A solid majority (56%) overall called climate change a major threat, including almost 9 in 10 Democrats and a slim majority of independents. But 70% of Republicans said it’s either just a minor threat or no threat at all.
Make America GAAAAHHHHFUCKTHEDRIVEWAYISONFIRE Again
Standard GOP practice. Value money and power over ethics, altruism, empathy etc.
Three-quarters of US Republicans prioritize pretending to care about the economy over the economy
Anyone driving car bigger than Golf (don’t know which size would that be in US units) is prioritizing economy and vanity over climate change.
deleted by creator
“the economy” means rich people
Tbh, same, i care about my personal finances more than climate.
In Germany we have a saying, it goes “nach mir die Sintflut” and means literally I don’t give a shit about what comes after my lifetime.
Conservatism is a plague of deadly selfishness.
Im not conservative at all.
Im a Egoist by belief. And i care about myself. I already do enough for the others by not having children.
Just an asshole then? Literally saying fuck everyone else after I die isn’t a good look.
When im dead i don’t care how you think of me…
While you’re alive you make everything worse.
That’s how selfishness works and that’s all you’re saying.
And? You make it worse as well, just by existing.
Ahh. So a conservative without kids, then.
Absolutely not. I have solar panels on my roof and im pretty left, but my personal wellbeing goes before something abstract like Climate change that will effect me, but not as much as me being unable to afford my nice life anymore.
Pretty left you say, but you don’t care about leftist values. Do you think left is just a label you give yourself? Compassion and a sense of social justice are at the core of any left position.
Egoism is not. “Nach mir die Sintflut”, an English equivalent could be a “devil-may-care” attitude, is a libertarian position.
So you have solar panels and don’t have kids?
Lol! You are better than probably anyone else on this thread
People downvote you, but you are just sincere and you are saying what we are all acting like.
We need to make polluting expensive, by attaching to it complete costs it has on society and environment.
Like cigarettes and alcohol.
No we have to outlaw polluting and create alternatives. Making it expensive allows rich people and corporations to continue polluting.
Cigarettes and alcohol are banned from certain public spaces, not just made expensive. You can’t smoke in schools, trains, hospitals and in some countries you can’t smoke in the streets. You’re not allowed to drive drunk, work drunk and in the US even openly carry alcohol afaik. IMO punishment for drunk driving should be higher and cigarettes should be banned everywhere in public.
Making cigarettes expensive does not help the addicts, it just costs them more money. Meanwhile the tobacco lobby still creates ads, still makes money off creating addicts and ruining public health. Cheap alcohol similarly has an effect on poorer people who have to spend more to have some fun, while addicts pay what they need to and rich people don’t care about the taxes on whiskey and wine because their bottles are ridiculously expensive anyway.
Problem is how you calculate it and how do you make it Socially acceptable, you cant make people with already barely enough to live pay extra because they use a old car they need and can’t afford a new one…
Point is to make cars unnecessary and even if someone is using car it shouldn’t be the size of WW2 tank.
If someone doesn’t have money, at least they can appreciate small car.
This is completely idiotic.
The solution is to give people more money, not to let them pollute the environment. Why are we often only discussing “solutions” that cost the poor relatively more?
We need cheap public transport and we have to make the rich pay for it.
