In light of the new Biden administration’s commitment to have the US abide by the Paris Agreement on climate change, I thought it might be interesting to take a little look into CO2 emissions by country. For the purpose of this exercise I took data on CO2 emissions from the EU’s Joint Research Center (source). The Europeans seem to be the most concerned about this issue, so I figured they should have the best data on it (and since the data is European, note that the tons mentioned throughout are metric tons). To derive per capita data and per $GDP data, I took population numbers from Wikipedia and took GDP numbers from the World Bank (source). I chose to look only at the top 20 largest CO2 emitting countries, but since they collectively contribute 78% of world CO2 emissions I figure this is sufficient to get an accurate look into current trends on the matter. For the charts I pared this down to the top 10, as 20 was a bit too unwieldy for visualization.
As is expected, the top emitters are all nations with large populations and large economies. More developed nations tend to produce more CO2 per citizen but also tend to produce less CO2 per dollar of GDP output. The top 3 countries alone produce half of the world’s CO2, but at the same time they produce 44% of the world’s GDP and have 40% of the world’s population. The top 10 produce 67% of CO2 and 61% of GDP with 49% of the population. The top 20 produce 78% of CO2 and 78% of GDP with 60% of the population. It is clear that CO2 is related to GDP, which is obvious when one considers that the most popular sources of power generation produce CO2, and power is used in all aspects of modern, developed economies.
The Paris Agreement is the latest attempt at a globally-coordinated response to the issue of climate change. Drafted under the auspices of the United Nations in late 2015, it was ratified and went into effect in 2016. The gist of the agreement is that each country will set its own targets for reducing its CO2 emissions over time and adhere to those targets. The agreement has no actual enforcement mechanism, which combined with the fact that each country is responsible for setting its own benchmarks means that in effect it is a toothless statement of intent, and not much more. The agreement also includes encouragement for more developed nations to help less developed nations reach their goals through grants and other financial measures, pledging $100B per year towards this effort (although, again, no enforcement mechanisms). This agreement has been accepted by all but six nations in the world.
Now, let us look at the progress that has been made under this agreement. For the purposes of this assessment, I compare the CO2 numbers from 2015 (the year before the agreement went into effect) to the CO2 numbers from 2019 (the last year for which my data-source has data). The results of this comparison are as follows.
From this we can see that while some nations have reduced their CO2 output, the net effect of the agreement has been about what could be expected from an accord drafted as this one was. The United States reduced CO2 output by 142 Megatons/yr, Japan reduced CO2 output by 74 Megatons/yr, and the EU collectively reduced CO2 output by 188 Megatons/yr. On the other hand, Indonesia has increased their CO2 output by 133 Megatons/yr, India increased CO2 output by 304 Megatons/yr, and China increased CO2 output by 864 Megatons/yr. Globally, CO2 emissions have increased by 1,769 Megatons/yr (a 5% increase) since the year before the Paris Agreement went into effect. It should be noted that all entities mentioned by name in this paragraph are on track to meet their 2020 goals, so it can be concluded that the Paris Agreement is a success!
Or is it? If CO2 emissions are an actual issue, then this agreement has so far been an abject failure at curbing them. All of the reductions made by nations committed to reducing CO2 have been wiped out and then some by nations less interested in this endeavor. But, money has still changed hands, with billions of dollars going towards green energy and carbon mitigation efforts in the developing world. From the perspective of developing nations, however, this has been a success. Not only have they gotten handouts, but they have been able to continue to develop their economies with the CO2 intensive energy sources that produce cheap, reliable energy that is the lifeblood of the modern world. Perhaps their leaders do not see CO2 to be as much of a problem as the climate crusaders see it. Or perhaps they are making the calculated choice that if they make their nations rich that they will be able to deal with the issues caused by a warmer world. Even if the worst came to pass and the current ice age ended with the complete melting of the polar ice caps, most of the land in the world will still be above water. It would be a major disruption, but humanity has adapted to greater change in the past. And it is always easier to adapt if one is rich rather than poor. Until a suitable (reliable, abundant, inexpensive) alternative to CO2 emitting power generation can be developed, it is probably safe to say that the world will continue increasing its CO2 emissions year over year as more and more nations develop and bring their citizens into modern standards of living.
