4 ms·

What sort of altruist has no qualms about billionaires blatantly influencing the democratic process and a political system where candidates outright take bribes

What sort of altruist has no qualms about billionaires blatantly influencing the democratic process and a political system where candidates outright take bribes in the millions? It doesn't matter much what they purport the donations are for, no one in their right mind would admit they lobby senators for power and control. It's always for the children, for the environment, for "our" future etc. Everyone sufficiently rich enough has a tax exempt foundation in their name. There is a long line of mega rich "altruists" controlling politics, an earlier generation of web company founders with people like Gates, Bezos and Zuckerberg is highly active with their charitable foundations and their corporations largely control what the public thinks and what people are allowed to say online. Now a new generation is rising, riding on the wave of decentralization. And just so you don't get me wrong, decentralization is a good thing and Bitcoin was a great innovation. The likes of Bankman-Fried don't represent the spirit of it, just as the likes of Microsoft represent the polar opposite of what the internet was meant to be: A means of free expression and information flow around the world. A democratizing force. These people are corrupting it.

tootie 4y ago
If you think climate is the top issue facing the planet, the most effective step you can take is getting Democrats elected in the US. And since the other side is onboard with unlimited political spending, there is no choice but to match them.
- trompetenaccoun 4y ago
  Of course, it's done wonders over the past 100 years. Only the single worst CO2 emitter in the entire history of the world and the Democratic Party was in charge half of the time. Very effective.
  - tootie 4y ago
    It wasn't a political issue for most of those years. There's no question who is being serious right now and who isn't. When voters torched Jimmy Carter, environmentalism went backwards for a long time. Obama and Biden have tried and been very marginally successful at reversing climate damage while Bush and Trump ran us backwards as fast as they could. Don't be obtuse there's an abundantly clear winner on this topic.
    - trompetenaccoun 4y ago
      Of course. Apologies for being obtuse. Just... I don't know if you've ever looked at the data but can you explain why the emissions fell faster under both Bush and Trump than their Democratic successors? https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-states https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-states https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?locations=US https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?location... Going by the actual emissions, the decrease seems to be slowing when a Democratic candidate gets elected. Not to speak of Clinton under whom emissions actually increased, not decreased!
      - tootie 4y ago
        For recent history, CO2 drops correlate almost 1:1 with recessions. Trump was legitimately terrible on policy he was just in office during the most dramatic economic contraction in our history. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/climate/united-states-climate-ranking-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/climate/united-states-cli... Not to mention all the well-intentioned liberal policies like increase vehicle fuel efficiency standards or the Clean Power Plan that got reversed by Trump before they came into effect. We need a good 20 years of complete liberal control of 3 branches of government and we haven't gotten anywhere near that.

tootie 4y ago

If you think climate is the top issue facing the planet, the most effective step you can take is getting Democrats elected in the US. And since the other side is onboard with unlimited political spending, there is no choice but to match them.

trompetenaccoun 4y ago
Of course, it's done wonders over the past 100 years. Only the single worst CO2 emitter in the entire history of the world and the Democratic Party was in charge half of the time. Very effective.
- tootie 4y ago
  It wasn't a political issue for most of those years. There's no question who is being serious right now and who isn't. When voters torched Jimmy Carter, environmentalism went backwards for a long time. Obama and Biden have tried and been very marginally successful at reversing climate damage while Bush and Trump ran us backwards as fast as they could. Don't be obtuse there's an abundantly clear winner on this topic.
  - trompetenaccoun 4y ago
    Of course. Apologies for being obtuse. Just... I don't know if you've ever looked at the data but can you explain why the emissions fell faster under both Bush and Trump than their Democratic successors? https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-states https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-states https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?locations=US https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?location... Going by the actual emissions, the decrease seems to be slowing when a Democratic candidate gets elected. Not to speak of Clinton under whom emissions actually increased, not decreased!
    - tootie 4y ago
      For recent history, CO2 drops correlate almost 1:1 with recessions. Trump was legitimately terrible on policy he was just in office during the most dramatic economic contraction in our history. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/climate/united-states-climate-ranking-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/climate/united-states-cli... Not to mention all the well-intentioned liberal policies like increase vehicle fuel efficiency standards or the Clean Power Plan that got reversed by Trump before they came into effect. We need a good 20 years of complete liberal control of 3 branches of government and we haven't gotten anywhere near that.