Right v Left - would this sum up the difference?

[Triumvirate]

Maybe they just don't agree the problem is systemic

Everybody should be concerned about that.

Words and attitudes don't hurt everybody

Don't be a chump m8

 

[Ken-1122]

Don't be a chump m8

I'm just telling you the truth that's all. If you don't want your views challenged, you shouldn't post them on line

 

[Triumvirate]

I'm just telling you the truth that's all. If you don't want your views challenged, you shouldn't post them on line

Oh I have no issue with my views being challenged - but some challenges are saner than others.

 

[Ken-1122]

Oh I have no issue with my views being challenged - but some challenges are saner than others.

I suspect if you had actual criticisms of what I said, you would have said them by now.

 

[Triumvirate]

I suspect if you had actual criticisms of what I said, you would have said them by now.

If you had anything rational to note, you would have posted it. You haven't, so.....

Do better.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

The Right cares about money and the Left about people?


By 'Left' I don't mean all Democrats, but the true Left.

The difference would be seen if for example a pandemic disease hit the planet and the Right Wing countries would keep people at their jobs to protect the economy and take a wait-and-see approach to how dangerous the disease turns out to be, risking people rather than money.

And in a more Right Wing country the low-paid being very close to insolvent, would agree with that approach.

A more to the Left country would close more down in case it was a dangerous disease rather than use expendable 'human canaries'.

How can the left care about people when they generally support the killing of the unborn with little restrictions?

I think this is more correct. The left thinks government can solve all of our problems if it is strong enough. The right thinks people can solve our problems if unfettered by the government.

 

[Triumvirate]

How can the left care about people when they generally support the killing of the unborn with little restrictions?

I think this is more correct. The left thinks government can solve all of our problems if it is strong enough. The right thinks people can solve our problems if unfettered by the government.

And yet those problems aren't solved and haven't been solved, so......

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

And yet those problems aren't solved and haven't been solved, so......

So maybe both are untrue? Maybe we need to come together and use government and private citizens in a different way to solve our problems. Like energy standards. Government sets standards to reduce energy and private companies left alone by private companies to solve the problem. This has been shown to work in the HVAC industry over the last 20 years. Buildings are way more efficient now than in 2000. Government upped efficiencies and engineers made more efficient equipment. Lets work together.

 

[Ken-1122]

So maybe both are untrue? Maybe we need to come together and use government and private citizens in a different way to solve our problems. Like energy standards. Government sets standards to reduce energy and private companies left alone by private companies to solve the problem. This has been shown to work in the HVAC industry over the last 20 years. Buildings are way more efficient now than in 2000. Government upped efficiencies and engineers made more efficient equipment. Lets work together.

I think that's great when the Government makes reasonable demands of companies, but the demands have to be reasonable. The governor of California for example, signed an order outlawing the sale of gas powered vehicles in 15 years. So the question becomes; where are they going to get all of this electricity required to replace gas cars? Currently California is having blackouts during summertime because they can't produce enough electricity for it's current demands; what happens when all of those gas cars are replaced with electric cars? And will it really reduce the carbon footprint? Currently only 15% of electricity is from renewable resources like wind or solar, the rest has to come from Diesel, Nuclear, Coal, natural gas etc. If they add more electric cars to the mix, they will need more diesel, nuclear, and coal to make the extra electricity required. Perhaps the Governor is assuming in 15 years we will have the technology to accomplish this using renewable resources, but there is no guarantee that this will happen.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I think that's great when the Government makes reasonable demands of companies, but the demands have to be reasonable. The governor of California for example, signed an order outlawing the sale of gas powered vehicles in 15 years. So the question becomes; where are they going to get all of this electricity required to replace gas cars? Currently California is having blackouts during summertime because they can't produce enough electricity for it's current demands; what happens when all of those gas cars are replaced with electric cars? And will it really reduce the carbon footprint? Currently only 15% of electricity is from renewable resources like wind or solar, the rest has to come from Diesel, Nuclear, Coal, natural gas etc. If they add more electric cars to the mix, they will need more diesel, nuclear, and coal to make the extra electricity required. Perhaps the Governor is assuming in 15 years we will have the technology to accomplish this using renewable resources, but there is no guarantee that this will happen.

I agree. And this will not happen. California does not have the power to go all electric vehicles and with California regulations they won't have it in 15 years.

We need to elect smarter people to run the government.

 

[Speedwell]

I agree. And this will not happen. California does not have the power to go all electric vehicles and with California regulations they won't have it in 15 years.

We need to elect smarter people to run the government.