Why are we engaging on their terms.
Plant food is not a pollutant, period.
Restrictions on carbon dioxide are nonsensical and counterproductive.
Why do you want to usher in the end of the world?
*looks around*
Why wouldn’t you? If SMOD won’t do the job, we’ll just have to do it ourselves. *revs SUV*
*cuts freon lines on old acs*
Anyone who would sabotage an A/C unit gets a hangin’!
/Texan
Texas…the only place you need to carry a fleece when it’s 110 outside
So I was looking for a second adapter to put with my other bike. They’re for hooking up CO2 cartridges up to refill your bike in the case of a flat. One of the adapters had a question and an answer from the company asking about the damage that the 16g CO2 cartridge would have on the environment.
Here we go:
Since this is CO2, will I be polluting the environment and speeding up global warming?
Yes. And also, stop driving your gas guzzler, get a bike, and only eat bugs and weeds from now on. Or you want granny to die and children, women, and color folk put back in chains.
Back in chains? I never let mine out of their chains.
Well, good men like you are rare these days.
The person asking this question should just stop breathing. THAT will do more to help the environment than worrying about 16 grams of CO2 in xer bicycle tires.
Someone should tell him that if he committed suicide, he’d reduce the carbon burden from his life of approx. 8 tonnes of CO2 per year.
Show some commitment, poseur !
The real question here is about the externalities – are they negative or positive. All of the evidence for negative is based on models. So negative on the negative.
Not only have they gotten handouts, but they have been able to continue to develop their economies with the CO2 intensive energy sources that produce cheap, reliable energy that is the lifeblood of the modern world. Perhaps their leaders do not see CO2 to be as much of a problem as the climate crusaders see it.
When your primary concern is making sure your people (or at least the people who aren’t part of a rival political faction) get ~2000 calories / day, the carbon footprint used to accomplish that tends to take a back seat.
The fact that the Biden administration wants to rejoin an agreement that is (a) meeting its stated goals while (b) the “problem” it purports to address is getting “worse” tells you that the real goal of the administration (and the agreement) isn’t “solving” the “problem”, its something else.
Ah, there we go.
One guy I follow calls all of this “the greatest scientific fraud of all time“.
I tend to agree.
The entire thing was about wealth redistribution.
Wealth redistribution is just a side effect of the overarching control over individuals.
The goal is global socialism. They haven’t even been hiding that for quite some time now.
You hush – the Davos elite know what is best!
Well, at least they think they know what’s best. For them.
Oh, Hyp. ?
You spelled global serfdom wrong, peasant!
Biden administration’s commitment to have the US abide by the Paris Agreement on climate change
Submit it to the Senate and complete the ratification process or there is no agreement.
Heh. How quaint. Even if they do that, there’s no way to stop Congress from passing anything they want to now.
Just get the parliamentarian to say they can ratify with a simple majority.
No Venn diagram?
(People who truely believe) (People stuck with the bill)
Little slice of overlap saying “wait, I thought someone else was paying for this”.
Other way ’round, I should think.
The Venn diagram should have a huge circle of “Wait, I thought someone else was paying for this” and another circle of (People stuck with the bill), with the relatively small intersection labelled (People who truly believe). IME, anyways.
I was drawing from the Obamacare example of the person who both was very excited for universal coverage and also said “I didn’t think I’d be paying for it” when presented with his new bill for health insurance.
Here ya go: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cf/a0/11/cfa01158e080979f644ad6647caa2f81.jpg
I took the data you show in your Table 2 and summed the total change for those top 20 nations–1141.26 metric tons per year increase from 2015 through 2019. Then I looked at the contributions of each of the listed nations to that increase. Guess who the largest and smallest contributors to that were? Yep, China contributed well over 75% of that total increase. The US was by far the greatest contributor to the reduction side, with 12.4% lower CO2 emissions.
The total reduction of emissions in the top 20 was -434.5 metric tons per year, which was dwarfed by China’s increase of 863.8 metric tons per year.
