archive.today • What to Know About Biden's New Clean Cars Regulation - The New York Times
The quote is the very last paragraph. The media is so annoying. I often don't read articles from start to finish anymore. I scan them to find the bit that finally gets to the fucking point.
The other links are at the top of the homepage - https://www.nytimes.com/
But the court is apolitical so surely they'll side with the science this time
Why does this still work on people? I don't understand Americans, if Biden is in power, but the republicans in the supreme court are the only ones who ever get to decide anything, they're the ones in power, not him. They always do this, they've always done this. And yet yanks fall for it every time.
Are you actually saying that "Vote!" is a lie?
---
In all seriousness - I don't understand Americans at all either and I am American.
I assume it's just incredibly heavy indoctrination combined with extremely superstitious and magical thinking. If you're told USA #1 your whole life, you wouldn't want to rock the boat too much, because what if it turns out that isn't true, and that's because you found that out? Everything will be fine if you just don't question things and keep your head in the sand. Vote Biden.
(Actually "Just keep your head in the sand, everything will be fine. Vote Biden" sounds like a better campaign slogan than all the other bullshit he's doing.)
Dems love to trumpet that they'll "restore Roe". It's all lies. There are only two ways to do that. Number one is highly unlikely. And number two is so out there for the dems - it's as likely as science fiction.
-
Pack the court and then pass the law.
-
Simply give the court the middle finger, do what they want and pretend the court doesn't exist.
If you're told USA #1 your whole life...
American exceptionalism and American civil religion are Americans' drugs of choice. And it's a heavy substance abuse problem that's bipartisan.
I'll leave this here.
Fourteen tenets
In a survey of more than fifty years of American civil religion scholarship, Squiers identifies fourteen principal tenets:
-
Filial piety
-
Reverence to certain sacred texts and symbols such as the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the flag
-
The sanctity of American institutions
-
The belief in God or a deity
-
The idea that rights are divinely given
-
The notion that freedom comes from God through government
-
Governmental authority comes from God or a higher transcendent authority
-
The conviction that God can be known through the American experience
-
God is the supreme judge
-
God is sovereign
-
America's prosperity results from God's providence
-
America is a "city on a hill" or a beacon of hope and righteousness
-
The principle of sacrificial death and rebirth
-
America serves a higher purpose than self-interests
I don't really understand how points like #5 work on those libertarian types though, they tend to be very loudly anti-government, while still worshiping at the altar of the USA.
conservatives now call themselves libertarians to differentiate themselves from the fascists
the vast majority of secular libertarians became anarchists, socialists, or commies
purely anecdotal and somewhat vibes based but i was kind of "in the shit" of libertarian community bs pre-2016 and saw this starting to take shape and then trump kicked it off hard
Ah, so their anti-"big government" rhetoric isn't genuine, it's just them mad that they aren't the ones in charge of that big government. I've seen that a lot.
basically. their imagined stripped down government is exactly the same as a neoliberal. just everything privatized with them in charge and wokeness destroyed
-
I've come to the idea that the Constitution needs to be replaced, and things like this are a big part why.
Whole damn country needs to be replaced, if you ask me. USA delenda est!
It’s why I consider Putin to be a liberal with 95% less decorum. He still puts on show elections because, well, he’s a liberal. But everyone knows who’s in charge. Even with actual elections, most Russians either support Putin and/or Russia as an institution, so anyone supporting it gets their support. No different than Americans, except Americans are 95% decorum and they’re convinced everything they see is reality then get mad when it doesn’t conform to what they’re told.
Building out public transportation to organically reduce demand for personal vehicles, even electric ones, which are still less GHG efficient than trains or buses
Passing laws calling electric cars "a pretty nifty doodad that'd be a smart fetch for a right-thinking man about town"
I love that my fate, and the fates of my loved ones, is determined by 9 unelected geezers in star wars clothing.
No that's the trick.
It's going to be 5-4 in favor of climate change with one of the fascists joining the dissent to make it appear less partisan.
I disagree. In the Texas immigration law ruling the GOP majority did not even bother to explain its reasoning. I think they will now routinely, proudly, openly give a middle finger to the nation.
The one recent exception that proved the rule was on the case determining if Trump can be barred from state ballots under the 14th amendment. The ruling that only the federal government can make that call, not the states, was bipartisan. However, the liberal justices plus Barrett dissented on the majority ruling that it was explicitly up to Congress to decide that.
The majority was clearly punting it to protect Trump as there’s no way it could pass in the current government. And the liberals didn’t like the “legislating from the bench” aspect. But I think Barrett realized, this was shooting themselves in the foot to remove that power from the court if it would be useful for their authoritarian, right wing ruling council project of the Supreme Court down the line.
Your proposal is to make gas more expensive by taxing it, under the hope that drivers will therefore want to drive less or buy hybrids or EVs? That's some rube goldberg shit compared to just making vehicle manufacturers build cars with higher emissions standards until EVs become the only economical option. Standard liberal obsession with modifying percentages and hoping secondary or tertiary effects achieve their goal.
By continuing to emit carbon you force - not tell - people to live in a dying biosphere. Come up with a solution to that that isn't just whining. And these rules don't apply to emergency service vehicles. They apply to the 99% of vehicles on the road which are not emergency service vehicles. Emergency service vehicles can be powered by directly burning a barrel of crude oil under a tank of water for all I care.
instead of bad faith and hostility, maybe you could try to have a productive discussion. the US economic sector emitting the most greenhouse gas is transportation. and 83% of transportation emissions are from cars and trucks. that second link goes on to show that using cars and trucks for personal transport and freight are the worst for CO2 emissions, except air freight (much worse than truck freight). but air travel emits less CO2 per passenger-mile compared to personal vehicles. there are many reasons China emits a lot less CO2 per capital than the US but one of them is the widespread use of mass transit
It's a full-spectrum effort, there isn't a single silver bullet. You are objecting to one of the smallest changes that needs to happen.
Read Half Earth Socialism. Or if the S word scares you off read The Ministry for the Future. It's a hard sci-fi novel so it's entertaining. It illustrates at least the lower bound of effort that will be required in the coming decades.
Standard idiot obsession with wanting to tell everybody exactly how to live.We're Not Republicans
The real answer is, stop funding interstates and move that funding into public transit and high speed rail. EV’s are at best a stop-gap measure, and people go to where the infrastructure is, so make that infrastructure not the one fossil fuel-powered personal vehicles use.
