Adar posted:

no.

by 2040 you're going to have more severe hurricanes and water issues that force some very specific coastal areas in Florida to move and many others to spend some money on mitigation, but each individual hurricane hits a handful of coastal counties once a year, so one or two individual towns/counties will be abandoned or not rebuilt at a time.

this does not mean Florida gets abandoned or the end of logistics chains or other doomsday predictions, it means the end of cheap flood insurance coupled with increased grid redundancy and large amounts of money spent on maintenance in major cities to keep them livable.

2100 with no further technological progress and increased global denialism would definitely suck balls in the US and start going down the uninhabitability route in Bangladesh, but even that's a stretch

IPCC SR15 posted:

Scenario 3 [one possible storyline among worst-case scenarios]:

Mitigation: Uncoordinated action, major actions late in the 21st century.

Internal climate variability: First unusual (ca. 10%) best-case scenario for one decade, then normal internal climate variability.

In 2020, despite past pledges, the international support for the Paris Agreement starts to wane. In the years that follow, CO2 emissions are reduced at local and national level but efforts are limited and not always successful.

Radiative forcing increases and, due to chance, the most extreme events tend to happen in less populated regions thus not increasing global concerns. Nonetheless, there are more frequent heatwaves in several cities and less snow in mountain resorts in the Alps, Rockies, and Andes. 1.5°C warming is reached by 2030, but no major changes in policies occur. Starting with an intense El Niño-La Niña phase in the 2030s, several catastrophic years occur while global temperature warming starts to approach 2°C. There are major heatwaves on all continents, with deadly consequences in tropical regions and Asian megacities, especially for those ill-equipped for protecting themselves and their communities from the effects of extreme temperatures. Droughts occur in regions bordering the Mediterranean Sea, Central North America, the Amazon region and southern Australia, some of which are due to natural variability and others to enhanced greenhouse forcing. Intense floodings occur in high-latitude and tropical regions, in particular in Asia, following increases in heavy precipitation events. Major ecosystems (coral reefs, wetlands, forests) are destroyed over that period with massive disruption to local livelihoods. An unprecedented drought leads to large impacts on the Amazon rain forest, which is also affected by deforestation. A hurricane with intense rainfall and associated with high storm surges destroys a large part of Miami. A 2-year drought in the Great Plains and a concomitant drought in Eastern Europe and Russia decrease global crop production, resulting in major increases in food prices and eroding food security. Poverty levels increase to a very large scale and risk and incidence of starvation increase very significantly as food stores dwindle in most countries; human health suffers.

There are high levels of public unrest and political destabilization due to the increasing climatic pressures, resulting in some countries becoming dysfunctional. The main countries responsible for the CO2 emissions design rapidly conceived mitigation plans and try to install plants for carbon capture and storage, in some cases without sufficient prior testing. Massive investments in renewable energy often happen too late and are uncoordinated; energy prices soar as a result of the high demand and lack of infrastructure. In some cases, demand cannot be met, leading to further delays. Some countries propose to consider sulphate-aerosol based SRM, however intensive international negotiations on the topic take substantial time and are inconclusive, because of overwhelming concerns about potential impacts to monsoon rainfall and risks in case of termination. Global and regional temperatures continue to strongly increase while mitigation solutions are being developed and implemented.

Global mean warming reaches 3°C by 2100 but is not yet stabilized despite major decreases in yearly CO2 emissions, as a net-zero CO2 emissions budget could not yet be achieved and because of the long life-time of CO2 concentrations. The world as it was in 2020 is no longer recognizable, with decreasing life expectancy, reduced outdoor labour productivity, and lower quality of life in many regions because of too frequent heatwaves and other climate extremes. Droughts and water resources stress renders agriculture economically un-viable in some regions and contributes to increases in poverty. Progress on the sustainable development goals is largely undone and poverty rates reach new highs. Major conflicts take place. Almost all ecosystems experience irreversible impacts, species extinction rates are high in all regions, forest fires escalate, and biodiversity strongly decreases, resulting in extensive losses to ecosystem services. These losses exacerbate poverty and reduce quality of life. Life, for many indigenous and rural groups, becomes untenable in their ancestral lands. The retreat of the West Antarctic ice sheet accelerates, leading to more rapid SLR. Several small island states give up hope to survive in their place and look to an increasingly fragmented global community for refuge. Aggregate economic damages are substantial owing to the combined effects of climate changes, political instability, and losses of ecosystem services. The general health and well-being of people substantially decreased compared to the conditions in 2020 and continues to worsen over the following decades.

Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

"The FBI supports the law" says a poster who forgot that the FBI engaged in a bunch of illegal surveillance under...you guessed it...Robert Mueller

https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/371206-robert-muellers-forgotten-surveillance-crime-spree

edit: LOL check out the post above me for more whitewashing of Mueller's criminality.

Random Stranger posted:

Not even remotely. You might notice that there's a difference between people who have to have college degrees in legal fields (the FBI) and high school drop outs who want to play with guns (local law enforcement).

GreyjoyBastard posted:

this is an interesting article, thank you for it

it does not particularly impact my opinion / position on "Mueller really loving hates people who commit crimes [that are not related to being in law enforcement]", but it was not a thing I was aware of

(if anything it supports my point, because i am fairly confident he draws a distinction in his mind between his illegal activities in surveillance and the illegal activities he was surveilling )

Conspiratiorist posted:

No, the current projection by the IPCC released a few weeks ago is, that if we don't start drastic action RIGHT NOW, then the next best case scenario is reaching 2 degrees during the decade of 2040 and from there, by way of deploying on a massive scale technologies that do not yet exist, managing to just barely begin to lower temperatures by the end of the century.