It is not so implausible as you may think. The California car market carries a lot of clout with manufacturers and contains a lot of people who would be likely to buy an electric car anyway. I find nothing out of the way in the notion that, say, all new car sales will be electric by 2035.

 

[Halbhh]

It is not so implausible as you may think. The California car market carries a lot of clout with manufacturers and contains a lot of people who would be likely to buy an electric car anyway. I find nothing out of the way in the notion that, say, all new car sales will be electric by 2035.

Yes, if not sooner. Sooner seems a reasonable guess if by 'all' we only include regular consumer autos of common kinds but including SUVs and most pickups, and then why not by 2030. Of course, other dramatic events could happen to obviate that.

 

[98cwitr]

The Right cares about money and the Left about people?


By 'Left' I don't mean all Democrats, but the true Left.

The difference would be seen if for example a pandemic disease hit the planet and the Right Wing countries would keep people at their jobs to protect the economy and take a wait-and-see approach to how dangerous the disease turns out to be, risking people rather than money.

And in a more Right Wing country the low-paid being very close to insolvent, would agree with that approach.

A more to the Left country would close more down in case it was a dangerous disease rather than use expendable 'human canaries'.

No, I think if leftist policies truly cared about people there wouldn't be such a high body count. Millions starved and were murdered under leftist dictators. The right believes what's good for the goose is good for the gander and individualism over collectivism. The left hates capitalism and the right loves it. Then there's the debate of dangerous freedom vs. peaceful slavery.

The effects of the covid shutdowns have put millions into poverty, many of those who even just recently got out of it. People aren't getting what they need to live, and certainly not live free.

 

[Ken-1122]

It is not so implausible as you may think. The California car market carries a lot of clout with manufacturers and contains a lot of people who would be likely to buy an electric car anyway. I find nothing out of the way in the notion that, say, all new car sales will be electric by 2035.

Finding people to buy electric cars is not the problem, the problem is where are you gonna get all of that extra electricity needed to run those cars?

 

[Pommer]

Finding people to buy electric cars is not the problem, the problem is where are you gonna get all of that extra electricity needed to run those cars?

Hence the 15 years’ worth of lead time.

 

[Ken-1122]

Hence the 15 years’ worth of lead time.

Yes! He is probably counting on us having the battery technology to make this possible by then, but there is no guarantee this will happen; and even if we do, the carbon footprint for electric vehicles (due to the way electricity is produced and how batteries are made and disposed of) isn't that much better than gas vehicles; so how much of a difference will this really make?

 

[Sketcher]

The Right cares about money and the Left about people?


By 'Left' I don't mean all Democrats, but the true Left.

The difference would be seen if for example a pandemic disease hit the planet and the Right Wing countries would keep people at their jobs to protect the economy and take a wait-and-see approach to how dangerous the disease turns out to be, risking people rather than money.

And in a more Right Wing country the low-paid being very close to insolvent, would agree with that approach.

A more to the Left country would close more down in case it was a dangerous disease rather than use expendable 'human canaries'.

Heck no.

There are going to be bad people on both sides, but the good people on the Right, and there are plenty, understand that a strong economy benefits the common people. Some understand this more articulately than others.

 

[Pommer]

Yes! He is probably counting on us having the battery technology to make this possible by then, but there is no guarantee this will happen; and even if we do, the carbon footprint for electric vehicles (due to the way electricity is produced and how batteries are made and disposed of) isn't that much better than gas vehicles; so how much of a difference will this really make?

No.
If, in fifteen years, an oil company won’t be able to sell near as much gasoline, do they just accept that loss or do they maybe branch out into the Electricity Generating business?
When the visible hand of the government wants something, it devises ways to get its thumb on the scale, in the market, makes it profitable to play along.

 

[Speedwell]

No.
If, in fifteen years, an oil company won’t be able to sell near as much gasoline, do they just accept that loss or do they maybe branch out into the Electricity Generating business?
When the visible hand of the government wants something, it devises ways to get its thumb on the scale, in the market, makes it profitable to play along.

They're already doing it--without a whole lot of fanfare. Just wait; as soon as big oil gets the renewables market sown up "green" will magically cease to be a communist plot to deny the Bible.

 

[Ken-1122]

No.
If, in fifteen years, an oil company won’t be able to sell near as much gasoline, do they just accept that loss or do they maybe branch out into the Electricity Generating business?
When the visible hand of the government wants something, it devises ways to get its thumb on the scale, in the market, makes it profitable to play along.

What they call "big oil" are some of the biggest investors in green energy. The reason they call themselves energy companies now is because they invest in more than oil; but anything that produces energy.