If all the Paris Accord does is a pseudo ISO “say what you’re going to do, then do it and document it” without making any meaningful reduction in emissions, it is useless, and a vile bait-and-switch. It advertises that it will save the planet, but all it really does is allow nations to set criteria for themselves to look good.
Another very useful analysis would be to look at CO2 emissions trends in the decades prior to the Accord, and see what, if any effect, the accord had on the general trajectories of the individual nations and the total, and also to extrapolate what the situation might have been had the Accord not been implemented.
I should say that the US contributed 12.4% of the total reduction. The closest competitor was Germany, which contributed 7.38% of the total reduction. Keep in mind that there was no real reduction overall, I’m just summing the countries that actually did reduce their emissions over the time period in question.
Germany outsourced their emissions to Czech power plants, right?
That’s the easiest way to cut emissions. Put power plants outside your jurisdiction. Move energy-intensive industry offshore. You can still consume as much but with the satisfaction that the emissions are elsewhere.
I learned it from watching YOU, Dad!
That’s what the large cities on the Eastern Seaboard did in the 1960s and 1970s when SO2 was becoming a pollutant of concern. They built a few nukes out in Eastern PA and NJ, and a bunch of really big coal burners in western PA and WV and connected them to the East via some big transmission lines. For instance, the Keystone/Conemaugh dual line delivered power from the Keystone and Conemaugh generating stations (near virtual twins except for the turbine generators) and pushed it out East. Homer City was another example. Most of the investors and owners of the output were power companies in NY, NJ, and eastern PA. Rather than install SO2 scrubbers on the plants (which were in their infancy and unproven/very expensive), they burned the high sulfur coal in western PA and shipped the power east.
Joke was on them, though: The plants were built with very tall stacks to launch the SO2 high into the atmosphere to keep the local measurements down, but that just caused it to rain back down with precipitation after it blew east, and caused the acid rain problems over the eastern cities that were trying to avoid the SO2 pollution in the first place.
https://nationalfile.com/fbi-promises-to-hunt-down-anyone-who-lies-about-taking-covid-vax-as-vaccine-passports-loom/
JFC.
More Lawyer employment acts?
This is where mass resistance is needed. Overwhelm the cunts with disobedience.
Hmm. Would be trivial to make up a certificate. “The person named in this document has
met and complied with all the requirements of the United States Center for COVID vaccine
verification” And some sort of logo with an eagle and like a cacadeus and there you go.
Doesn’t say you’ve been vaccinated, makes no false claims. At least assuming someone
went to the trivial effort to create such a center. Looks like it’s pretty cheap to
create a non-profit corporation where I am.
I am in!
When I visited the Dutch Resistance Museum in Amsterdam in 2009, there was an exhibit on document forgery–the Resistance had to have very good fake documentation to allow them to move around as necessary in their operations to thwart the Nazi occupiers. One of the installations was a glass table in the face of which were facsimile slides of real and forged documents that could be illuminated to compare the real ones with the fakes. There were little blurbs about raids on Nazi printing offices to capture up-to-date forms for passports, internal travel permits, IDs, etc. It was a very interesting exhibit.
The whole museum is worth taking a day to tour–it’s not very large, and so you can do it in a day (maybe an afternoon, if you don’t mind glossing over some things).
I know a guy in a different country that requires testing every week or month. He’s been passing out bogus testing certificates to family. I assume he’ll do the same if they need proof of vaccination.
Check the forum for relevant resources (IYKWIMAITYD).
Here we go:
Since this is CO2, will I be polluting the environment and speeding up global warming?
How perspicacious of you. Instead of using this handy little device, call Triple-A and have them send a guy out in a giant tow truck so he can reinflate your tire with an air compressor powered by a diesel generator.
SCIENCE!
Better idea. Buy as many of them as you can, and bury them in the ground.
Buy as many of them as you can, and bury them in the ground.
Excellent.
I don’t see the relevance of per capita emission. make it per square kilometer.
