It seems to me you’re just hating to be hating. Yes we could do better but the fact is we’re nowhere near as bad as you make us out to be
All I said was that just because there is worse, it doesn't make us any better. Where did I make it out that we were terrible? Obviously we aren't going as good as we could if we aren't at the top of the list and the greenest country there is.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
But we’re not as bad as you make us out to be
That's not a valid argument.The fact is that America could be doing a lot more.Just because we're not at the bottom of the list, doesn't mean we can't do more than we're already doing. We have the opportunities, but we aren't taking them.
Yes we have. Over the decades we’ve gotten considerably more green than we used to be. It’s progress not perfection. Others like China have gotten progressively less green.
You're not listening.Stop using China as an example. We are not China.And thats exactly what im saying, you're proving my point for me.YES, America has become more green. NO, it hasn't all been under Trump. Trump is halting production, or pushing us backwards. And at the same time, he's taking credit for what few positives we have done.We can do more. Trump isn't allowing that to happen. Understand?
That isn’t true. He hasn’t halted anything
Then again, you aren't paying attention. Typical.I've laid out facts in front of you.If you choose to ignore them, then fine.But im not going to be dragged into some asanine argument because of it.
You haven’t laid out facts. We’ve gotten greener even with Trump in charge. We haven’t gone backwards ever
The fact is we’re nowhere near as bad as you make us out to be
i'd say you are, but that is only my oppinion. but you are right that there are many who are far worse, which is a very big problem
The Chinese spill far more pollutants in a day than we do in a year
and that makes your pollution any better? i don't think so. just because someone else is doing worse than you does not mean you, and by extension i, are doing good
But we’ve gotten progressively better every decade. You don’t want to hear that though
i'd love to hear that, but the "good" news usually get ignored. they dont sell as well as the bad ones. Also, you are not the only ones who are doing better every decade. that should be the bare minimum for everyone, especially the really bad ones
Oh, if this is the Yale thing you were talking about:epi.envirocenter.yale.edu/.../executive-summaryYou'll notice the United States is ranked #27 overall, but also dead last among all nations in Europe and North America. That's not something to brag about.
It isn’t a competition
@reptocarl Then there's no reason to hate China, then, is there?
We’re not as bad as people make us out to be
Perhaps not. Yet, we can do better, and Trump isn't helping. At all.
It’s a balancing act. The more restrictions you start putting on companies to be greener then all they do is move to a different country that doesn’t put those restrictions on them and nothing really changes environmentally but instead USA loses jobs and tax revenue. Then the people will start bitching about jobs and the economy
Technically, if it's a choice between a company being here and polluting versus not being here and polluting, then we do actually get cleaner. Nonetheless, if you do a little bit of research on this issue, you'll find companies don't actually leave as easily as people think they do. Not that the United States has much manufacturing anymore.
Oh, and the reason we don't have manufacturing, despite all the posturing on the matter, is cost of labor. Not environmental standards.
Cost of labor is a factor and them moving does make us greener but makes where they move to less green so the environment stays the same
Yes, but we can't do anything about that, can we? While our backyards are cleaner for the effort.
But my point is the environment is a globally shared thing. It doesn’t matter if a company is polluting here or there. The overall effect on the environment is the same
You literally just posted a question about why we don't hate on China, because the United States is so much cleaner.
Liberals are wanting us to be completely green but say nothing about China.
Again, China has nothing to do with whether or not the United States should be "greener". You're presenting an irrelevant straw man for us to beat down.
What none of you are understanding is greener products and going green costs money which will be passed to the consumer and hurt jobs and the economy. Like I said it’s a balancing act ANY president has to balance. Trump leans toward protecting our economy and jobs. Liberals swing toward protecting the environment at the expense of the economy and jobs. You can’t have it both ways
That's fair. Although I'd argue that in some cases, technological advancement makes "going green" affordable. And then there's the fact that we WILL run out of oil and coal eventually, which is a national security threat. As is climate change that's largely caused by using dirty forms of energy generation.
Personally as conservative as I am I’ve never understood why we can have men walk on the moon in 1969 but 20 years into the 21st century we’re still dependent on coal and the internal combustion engine. I know the oil lobby is very powerful. I cannot understand why we’re not getting our energy by nuclear power plants which is the very cleanest. The US Navy has proven its safe. What you don’t hear from environmentalists is wind turbines are killing birds especially the nocturnal ones some that are endangered
I'm with you on that. I think people just grow accustomed to using a particular kind of technology and then don't want to move away from it. As for turbines, yeah they kill birds, but so do cell towers and house cats. And most of the new (er) wind turbine installations are offshore. Without actually knowing what I'm talking about here, I imagine that cuts down on bird mortality a bit. Hydroelectric kills a certain amount of fish, too. Anyway, we've come a long, long way from Chernobyl and Fukushima in terms of the safety of nuclear technology. But people are afraid, and it's hard to get over that.
