Climate Scientists have overplayed their hands.
They've created a doomsday which is existential.
Their solution is totally unrealistic.
So the Climate Scientists themselves have said that it is already too late.
So fuck it. Just get dat blang. Secure the bag.
They've created a doomsday which is existential.
Their solution is totally unrealistic.
So the Climate Scientists themselves have said that it is already too late.
So fuck it. Just get dat blang. Secure the bag.
Nec Aspera Terrent
-
- Posts: 7571
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:54 pm
Re: Socialism
You are doing jackshit though. Don't kid yourself. Even if we eliminated every internal combustion engine in the land, we'd still end up cutting down every tree for fuel or farmland to support 320 mil of us in this country alone. You are delusional dude. You own 2 properties. You have a bunch of shit you don't need. Are you going to force your kids at gunpoint to walk everywhere and not start families of their own which would use excessive resources? Go live in a fucking tent and subsist on your own private self grown vegetable garden and then tell us all how moral you are. You have as big a carbon footprint as anyone. You can't bullshit a bullshitter.brewster wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:39 pmThis is the same "all or nothing" bullshit. There's nothing wrong with doing what you can, it's not a lottery where you either win or don't. If everyone cut their personal emissions 10%, that's 10% closer we are to the goal. Nobody said $20/gal. That's your 'all or nothing' false choice. Even 30% more would significantly change people's energy habits. Maybe people don't need to work 2 hrs from where they live in a 4000 sq ft house they don't need. The "poor people" argument is ignoring what was already proposed, that there be tax credits making it revenue neutral for many people. You just want excuses to do nothing and not care.heydaralon wrote: ↑Sun Mar 24, 2019 5:00 pmYou want gas to be $20 per gallon or whatever. You want BP to be destroyed. How far are you willing to take your environmentalism? Obviously you aren't going to kill your family, but would you be willing to demolish your property? Stop buying products made with petroleum period? Not use electricity anymore? Not have anymore kids? Not drive anymore? You want poor people to go bankrupt paying fuel costs, when you are just as guilty as anyone is for "climate change" etc. Whatever environmental solution that we come up with will be meaningless, because oil is used in everything. Everything. Your lifestyle is more decadent than Kings of centuries before. Everyone's is. Yet we wring our hands and pretend like we are not all complicit.
Shikata ga nai