4 ms·

> They marketed their anti-litter campaign as a state-pride manly-man issue to great success. I don't know why people don't do this with environmental issues a

> They marketed their anti-litter campaign as a state-pride manly-man issue to great success. I don't know why people don't do this with environmental issues at large. In my experience, conservatives care about the environment more than anyone. They live in the woods and hunt and fish and enjoy nature daily. But it's become a partisan issue so they don't listen. Surely someone can come up with a clever slogan to get convince conservatives to conserve nature.

egberts1 7y ago
Nuclear: zero-carbon energy. #headduck
- archgoon 7y ago
  Unfortunately, despite prominent climate scientists like James Hansen advocating that Nuclear be considered a tool in the toolbox for combating Climate Change, it's been regularly dismissed by many activists it seems. Foolish, it would have been an excellent talking point to communicate that environmentalists were serious about this problem and weren't simply trying to leverage it to push their personal wish list of policy proposals. Missed opportunities.
- munk-a 7y ago
  US Energy interests did a really bad thing in the 70s, 80s and 90s that's lead to this bull-headed knee-jerk response from a lot of otherwise environmentally minded people. At the same time... in Vermont the Vermont Yankee[1] plant destroyed anyone's ability to reasonably advocate for safe nuclear power by repeatedly violating the public trust to make a quick buck and saddling the state with a heavy burden, specifically: > In December 2014, Entergy submitted the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This report estimated that the total cost for decommissioning the reactor would be $1.24 billion. The same document reported that only $665 million had been collected in the 42 years of operations of this plant for this purpose. Entergy hopes to raise some of the shortfall funds through "external financing". The sorta TL;DR here is that nuclear power, at the tech level we had in the 70s/80s/90s is incompatible with capitalism and the greed that goes with it. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Yankee_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Yankee_Nuclear_Power_P...
s_y_n_t_a_x 7y ago
There's a lot of assuming there. As a conservative of course I care about the environment, and of course I love nature. There is such a thing as over regulation though and the "green" issues get convoluted with political agendas on both sides. I disagree with your assumption that conservatives need convincing to conserve nature. Texas is a great examples of green policies done in a practical way. Our wind energy will outpace coal soon. The problem is people like to put people in a prison of two ideas. Either you believe in science/climate or you don't, which is ridiculously simplified, furthers no discussion, and usually results in insults.
- egberts1 7y ago
  We call the un-reprovable science, scientism. #caring
flyingcircus3 7y ago
In my experience, conservatives care about things that directly affect them, or things that they believe directly affect them. Their local environment is important to them. The global environment and climate are far away and someone else's concern.
WalterBright 7y ago
An example of a libertarian, market based approach to environmentalism is carbon taxes.
- burrows 7y ago
  Taxes are explicit market intervention. How are they a libertarian approach?
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    Pollution is an "externality", meaning the cost of it is dumped on society. By taxing it, one "internalizes" the externality meaning it is only done if the cost of it is justified. It causes market forces to work on polluting activities. The tax rate is adjusted to reflect the true cost of it. For example, an amount of CO2 emissions for the country per year can be set, and then CO2 taxes adjusted until that target is met. Import tariffs can be added to reflect the amount of CO2 emissions the originating country is generating.
    - burrows 7y ago
      Ok, I agree to some extent. CO2 emissions are analogous to a madman releasing a slow-acting airborne poison. The government should use its force monopoly to stop the madman. Unfortunately, any tax is another dollar toward government expansion. The madman should directly compensate his victims.
      - WalterBright 7y ago
        Commensurate with pollution taxes I propose reductions in taxes on productive activities, so that it is revenue neutral. Keep in mind the maxim: 1. to get more of something, subsidize it 2. to get less of something, tax it The CO2 tax proposal failed in Washington State because it was perceived as a money grab by the state. If it came with a corresponding reduction in the sales tax, it likely would have passed.
xellisx 7y ago
"Don't mess with God's Earth." ?

egberts1 7y ago

Nuclear: zero-carbon energy. #headduck

archgoon 7y ago
Unfortunately, despite prominent climate scientists like James Hansen advocating that Nuclear be considered a tool in the toolbox for combating Climate Change, it's been regularly dismissed by many activists it seems. Foolish, it would have been an excellent talking point to communicate that environmentalists were serious about this problem and weren't simply trying to leverage it to push their personal wish list of policy proposals. Missed opportunities.
munk-a 7y ago
US Energy interests did a really bad thing in the 70s, 80s and 90s that's lead to this bull-headed knee-jerk response from a lot of otherwise environmentally minded people. At the same time... in Vermont the Vermont Yankee[1] plant destroyed anyone's ability to reasonably advocate for safe nuclear power by repeatedly violating the public trust to make a quick buck and saddling the state with a heavy burden, specifically: > In December 2014, Entergy submitted the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This report estimated that the total cost for decommissioning the reactor would be $1.24 billion. The same document reported that only $665 million had been collected in the 42 years of operations of this plant for this purpose. Entergy hopes to raise some of the shortfall funds through "external financing". The sorta TL;DR here is that nuclear power, at the tech level we had in the 70s/80s/90s is incompatible with capitalism and the greed that goes with it. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Yankee_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermont_Yankee_Nuclear_Power_P...

s_y_n_t_a_x 7y ago

There's a lot of assuming there. As a conservative of course I care about the environment, and of course I love nature. There is such a thing as over regulation though and the "green" issues get convoluted with political agendas on both sides. I disagree with your assumption that conservatives need convincing to conserve nature. Texas is a great examples of green policies done in a practical way. Our wind energy will outpace coal soon. The problem is people like to put people in a prison of two ideas. Either you believe in science/climate or you don't, which is ridiculously simplified, furthers no discussion, and usually results in insults.

egberts1 7y ago
We call the un-reprovable science, scientism. #caring

flyingcircus3 7y ago

In my experience, conservatives care about things that directly affect them, or things that they believe directly affect them. Their local environment is important to them. The global environment and climate are far away and someone else's concern.

WalterBright 7y ago

An example of a libertarian, market based approach to environmentalism is carbon taxes.

burrows 7y ago
Taxes are explicit market intervention. How are they a libertarian approach?
- WalterBright 7y ago
  Pollution is an "externality", meaning the cost of it is dumped on society. By taxing it, one "internalizes" the externality meaning it is only done if the cost of it is justified. It causes market forces to work on polluting activities. The tax rate is adjusted to reflect the true cost of it. For example, an amount of CO2 emissions for the country per year can be set, and then CO2 taxes adjusted until that target is met. Import tariffs can be added to reflect the amount of CO2 emissions the originating country is generating.
  - burrows 7y ago
    Ok, I agree to some extent. CO2 emissions are analogous to a madman releasing a slow-acting airborne poison. The government should use its force monopoly to stop the madman. Unfortunately, any tax is another dollar toward government expansion. The madman should directly compensate his victims.
    - WalterBright 7y ago
      Commensurate with pollution taxes I propose reductions in taxes on productive activities, so that it is revenue neutral. Keep in mind the maxim: 1. to get more of something, subsidize it 2. to get less of something, tax it The CO2 tax proposal failed in Washington State because it was perceived as a money grab by the state. If it came with a corresponding reduction in the sales tax, it likely would have passed.

xellisx 7y ago

"Don't mess with God's Earth." ?