OT about a comment you made in a thread I was late to: Loire Chenin Blanc is the very best Chenin Blanc. There’s some excellent US and South African versions, but the Loire is still the champion. I’d kill for a nice Quarts de Chaume right about now.
{Bartender from The Shining suddenly appears}
“What’ll it be?”
did not try it yet but looking forward to… was thinking of taking it to my mom’s for real easter…
carbon mitigation efforts – I am not sure these efforts mitigate or just pretend
“By misrepresenting yourself as vaccinated when entering schools, mass transit, workplaces, gyms, or places of worship, you put yourself and others around you at risk of contracting COVID-19.”
THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH!
well if no one asks no reason to misrepresent
I don’t see the relevance of per capita emission. make it per square kilometer.
Emission/GDP is pretty much meaningless when comparing manufacturing-based economies with service-based economies.
Tax consultants might be full of hot air, but they can’t compete with foundries and forges.
Every dollar spent by government to pay someone to dig a hole and then fill it in increases GDP by one dollar.
Great article!
Until a suitable (reliable, abundant, inexpensive) alternative to CO2 emitting power generation can be developed
It has been. But the greenies don’t want us to use it and have essentially stopped it. Because their goal is not CO2 reduction.
My friends father invented a perpetuum mobile in his bathtub but everyone called him crazy.
Is his name Stan Pons?
no it actually involved a sort of water based device
Ditto Pons’s gadget. Deuterated water, but still water.
but cold fusion still is fusion of some sort.
this was something based on a water wheel and some tubes and balloons and harnessed energy from gravity
*triple facepalm*
there was also a weight and if I remember correctly – I did not fully understand at the time – it created an imbalance of forces which generated power. gravity and Archimedes’ principle
It’s probably fun to dick about with that sort of thing, even if thermodynamics wins every time.
I misread this at first as de-uterated water, or water that had the uteruses taken out of it.
Ah yes, a hydrohysterectomy. Tricky surgery that.
The cold fusion guy? Did he descend into quackery like that Bob Lazar guy or whomever it was that made that cockamamy Corvette?
Stan was a pretty competent scientist who went more than a little nuts once he sniffed the possibility of fame and fortune. Gary Taubes’s book “Bad Science” covered the whole mess beautifully. I had something of a front seat for this, know/knew nearly everyone Taubes talks about, and will attest that what you read there is quite accurate.
I read Taubes’s book many years ago–I’m glad to hear from an insider that it was accurate. It seemed very well put together, and I thought it was a very good telling of the story. The book fits in well with another that I have (I can’t remember the title at the moment) that discusses multiple scientific “frauds” — where “fraud” can mean anything from deliberately defrauding others to inadvertently fooling oneself and others.
There is a lot to be learned from studying these events–there always seems to be a pattern, whether fooling oneself or others, changes to the story always occur, handwaving explanations, alterations of the hypothesis to fit facts when the hypothesis itself should be thrown out, etc.
Next time we’re both on the zoomy thing, I’ll give you the inside story including some juicy stuff that’s never been publicized.
Your book- might it be Martin Gardner’s “Fads and Fallacies”?
Can’t wait! It might be; I’ll have to peruse my library to be sure.
Aah yes. That should have rung a bell. I like Gary Taubes (not ventured beyond his stuff on diet). I should give that one a read.
Yep. I have no doubt that when we finally develop the holy grail of clean energy, fusion power (which as we all know is only 20-30 years away), it will suddenly become dirty and unsustainable, the scourge of the earth that we must somehow eliminate.
Depends – can you sucker trillions of dollars from it? If no, then yes, it is dirty and disgusting and is killing the gay frogs.
In the morning thread, R C Dean wrote, in response to a comment of mine:
I think this is worth discussing. I absolutely agree that risk aversion is excessive in our society. Not to go into all the various ways it perniciously eats away at us, but it really does sap our lives and economic well being.
I certainly don’t want to suggest that “we” never try anything to improve the world around us, but given the knowledge that systems emplaced and enforced by governmental action have consistently, throughout our history, been expanded and repurposed to generally become bloated, ineffective, and in many cases counterproductive to their original stated goals, there must be some caution exercised when attempting to do so. If “we” can’t resist the temptation to legislate solutions to current problems, then we need to consider sunset clauses with teeth, and other mechanisms that prevent these ineffective programs from metastasizing, or being redirected in ways they were never intended.
