It won't, but we just have to suffer all the higher prices, taxes, inconvenience and virtue signalling so that hypocrites can feel better
Off Topic Climate change/ pollution
- Thread starter bradymk2
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
It won't, but we just have to suffer all the higher prices, taxes, inconvenience and virtue signalling so that hypocrites can feel better
Some Tory bastard earlier excused Sunaks persistent helicopter trips as not making much difference. As I’ve said before the rich don’t give a **** about the climate but don’t mind taxing the poor to ****, just to make them feel better.
The rich like all those multi millionaire lefties like Emma Thompson, Sting, Bono etc…? Not to mention those great climate activists who tell us we all need to cut down on flying and reduce our carbon emissions, the Markle. Citizen Khan racks up a larger carbon footprint whilst taxing the **** out of the Londoners who vote for him. Hypocrites on every side.
Indeed, we're all hypocrites, it's just a question of degree.
The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
Plenty on here track our chairman’s every move on his plane
It's hard to have any form of consistent discussion when issues are being mixed together.
I answered steverico about why burying plastic in a landfill isn't a good idea and that it doesn't make any sense why an adult male would demand to drink from a plastic straw. Then the next reply is about 3 billion Americans, Indians and Chinese who supposedly don't care about the environment, despite China and the US investing billions in renewable energy.. and then the argument moves on to virtue signalling and hypocrites... There's no follow through or logic, just random themes being thrown in to a discussion.
It's like discussing with a pigeon. Pointless.
Ye I did wonder how anyone knows all 3 billion don’t give a ****
The super rich and the elite couldn’t believe their luck when climate ‘scientists’ started to claim we were doomed. The World Bank demand farms are closed, Bill Gates buys up farms to produce his version of Soylent Green. The WEF are now openly talking about using apps to measure our individual carbon footprints so they can keep us in their 15 minute cities. All the **** the Chinese are already ahead of the game on. Blair and his globalising cronies in the UN and WHO want to rule the world. Whilst people keep falling for this climate scam they’ll get away with it
None of those ppl are telling you anything. You're a non-entity, like me, and they don't know we exist. You're specifically seeking out and reading media which quotes them, for the sole purpose of annoying yourself and convincing yourself of the opposite.
I have no idea of the climate opinions of Emma Thompson, Megan Markel or Dave the barman from Minder, so they don't affect me or my beliefs.
You obviously don’t read much then or you would know what they on record as saying.
Annoying myself? You really are a patronising, condescending prig. Mind you, you have made a good enough living working for firms helping destroy the planet to retire early and go travelling adding to your carbon footprint, Whilst I haven’t flown for 31 years thus helping the planet be be a cleaner place for your kids and grandkids.
They may be investing billions in renewable energy. They are also spending billions on extending their use of coal. Whilst some gullible people think the tiny amount we contribute to worldwide emissions need reducing to zero to save the world.
Indeed, we're all hypocrites, it's just a question of degree.
The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
I haven’t flown for 21 years. You can do your carbon offsetting by buying me a few pints next time I see you.
How dare you have your own beliefs, you should be getting spoon fed your opinion from your echo chamber
Talkin' politics with me daughter the other night and she threw out an idea which intrigued me. (She's a chip off the old block and can always be trusted to come up with a left field solution).
So... The impact of your vote should be relative to how much skin you've got left in the game. In a nutshell, the older you are then the less ****s you're liable to give about the future of the planet.
A twenty year old should essentially have a vote which is worth eight times as much as a hundred year old, with a pro rata scale for each 10 year interval in-between.
As you age, your voting impact decreases.
Her reasoning was to limit the damage that Brexit voting, small boat frothing, gammon faced ****s could do, but she's young and idealistic and I'd never suggest that her representation of her dear Dad's generation represented everyone of an older demographic.
Perish the thought.
However, I'm struggling to find an argument against her logic.
So... The impact of your vote should be relative to how much skin you've got left in the game. In a nutshell, the older you are then the less ****s you're liable to give about the future of the planet.
A twenty year old should essentially have a vote which is worth eight times as much as a hundred year old, with a pro rata scale for each 10 year interval in-between.
As you age, your voting impact decreases.
Her reasoning was to limit the damage that Brexit voting, small boat frothing, gammon faced ****s could do, but she's young and idealistic and I'd never suggest that her representation of her dear Dad's generation represented everyone of an older demographic.
Perish the thought.
However, I'm struggling to find an argument against her logic.
I'm not condescending because I don't read opinions of actors and musicians. They're modern day court jesters - overpaid entertainers. I have as much need to know what Sting or Emily Thompson think about global warming as I do what Paul Weller thinks about rate increases adequately controlling monetary inflation.
Remember when people of that age in the 1960s thought they were going to change the world by sitting in fields with flowers in their hair chanting make love not war whilst listening to a cacophonous row from acid head rock bands? Young ones now are just as clueless as a lot of us were back then.
Last edited: