So there are constantly people debating whether or not Al Gore is full of shit about global warming. (He’s not, by the way, but I’m not going to argue the point with you. His facts are accurate.)
So maybe there is global warming, and maybe it’s caused by man-made pollutants, and maybe not. But whether or not global warming is going to kill us all next summer, or a century from now, or maybe never, I gotta ask the question: isn’t it just a good idea to develop cleaner, greener technology anyway?
And aren’t the stakes high enough that it’s worth going on the assumption that, yes, if we don’t start taking better care of the planet, we’re all going to die, and let’s just fucking do it and quit arguing about it?
Oh, and, uh, don’t give me any of the usual bullshit about putting hippie environmentalism before economic reality. There’s money in green technology. Lots of it — fat government grants, consumer money, b2b money, everywhere.
So really, if you’re anti-environmentalism, you’re simply shoring up aging industries like the automobile industry, at the expense of new, developing markets. If you vote against environmental laws or initiatives, you’re voting to let the government provide shelter for industries that couldn’t survive under the scrutiny of those laws.
You are anti-market. You, sir or madam, are the fucking socialist hippie.
There’s that great free-market comeback about all the jobs lost through modernizing industries: “are you counting the buggy whip makers?” There’s upheaval on the horizon, and there’s money to be made, always, in a chaotic situation. When are you starring in a video of requiem for a diplomat, dressed like Harry Lime, wandering the sewers of Vegas? Sorry. I just had a vision of Orson Wells telling his friend why he was living in post war Vienna. I’m typing on a crappy old laptop ’cause my PC died and Tracy’s animation workstation’s in the bedroom, and she’s asleep. Thi thing could run on handcranked power.
I always like to ask people I talk to, that express a disbelief or scorn about human-caused global warming, if they buy the cheapest house possible, if they buy the cheapest food, or they buy the cheapest car.
Buying cheap always has quality issues down the line that you end up paying for. And its the exact same thing with energy. If solar costs more, so what? If wind costs more, so what? We don’t have to be so cheap that we end up paying for it in smog or acid rain or coal miner lives, or any of the other numerous issues that we end up paying for to fix later on down the road.
Hey Jeff, long time no chat! How are you doing?
Josh, while the ‘fucking socialist hippie’ conclusion might feel good, it’s not good rhetoric. Try “Protectionist, anti-competitive, Big-Government Nanny-Stater”, or something similar.
Leave a comment