Sunset clauses, like non-sever-ability clauses, have no teeth when the courts blithely ignore them; PA SC ruling on the pre-election litigation as an example. Until those with power for their decisions are held accountable, they’ll make decisions that suit themselves and we can all just fuck right off.
Until those with power for their decisions are held accountable – is that one of those figures of speech meaning never?
Yes.
Right, so, then, it sounds like we have a system in which it is almost always more dangerous and counterproductive to *do* something than *not to do* something. In a situation like that, I’d say that an aversion to taking action is not excessive in its estimation of risk.
I don’t think the problem is risk aversion, so much as the inability to accurately estimate risk.
Usually: Risk = (Probability of Occurrence) * (Consequences of Occurrence)
When the government gets involved, both are maximized, in terms of negative outcomes.
Also the media, which is adept at convincing us things are more prevalent than they are.
Or, entirely nonexistent, as their customer’s needs may dictate.
In yet another example of our heros not thinking outside the box they were trained to stay in, a buddy just found out he has parasites from a swim in warm freshwater in Costa Rica. He’s been to well over a dozen doctors. None could figure it out.
He has worms (flukes he said) all over that you can see with a naked eye. He has examples of the full life cycle at this point. Yet every test they gave him came up negative for whatever they were looking for. He was given a tip on a guy who knows all about this and he knew exactly what it was. Told him to go the the local fleet farm store and get… wait for it… ivermectin.
Problem is, he needs to document this because he was thrown in a rubber room by 6 hospital goons 3 weeks ago when they tried to give him a psych eval. He got out in about 12 hours after his girlfriend raised holy hell. He’s going to try to sue.
He’s in Minneapolis/St. Paul so has access to excellent health facilities, including the Mayo Clinic, which struck out. But the guy that gave him the advice also told him to go to a doctor in middle of nowhere northern Wisconsin that he said knew all about it and could help him since he probably still has other crap in his body from these flukes, like bacteria.
I know many here are in the health system. This is not a rant about good doctors, etc. It’s a rant about our system that has become very efficient at treating many of the more common issues, but can’t seem to leave the safety of the If/Then cookbooks when they don’t work.
My youngest is 16 and tends to drink sugary crap. So she gets cavities. We used to take her to a basic dentist, but she has zero pain tolerance and he wasn’t very patient with her. So I took her to one I knew from years ago. He’s got amazing people skills and he’s great with her. On our first visit, he spent an hour explaining everything to her. He could tell how well she brushed and what she ate based on where her cavities were. He told her she grinds her teeth occasionally in a circular pattern, probably when she’s stressed and doesn’t notice. He was like the Sherlock Holmes of dentists.
I have been to doctors like that too, they are out there but definitely rare. Once I has a sinus infection and went to an NP. I was concerned about the number of Ibuprofen I was taking. She sat down and did the math with me, and based on prescription strength and recommended amount, I could safe take 18 over the counter ones a day.
Good doctors are some of the rarest and most valuable people ever. It takes an extra special human to make a good doctor. Cherish them. Unfortunately, the health systems either side of the Atlantic aren’t too good at this, it seems.
This is why I don’t trust tropical environments. We were never meant to exist in such warmth.
And especially stay the heck away from bodies of freshwater in such parts, especially especially stagnant ones.
Just look at what you can find in your own country. Arachnophobes, you would find if you watched it, that the spider isn’t actually the terrifying part of this.
Well nobody is going to click it after that anyway, but stay away from any water that isn’t filtered, boiled, and hermetically sealed.
“They are no threat to humans.”
Holy shit. WTF was that thing!?
I’m assuming it grew a bit after coming out of the spider, as I can’t imagine a parasite that big was inside that spider.
Agree, though they live in other climates, it always seems the shit in the tropics is trouble.
For anyone with deep pockets, SGAmmo is showing some stock.