And of course, we're not starting drastic action right now, so that's the best case scenario we're looking at, and it's loving catastrophic as it is.

Then we get to Scenario 3, which is the closest to our current reality.

Pollyanna posted:

The problem is that GOP voters who approved of the minimum wage act viewed it as “more money for me”, an inherently Republican belief. They probably would have reconsidered if they were reminded that minorities would also get more money. Expect a “poo poo wages for browns” act to show up in the next 4~6 years when they realize it.

Conspiratiorist posted:

No, the current projection by the IPCC released a few weeks ago is, that if we don't start drastic action RIGHT NOW, then the next best case scenario is reaching 2 degrees during the decade of 2040 and from there, by way of deploying on a massive scale technologies that do not yet exist, managing to just barely begin to lower temperatures by the end of the century.

And of course, we're not starting drastic action right now, so that's the best case scenario we're looking at, and it's loving catastrophic as it is.

Then we get to Scenario 3, which is the closest to our current reality.

Random Stranger posted:

I agree with you there, my point was just that the FBI isn't going to roll over for the republican party because they decided crime was legal for anyone with an R next to their name which is an attitude that comes up way too often.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

What the hell is a succ-Dem other than a surely cringy pun?

Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

Every single poster who thinks there are good, reachable Republicans who actually care about the rule of law should read The Reactionary Mind, a book I recommend all the time and makes an airtight case for conservatives having no real value system beyond establishing an over/underclass and keeping themselves in the privileged overclass.

It's literally hundreds of pages of proof that this is how conservatives operate. And then you finish the book and realize that it's 100% true and you can predict all of conservatives responses to every issue by applying the lessons from the book.

CPColin posted:

Anybody know how to interpret the last clause of Article V? As I read it, you can't amend the Constitution to gently caress with the Senate unless all states agree.

Lightning Knight posted:

It is a meme term for centrist basically.

https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1060304407248752640

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

If Mueller was in the bag for Trump then Trump wouldn’t be such a paranoid freak ranting and raving about his investigation every chance he gets.

theblackw0lf posted:

https://twitter.com/PamKeithFL/status/1060281925661872128

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

What the hell is a succ-Dem other than a surely cringy pun about... something?

CPColin posted:

Anybody know how to interpret the last clause of Article V? As I read it, you can't amend the Constitution to gently caress with the Senate unless all states agree.

GreyjoyBastard posted:

which, much like 'centrist', gets applied to 'any Dem I don't like'

GreyjoyBastard posted:

sure, primary their butts off

LinYutang posted:

Yep. In Michigan we got our flips thanks to the white suburbs. Rural seats were still a shitshow defeat, even for candidates who were running on M4A like Jerry Hilliard and Matt Morgan.

Makes it kind of hard to believe that M4A is the magic victory wand that people think it is. Voters have weird and contradictory preferences that aren't encapsulated by a single set of policies.

Z. Autobahn posted:

Yeah, I think what a lot of 'leftist policies will sway red voters' posters don't get is that it won't happen because leftist policies are about alleviating inequality and the core dominating philosophy of most of these people is explicitly and unabashedly pro-inequality.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

What the hell is a succ-Dem other than a surely cringy pun about... something?

cheetah7071 posted:

My model is the bronze age collapse here. Lower population, people spending more time surviving and less time making trade goods, a collapse of the governmental systems that kept things safe and encouraged trade, and refugee armies making travel unsafe.

Conspiratiorist posted:

No, the current projection by the IPCC released a few weeks ago is, that if we don't start drastic action RIGHT NOW, then the next best case scenario is reaching 2 degrees during the decade of 2040 and from there, by way of deploying on a massive scale technologies that do not yet exist, managing to just barely begin to lower temperatures by the end of the century.

And of course, we're not starting drastic action right now, so that's the best case scenario we're looking at, and it's loving catastrophic as it is.

Then we get to Scenario 3, which is the closest to our current reality.

theCalamity posted:

I don't have to wait until primary season to do something about it. I can go interrupt their meals

Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

Conservatives are only about 30% of the population. Dems are failing with regular non-reactionary people.

The mindset is not "leftist policies will sway red voters", it's "leftist policies will sway people who don't vote" which was 60% of the electorate yesterday.

Z. Autobahn posted:

Yeah, I think what a lot of 'leftist policies will sway red voters' posters don't get is that it won't happen because leftist policies are about alleviating inequality and the core dominating philosophy of most of these people is explicitly and unabashedly pro-inequality.

Condiv posted:

what's the obsession with beto? i really don't get it

LinYutang posted:

Condiv posted:

what's the obsession with beto? i really don't get it

cheetah7071 posted:

It means that the way you abolish the senate it by stripping it of its power, rather than actually abolishing it

cheetah7071 posted:

My model is the bronze age collapse here. Lower population, people spending more time surviving and less time making trade goods, a collapse of the governmental systems that kept things safe and encouraged trade, and refugee armies making travel unsafe.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Anyone else still really really pissed at Nate and his wild hosed up Live Model that gave us all direct flashbacks to 2016 except with the additional knowledge that if we didn’t take the House it was Game loving Over?

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Anyone else still really really pissed at Nate and his wild hosed up Live Model that gave us all direct flashbacks to 2016 except with the additional knowledge that if we didn’t take the House it was Game loving Over?