"Clean coal" more republican lies

Ironically, one of the arguments people have against Ron Paul is that he's supposedly 'anti-environmentalist', simply because he's anti-big government. And yet they're now lapping up Romney's bullshit about "clean coal"?!

I'm beginning to think that pro-Romney voters have to be even stupider than when they first voted for Bush. The guy is so obviously a liar and a cheater, and yet they're too blind to see it. Romney must be having a field day with their gullibility.

I'm 19, and all it took was Bush and Obama for me to see through the bullshit. (I don't remember Clinton, although after reading about his foreign policy, he's not exempt either.) It still baffles me how there's 40, 50 and 60-year-olds who've had their whole lives, and yet they're STILL buying into everything the system throws at them. Seems like all the programming and flouride keeps their brains docile.

Plus, perhaps today's harder economy intentionally prevents people from taking the time to do the research, because they're so busy trying to make a living. And a lot of older folk don't bother with the Internet, settling for FAUX News instead.

I don't mean to judge, but if you don't see that Romney is a puppet, you lack a fully developed brain. I think in most cases this borders towards scientific fact rather than a personal statement.

Obama's a puppet, too, but he's somewhat more subtle. Romney is just WAY too obvious. But I hate them both equally.

 

Ah, 19 whole years old. You should save this post and read it when you're 30. Then read it again when you're 40.

 

LOL, Of course the health insurance cartel/lobby wouldn't have anything to do with that. The Healthcare Reform Act was essentially written by the Health Insurance Industry. It was a very bad compromise made by the President, but a compromise he had to make to get any reform accomplished, and if you think that the system doesn't need reform, then I have to assume that you're either fabulously wealthy and have established a gigantic HSA or haven't yet had the pleasure of fighting tooth and nail/and or pleading with a health insurance company to provide the "risk mitigation" that they claim to provide, in print, on your policy.

Almost every example you give of the evil's of Big Government can be traced straight back to corporate influence and manipulation of the government. This massive government intervention you speak of, perverting the market, is really corporate intervention, perverting the market via the government through bribery to reinforce and perpetuate the infinite growth paradigm. The BIG INTERVENTIONIST GOVERNMENT you imagine doesn't exist - you're seeing the privatization of government at work, and you somehow think that just giving them free reign is going to make this world a better place?

 

Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, Finland, and Sweden are among the top 10 happiest countries in the world. I believe they are all socialist.

http://247wallst.com/2012/05/22/the-happiest-countries-in-the-world-2/

 

There has been a lot of corporate propaganda trying to convince us that electric cars are bad for the environment. You have apparently fallen for it. There is another thread here that goes into this in depth. The only real issue is whether the energy source to charge the battery is clean. If we imagine a wind and solar grid supplying the charge, then the electric car is a clear win for the environment.

 

Hopefully if free speech is still around by then. LOL

Yeah, yeah. I'm young compared to you, and apparently don't know shit. Pffft ... but I honestly don't see my thoughts changing on this matter. I now know bullshit when I see it.

 

Nobody ever does.

 

haha You think I'm going to 'grow up' and buy into the system? Not a chance. I can't unlearn what I've learned, and I don't want to sell my soul.

 

That's not what I said.

 

Never say never. No telling what will happen.

You don't WANT to sell your soul but that doesn't mean you WON'T.

And yes, you can "unlearn".

 

I like to think I already had chances where I could have, but didn't.

Heck, my whole social life in school sucked just because I chose to be myself. It's in my nature.

Yeah, I know there's some former hippies who claim they had unrealistic delusions. But come on, that's a cop out. Foolish excuse. They were probably just in it for the fad from the beginning anyway.

Being a 'hippie' seems to fit my personality like a glove. Even my hair. LOL Like people would taunt me for it, and yet look at people like Syd Barrett. I know it's not about the hair, but just saying. Tiny details like that, on top of where I was already at. It's like self-discovery.

Plus I never liked politics in the first place. Back when my best friend was a neocon, I would always tell him to shut up about politics. But now we're pretty like-minded. Discovering Ron Paul, and the truth about our system truly got me very interested and passionate.

My friend is now at the point of being an anarcho-capitalist. I'm not as defined. I can switch between Libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, although the latter is perhaps more preferable. Like I see what he means, being a truly free society.