I’m not paying $40/box for Tula .45, but that’s just me.
having deep pockets may mean they have a hole in the bottom
The Remington plant is, apparently, fully online and running three shifts. Hope springs eternal!
My local shop had 9mm blazer brass for 53 cents/rd. I grabbed a couple boxes. Will probably go back tomorrow with the wife for more (limit 2 boxes/customer).
I took my daughter to our backyard range for her first time shooting yesterday. We used the CZ Scorpion with a sbtevo brace and streamlight laser, which helped her quite a bit. She had an absolute blast and wouldn’t stop talking about it the rest of the day. I saved her target where every shot was on the silhouette. I know we created one of those memories that she’ll always fondly carry. Helps me to keep perspective.
The CZ is fun as anything to shoot but man does it eat through ammo. Feels like I went through a 35 round mag in 10 or 15 seconds.
⬅️
OMG, exposing impressionable youngsters to violent death machines!
It’s pretty great, isn’t it?
I’m not paying $40/box for Tula .45, but that’s just me.
Maybe a box of 250.
At the club, some jackhole had posted a couple pictures of Remington bulk pack .22 (555 round boxes) that he was willing to let go for $65/box.
Also the media, which is adept at convincing us things are more prevalent than they are.
It happened to him/her/it. It could happen to you!
Anecdotal outlier sob story, FTW!
The shear mendacity and evil of the media is unbelievable. Just watch C4 news interview anyone who questions their aggressive propaganda. The anchor will literally sit there wincing and smirking while the bad wrong man says his piece, (I’m not talking about the JP interview any more, although I suppose that’s what most Americans are familiar with). Any of the “backbench Tory rebels” and “extremists” who question The Narrative on covid get hit with “WELL TRY TELLING THAT TO [insert someone who’s elderly relative has died here]!”
It’s always the same. They can’t engage with real arguments honestly, so they use appeals to visceral emotional responses that eclipse any reasonable perspective, or just flat out lie, again, and again, bigger, and bolder.
TMITE.
That’s what sold papers, it’s what gets clicks, and it’s what makes media personalities feel important and special. Truly the are saving the world.
Great stuff, Gadfly!
CO2 is a fucked up metric anyway. It’s voodoo to funnel money from the gullible to the immoral. Just like most government endeavors.
I think this is worth discussing. I absolutely agree that risk aversion is excessive in our society. Not to go into all the various ways it perniciously eats away at us, but it really does sap our lives and economic well being.
I could climb that tree and pick some of its fruit to eat, but I might fall out and get hurt. I’d better just stay down here and starve.
In one of my short films, made about 17 years ago that I just rewatched, there was a scene making fun of Hollywood style since ‘science’, which all #science seems to be now. On the chalk board in the background I noticed a #groundbreaking formula we created: 9-7=Dog. I think I need funding to follow up on this
This is why I don’t trust tropical environments. We were never meant to exist in such warmth.
A while back, Suthen made a comment about emergency first aid in the back country.
As I read it, all I could think of was, “Boy am I glad I don’t live in a swamp.”
First time I was in Brazil, I was walking down the beach one morning and I see this bright florescent pink thing lying on the beach a few yards in front of me. So I think it’s some sort of kids toy left on the beach and I get closer and it’s a freaking jellyfish. I made a wide berth around that thing and thought ‘I’m never getting in the water here’.
There are great white shark warnings about every 50 yards or so all down that beach anyway. So it’s a known to the locals you don’t go out at high tide. I’m not getting in the water there, period, not ever. I’ll sit on the beach under my umbrella and watch the wininz. Much safer.
Did you piss on it? Isn’t that what you’re supposed to do?
You have to pay extra for that.
My wife got stung by a jellyfish when we were in Malta a couple years ago, but she wouldn’t let me piss on her. Too kinky.
Ugh. The exact same thing happened to me down on Assateague Island, back when I was a kid. Jellyfish creep me the fuck out.
Yeah, I saw one at Atlantic Beach once.
I don’t like beaches.
Ugh – Atlantic City
I don’t like beaches.
