Hacker News Reader

Comment by VancouverMan | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Remember that being a hypocrite doesn’t make someone’s arguments incorrect.

> For example, the Canadian politicians who focus the most on that subject, and who impose onerous "carbon taxes" on everyone, spend a lot of time in planes flying all over the country, and even overseas. Most of this travel is unnecessary and pointless.

Do you have data indicating that the politicians who don’t focus on the subject are more modest with their travel?

Good scientific observation.

To make a comparison that Canadian politicians who impose taxes jet travel more are harming the environment more, we need a comparison between controlled variable and the tested variable like the amount of jet travel Canadian politicians who don't impose taxes do.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/cre...

> Last fiscal year, the Trump family took more trips that required Secret Service protection than the Obama family took in seven, according to a budget document released by the Treasury Department. On average, Obama’s family took 133.3 protected trips per year, while the Trump family has taken an average of 1,625 annually.

There's one (non-Canadian) datapoint.

Before anyone shouts "but Trump's family is bigger!": read the link.

"Do you have data indicating that the politicians who don’t focus on the subject are more modest with their travel?"

Why would they be if they don't care as much...?

But it’s being asserted that both sides don’t genuinely care; that they care equally as much.

The point is, if they honestly believed in climate change, their actions would reflect a state of emergency. Instead, they act as if nothing is wrong, except when it comes time to impose limits on others, and then they remember it's all justified by the need to save the planet. So comparing to other politicians is pointless, it's their actions in relation to their policies that is at issue, not how it compares to other politicians.

That's exactly right. The behaviour of the other politicians are irrelevant.

I don’t see that as a problem. The problem is brainwashing (mostly well meaning progressives) into doom culture, it’s an easy way to justify extremely totalitarianism.

We already went through that in the 70’s with nuclear power. Humanity would be far better off if it weren’t for 70’s progressives and their anti-nuclear agenda. It’s the same but worse this time: welcome our new climate tyrants.

Climate change is a cult with religious qualities. I haven’t seen anyone rebutting that.

I don’t give a shit if people use private jets for whatever reason.

Maybe it has to do with the US having double the per capita carbon footprint, and double the cumulative total amount of CO2 of China, and many multiples of India:

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-pe...

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-which-countries-are-his....

The climate doesn't care about per capita, also nuclear power could have been used to reduce carbon footprint.

There's far more room for improvement when per capita is high than there is when per capita is low.

And the climate certainly does care about cumulative CO2.

Would have, could have, should have. But didn't. Trying to hold others accountable without getting one's own house in order just comes off as the blatant hypocrisy it actually is. Until we do better ourselves, we are in no position to call others out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com