Are leftists good for the environment? Let's look at the evidence.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

God is raising sea levels, and causing extreme weather events. Obviously this is God punishing rising sin. Do liberals have any alternative explanation of why this is happening?

Well, DO YOU?

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Well, DO YOU?

Yes, global warming due to the rising temperatures we caused...

[Joanna Lytton-Vasey]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Yes, global warming due to the rising temperatures we caused...

... by spouting a load of hot air.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Yes, global warming due to the rising temperatures we caused...

"We" is correct, communists punch above their weight when it comes to polluting the planet:





No lifeguards here either. At least we have that in common.

By the way, the #1 cause of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the leftist opposition to nuclear power.

After communist incompetence killed 54 people at Chernobyl, the left decided to defend communism by scapegoating all nuclear power.

One less data point to use against communism, at the cost of one less planet for us to live on. But there are lots more data points against communism, and no other planets. Oops.

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

"We" is correct, communists punch above their weight when it comes to polluting the planet:





No lifeguards here either. At least we have that in common.

By the way, the #1 cause of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the leftist opposition to nuclear power.

After communist incompetence killed 54 people at Chernobyl, the left decided to defend communism by scapegoating all nuclear power.

One less data point to use against communism, at the cost of one less planet for us to live on. But there are lots more data points against communism, and no other planets. Oops.

Or, it could be the fact that nuclear reactors create toxic waste... just a thought.

[Didymus Much]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Or, it could be the fact that nuclear reactors create toxic waste... just a thought.

It's amazing how you're able to solve all the world's problems without actually thinking about anything.

[Basilissa]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Or, it could be the fact that nuclear reactors create toxic waste... just a thought.

Most don't... just evidence.

It’s amazing you solve the problems of your daily life with only one functioning brain cell...

That's one more than you have, dear.

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Most don't... just evidence.

That's one more than you have, dear.

Clearly, your reading comprehension is less than a 4th grader... second paragraph talks about that the unresolved nuclear waste problem... gee, I wonder if that is because the waste is radioactive in nature? Not exactly stuff you just easily dispose of. But maybe you can pray it away...

I guess you lack even the most rudimentary cognitive capabilities.

Be blessed...

[Basilissa]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Clearly, your reading comprehension is less than a 4th grader... second paragraph talks about that the unresolved nuclear waste problem... gee, I wonder if that is because the waste is radioactive in nature? Not exactly stuff you just easily dispose of. But maybe you can pray it away...

I guess you lack even the most rudimentary cognitive capabilities.

Be blessed...

That's the only one aspect you understood there?... Interesting.

I believe we can make a Christian of you yet, son. Your mind is as narrow and closed as it is required of True Believers(tm).

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

That's the only one aspect you understood there?... Interesting.

I believe we can make a Christian of you yet, son. Your mind is as narrow and closed as it is required of True Believers™.

I didn’t need to quote any other facts from your article except for the one that supported my point. No one is claiming that nuclear is carbon free. That is great. The big downside is the waste is radioactive and therefore toxic and difficult to dispose.

[Basilissa]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

I didn’t need to quote any other facts from your article except for the one that supported my point. No one is claiming that nuclear is carbon free. That is great. The big downside is the waste is radioactive and therefore toxic and difficult to dispose.

Which, amazingly, has nothing to do with Brother Jeb's original point.

I'm half impressed that you finally learned to write in complete sentences, though.

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

Which, amazingly, has nothing to do with Brother Jeb's original point.

I'm half impressed that you finally learned to write in complete sentences, though.

You mean the lack of the life guards in Freehold, Iowa or the his praise of rising sea levels?

[Basilissa]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

You mean the lack of the life guards in Freehold, Iowa or the his praise of rising sea levels?

See how that text in my post is underlined? It is called a hyperlink. Click on it and a miracle will happen.

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

See how that text in my post is underlined? It is called a hyperlink. Click on it and a miracle will happen.

We... meaning humans. His argument is a straw man.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: 5 Reasons why Freehold pools have no lifeguards

We... meaning humans. His argument is a straw man.

You did not specify that. "We" could mean anything; if an Icelander said "We elected Guðni Jóhannesson," I would not assume they meant to include me. Similarly when a communist uses the W word, it's of narrow significance.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm

The average price of wage-labour is the minimum wage* i.e., that quantum of the means of subsistence which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare existence as a labourer. What, therefore, the wage-labourer appropriates by means of his labour, merely suffices to prolong and reproduce a bare existence. We by no means intend to abolish this personal appropriation of the products of labour, an appropriation that is made for the maintenance and reproduction of human life, and that leaves no surplus wherewith to command the labour of others. All that we want to do away with is the miserable character of this appropriation, under which the labourer lives merely to increase capital, and is allowed to live only in so far as the interest of the ruling class requires it.

* No it isn't. That's the minimum wage. The average price of wage-labour is called (wait for it) the average wage.

Apart from the idiocy of the content (for example under such conditions however would they sell anything in order to increase their capital?) and a typically gross misunderstanding of basic economics, the "we" there does not include me. In fact it includes very few humans.