To be fair, isn’t it the ultimate chick flick?
It’s a violation of international law.
But you Ted, you are the wind beneath my wings.
All these landlubbers and their aquaphobias….
You should try swimming from a sailboat over the Puerto Rico Trench.
It’s a little bit of a mindfuck knowing there’s 5 miles of water underneath you and you’re seventy miles to the nearest shore.
Never mind swimming in the open Atlantic, hundreds of miles from anything.
Nope nope nope nope..
I’ve seen jellyfish washed up on the beach before but it never made me think of not going in the water. I don’t think I’d go in the water nowadays anyway, unless it was another warm Mediterranean summer’s day in crystal clear water. I am lead to understand that occasionally in some parts of the world there are big swarms of them and it’s not a good idea to go swimming.
Little Crystal jellies are one thing. This fucker was two feet in diameter.
Jellies don’t bother me unless you see the box floating above the water. Then it’s time to get back on the boat.
Most of the really bad species are grouped around…. dun dun dunnnnn… Australia (total shock to everyone I’m sure)
Everything in Australia is trying to kill you. They really don’t like humans.
Oh no I’ve seen big ones, too.
That’s what she said.
Thanks for writing this, Gadfly. It’s one of my favorite types of articles here. I feel like it gives my logic muscle a workout. (Although it’s probably making me more white supremacist).
co2 is colorblind.
Racist!
Except that it of course disproportionally affect bodies of color! Don’t you #science, bro!
I would think bodies of color handle the heat better
Well, that’s kinda weird.
The banner is an ad for Impractical Jokers. New episodes airing Thursdays at 9!
“The rulers of this country have always considered their property more important than our lives.”
I kinda agree with the rulers here. I’d consider a half-consumed Tic Tac more valuable than your life.
any hint of the text of the banner?
Thanks gadfly. Good info
More good info.
Excellent.
Very helpful.
What Scruffy said.
Depressing and infuriating, but good info.
Wheeeee.
*whistles innocently*
Just ran errands. Looks like lots of stores are swapping out their “Masks required by order of blah blah” for “Masks optional”. Even the hearing aid place, somewhat to my surprise. My audiologist even came out as a COVID skeptic! Somewhat reluctantly, until she had tested the waters.
Well, that’s enough optimism for one day. Carry on.
We have a thread running in the forum collecting info on which companies are still requiring masks and which aren’t if youre interested in adding your experiences. (you don’t have to be as specific as I am on location)
I can cover the NY beat with three words:
All of them.
You’re welcome.
Not here. The local Hannaford supermarket had the “masks mandatory” signs much more prominently placed.
And as always, I repeat my screed about Express Self-Checkout needing to have the same item limit as the traditional express lanes.
Ours locally across the street has always said “Please wear a mask…” 90% compliance, 9% chin diapers and the occasional barefaced are in there. I have never seen anyone confront anyone if they are or are not wearing one. And we live near old-fart city.
DeSantis feeling he is gaining momentum for 2024 I suspect
https://redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2021/04/06/im-punching-back-in-latest-comments-desantis-makes-clear-he-is-not-done-owning-60-minutes-n356220
Which he absolutely go nuclear on 60 minutes, but in the end, the narrative was set, minds were wired and you will never, ever, get people that far gone to reexamine their beliefs.
“corporate smear merchants” is likely to catch on, but yet again the GOP whiffs on an attempt to show the congruence between the smears and the DNC’s best interests. They’re not just randomly acting “smear merchants”, they’re the propaganda arm of the DNC.
Yep. “corporate smear merchants that are carrying the water for the DNC initiatives and talking points” would have been better. Same with the MLB thing, these all could be a two-front war on ideology but the GOP is whistling in the wind.
What’s wrong with “Democrat Party propagandists”? Short, to the point, memorable.
I haven’t read the article, I just noticed the title and that it’s in Portland.
https://pamplinmedia.com/pt/10-opinion/503827-403557-opinion-is-clean-energy-racist-it-doesnt-have-to-be
It seems to be a woke way of admitting that “clean energy” is expensive energy.
And of course all poor folks are black or brown.