Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
You are so eager to stan reactionary liberals and use flimsy rhetoric to paper over their being aggressively anti-democratic. "Tiny flaws" my ass, this guy is a ghoul.
I don't see any special value in listening to a reactionary liberal say "clean air good" when they advocate for an ordering of society that is fundamentally opposed to human benefit and has historically failed to make gains in even the highly solvable issue in question.
I have a very cynical view on China at this point, but even they are not the level of anti-marxist that would make them consistent with his "vote with your wallet" liberal ideology. China has a much greater capacity for dictating production as it sees fit, which is much more conducive to solving the clean air problem than market solutions and welfare capitalism.
If anyone else is still reading this thread, they probably have a much more positive view of China and the comparison will look many fold more ridiculous to them. I wish I had their optimism.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220222125732/https://epic.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/China-Report_FEB2022.pdf – page 9 is interesting
China has made gains in seven years that the USA made in forty...
"In Beijing, there is half as much pollution compared to both 2008 and 2013 levels." [writing in 2022]
"Can China meet and sustain these further pollution reductions? To this point, the country has relied on command-and-control measures to swiftly reduce pollution. While the measures have worked, they have come with significant economic and social costs. As China now enters the next phase of its “war against pollution,” the long-run durability of its actions will be enhanced by minimizing the costs. Relying on market-based approaches are one solution that can effectively and inexpensively reduce pollution" – lol, in other words "abandon what has just proven itself to work because it won't work because Milton Friedman wouldn't do it"
you are so eager to find tiny flaws and cancel people
even if what you are saying is true, why would you dismiss clean air advocacy based on that?
You are so eager to stan reactionary liberals and use flimsy rhetoric to paper over their being aggressively anti-democratic. "Tiny flaws" my ass, this guy is a ghoul.
I don't see any special value in listening to a reactionary liberal say "clean air good" when they advocate for an ordering of society that is fundamentally opposed to human benefit and has historically failed to make gains in even the highly solvable issue in question.
Not even true. Evidence presented in the video we're discussing shows China has indeed made quick gains in solving it.
I have a very cynical view on China at this point, but even they are not the level of anti-marxist that would make them consistent with his "vote with your wallet" liberal ideology. China has a much greater capacity for dictating production as it sees fit, which is much more conducive to solving the clean air problem than market solutions and welfare capitalism.
If anyone else is still reading this thread, they probably have a much more positive view of China and the comparison will look many fold more ridiculous to them. I wish I had their optimism.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220222125732/https://epic.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/China-Report_FEB2022.pdf – page 9 is interesting
China has made gains in seven years that the USA made in forty...
"In Beijing, there is half as much pollution compared to both 2008 and 2013 levels." [writing in 2022]
"Can China meet and sustain these further pollution reductions? To this point, the country has relied on command-and-control measures to swiftly reduce pollution. While the measures have worked, they have come with significant economic and social costs. As China now enters the next phase of its “war against pollution,” the long-run durability of its actions will be enhanced by minimizing the costs. Relying on market-based approaches are one solution that can effectively and inexpensively reduce pollution" – lol, in other words "abandon what has just proven itself to work because it won't work because Milton Friedman wouldn't do it"