 

Where do you think our current energy is coming from? it sure ain't from solar and wind.. its from COAL and WATER.. It doesn't seem like we're on a fast pace to be independent of either of these sources any time soon... So really these electric cars are not any better than your normal combustible engine as it stands right now... Also unless you are driving within a city... an electric car has no efficiency... Rural and Suburban residents will not benefit from electric/hybrid cars either

And well unfortunately i have to be at work in 20min.. So i cannot even begin to go into detail on why mining for precious metals to make these batteries is bad for the environment..

So unless quickly the world changes its views and goes to solar/wind and recycling of precious metals instead of mining for them.. then i see the electrical car as nothing more than a gimmick to help fool tree huggers into believing they are driving something that is better for the environment

 

A few more things to consider:

Electric cars will move the combustion out of the cities to rural power plants(fewer internal combustion engines on cars and trucks spewing hydrocarbons). The net combustion is the same, but city people are not impacted as much as they were previously. In addition, a power plant may have greater ability to scrub pollutants out of exhaust stacks and deliver electricity to the vehicle rather than trying to do all the scrubbing at the vehicle itself.

Mass transit in urban areas has the potential to further reduce the release of hydrocarbons per person whether you are talking electric vehicles fossil fuel or biofuel vehicles.

Urban planning can help put people closer to their jobs and shopping. By reducing miles traveled per person, you reduce hydrocarbon release.

As sunfighter said, the transition to electric vehicles, a larger share of the nation's fleet of vehicles can use energy that will ultimately come from solar and wind. There may be some need for vehicles that run on biofuels, but the more that can run without hydrocarbons, the better.

 

Why is this thread titled Clean Coal Republican Lies when Obama said he want us to use more clean coal?

 

I guess they both did!?

I wouldn't be surprised. Obama and Romney are both working essentially for the same system. Obama just has the facade of appealing to the liberals. You know he's supposedly about diversity and choice. While Romney has the facade of appealing to the older faux Christian audience. Their core policies are essentially the same, though.

Romney supports the NDAA 2012, just like Obama.

 

None of these Countries you've listed are socialist. Most of them are democratic or representative Monarchies. They have political parties that lean towards socialism, but also have conservative parties. Denmark, for example, does have a socialist democratic party in power. However its only been one year since they took over the conservative party.

 

Letlovin

Everything is context in the debate over the meaning of socialist in American thought – to many Americans the systems in many European countries would be seen as ‘socialist’ (even the UK) but as you rightly explain in the context of Europe (and a lot of the rest of the world) they may not be seen as such with some or all having at one time or another (in their context) right of centre governments BUT the problem is that even these right of centre governments are seen as ‘left wing’ by many Americans within their political context.

Remember the thread – America: two right wing parties???
http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=453060&f=36

Where I explained to you why many non-Americans though the Democrats as well as the Republicans was a right wing party?

 

Yes, I remember the thread. You helped me to learn quite a bit on the topic, thanks.

I suppose someone on the far right would call those Scaninavian countries socialist, but they aren't actually. They pay very high taxes, in order to pay out a huge amount of welfare.....but that doesn't make a country Socialist though.


However I can't see how you would call The Netherlands Socialist at all. On the Index of Economic Freedom Netherlands is the 13th most free market capitalist economy out of 157 surveyed countries.

 

It doesn't matter if power companies can burn coal with zero emissions. Viable coal reserves will be all gone in 25-30 years max. Possibly oil will be gone even sooner and coal can be turned into oil so it will be all gone around the same time. Nature will soon force man to use renewable resources no matter if he's ready or not. No matter if it can only sustain a small portion or if 5 billion people have to starve, cook or freeze to death... The number of people destined to suffer and die in the impending energy apocalypse really depends on when the populations wake up and realize that renewable energy needs major support and major investments. The deadline to save 7 billion is long gone if it ever was sustainable without oil to begin with.

 

Minor quibble: you say coal and oil will be gone at some point. That's not true. As it gets harder to find and extract from the earth, its price goes up. The high price will cause less to be used, so coal and oil will never be unavailable, it will just cost too much to be used by anyone except the rich.