Environmentalists in the 70’s stopped our nuclear power expansion. It’s time to take a second look at it. Fukushima was built in an earthquake prone area. That was just plain dumb
Is there any part of Japan that isn't an earthquake prone area? Not a rhetorical question - I don't know.
No he isn’t. We’ve actually become greener under Trump. We’ve never gotten less green
Environmental protection rollbacks Advocating for coal industries Fighting Californias fuel high standards Putting a oil pipeline through a reservation, damaging the local habitats Pulling out of the Paris accordEtc.
Stop being a sheep. Your smarter than that
Stop hating just to be hating. The fact is even with his cutbacks we’ve still gotten greener
That’s bullshit. Sorry if I take out various bits of your car, is the car working better? No. That logic makes no sense.
Because of other advances elsewhere that make up for it
Like what and how do they make up for all that damage?
Clean coal technology is a big one. Hybrid autos and the fact that conventional autos have gotten much greener too
Clean coal does not exist. Coal energy is one of the most polluting sources of energy on earth. He may espouse it, but it doesn’t exist. Like the myth of windmill cancer. That’s because of emission and fuel standards set by California and Hawaii. Try again.
Tell you what, get enough proof and send it on over. I’ll check it when I wake up.
It does exist. The exhaust has scrubbers. You’re just someone full of hate. The most clean energy for large scale is actually nuclear but you environmentalists have nixed that haven’t you? In spite of Finland’s and the US Navy’s example of it being safe
1. I fully support nuclear power. It’s our best sustainable energy source. Stop attributing things to me as if I’m some liberal fuckwit. 2. Correct I am full of hate. But right now I’m only amused. If it exists, prove it is real and prove those scrubbers remove all the pollution. Not just from the air, but the toxicity it leaks into the water, the damage it does to the earth in order to mine it etc.
They don’t remove all of it. But it’s progress not perfection. We’re way greener than we were in the 70’s but you don’t want to hear that
The 70s? Lmao dude. We didn’t have any environmental protections then. You haven’t proven anything at all. We were better off before trump took office, but you refuse to believe that because that would mean Obama was greener than trump. That is a demonstrable fact. You can’t make massive reversals in environmental protections, try to steal credit for what others have long done, try to propose the myth of a clean version of one of the most polluting forms of energy and then refuse to provide credible EVIDENCE.
You haven’t proven we’re worse either
You haven’t proven the water or air is more polluted since Trump has taken over. All you say is he reversed some of Obama’s doings but you haven’t proven it’s actually had any impact
I actually have. Shall I list the reversals again? Or the fact that your greener policies are either not true, not by trumps administration or are fallacious?
But they haven’t had any impact
Explain to me how reversing environmental protections doesn’t somehow harm the environment
I’ve told you how. Now you prove there has been negative impacts.
That’s not how this works honey. You made the claim that we are greener now despite all the reversals on environmental protections. It’s your burden of proof, not mine.
Provide credible, unbiased evidence or be silent.
You prove it. Do you really think climate change can be reversed?
That’s not how the burden of proof works. You make the claim, you prove it. An assertion without said evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
So can yours. Do you really think climate change can be reversed?
Correct. Now prove your claims, or what you say is effectively dismissed until you do so and this discussion ends.
How can it be reversed?
Your claims are dismissed as you refuse to prove your claims. Good day.
Biased source from the source of the environmental damages. I said credible UNBIASED sources. Would you trust obamas White House page if it showed he did no drone strikes? Of course not. You have all the burden still left to prove.
What sticks out is the more environmental restrictions you put on companies the more they’ll leave to other countries that don’t force those restrictions on them. This is one reason jobs have grown under Trump. If he kept Obama’s restrictions you’d be bitching about the economy and jobs instead. You can’t have it both ways
I wasn’t bitching about either when Obama was president nor are jobs and economy relevant here. Correct, they likely will. But that is their fault then, as they couldn’t meet our high standards. But now we have lax to no standards for them. Prove your assertion or just stop talking and wasting my time.
I did. He hasn’t hurt the environment.
No you keep claiming it. Your only proof was a biased source from the administration itself. Evidence is credible and unbiased. You have yet to provide that.
My point was made. If a company isn’t complying with government restrictions then that company moves to Ukraine for example you haven’t really changed anything environmentally except where the source of the pollution is coming from. This is a global problem not a country problem. It isn’t going to do anything positive for the earth if we’re the greenest in the world and China stays the same. We’re the greenest of the industrial superpowers already
Your point was not in any way proven. You have repeatedly failed to do so. Making a point or not is totally inconsequential. Your statements thus far are worthless.
Have fun with that
I’m honestly disappointed in you. But par for the course I suppose. Good day.
I am you too.