|
Unoriginal Name posted:Is there a strong reason why the Oregon house doesn't just put up a compromise bill, wait for the lost Republicams to trickle back in, lock the loving doors and vote on what they needed to? All bills die on Sunday.
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:They've become convinced that this bill will basically destroy the economy, somehow. I think I heard on the radio it's only going to jump the gas tax by 22 cents a gallon? 22 cents/gal isn't pocket change, especially for the logging truck drivers that had a rolling protest convoy down I-5S last week - went on for miiiiiles. HB2020 would've made near zero functional difference on the climate catastrophe we're staring down and was just another piece of liberal feel-good legislation that just ends up being a tax on working people, so seeing it framed as regressive Republicans vs. The Good Guy Democrats is just hilarious to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/robwdavis/status/1144296917024686080?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:22 cents/gal isn't pocket change, especially for the logging truck drivers that had a rolling protest convoy down I-5S last week - went on for miiiiiles. 22 cents/gal isn't much when you considered that gas prices swing up and down by 3 to 4 times as much from winter to summer anyways. https://www.gasbuddy.com/Charts Or does the trucking industry shut down every summer and I just haven't noticed?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:22 cents/gal isn't pocket change, especially for the logging truck drivers that had a rolling protest convoy down I-5S last week - went on for miiiiiles. It’s a bit more complicated than that - but sure. Cap and trade isn’t ideal but it’s also not completely ineffective. If you’d gone with inadequate over zero functional difference I’d be more inclined to agree. This country and this state is in love with market based half measures and if that’s what you can get it’s better than holding out for whatever it is exactly that you’d rather see (I’m curious what that would be). If nothing else it demonstrates you can take action without everything falling apart which is useful. I’m curious what your proposal is and how feasible it might be?. I ask this question a lot and I mostly get hemming and hawing and pie in the sky responses that amount to everybody else makes changes in a way that doesn’t impact me. The logging industry is kind of our coal miners. We need to just keep letting them do what they’re doing because the jobs now are more important. That 22 cents a gallon they’re saving isn’t really being saved. It’s just being pushed out into the future when it’ll need to be made up with interest. Keep in mind when the catastrophe hits who’s going to get hit the hardest is exactly the people you think this will hit the hardest so I don’t even know that you’re doing them any good
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
xrunner posted:It’s a bit more complicated than that - but sure. Cap and trade isn’t ideal but it’s also not completely ineffective. If you’d gone with inadequate over zero functional difference I’d be more inclined to agree. This country and this state is in love with market based half measures and if that’s what you can get it’s better than holding out for whatever it is exactly that you’d rather see (I’m curious what that would be). If nothing else it demonstrates you can take action without everything falling apart which is useful. I’m curious what your proposal is and how feasible it might be?. I ask this question a lot and I mostly get hemming and hawing and pie in the sky responses that amount to everybody else makes changes in a way that doesn’t impact me. The logging industry is kind of our coal miners. We need to just keep letting them do what they’re doing because the jobs now are more important. That 22 cents a gallon they’re saving isn’t really being saved. It’s just being pushed out into the future when it’ll need to be made up with interest. Keep in mind when the catastrophe hits who’s going to get hit the hardest is exactly the people you think this will hit the hardest so I don’t even know that you’re doing them any good Hush this bill won't overnight fix climate change and redress all social and economic grievances and therefore is not worth it. Oh gee it's gonna cost some people something. Everything costs. Grow up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
22 cents is nothing and the logging and trucking industries are already heavily subsidized in a wide variety of ways despite forming a small part of the economy. It would be irresponsible to continue ignoring the oncoming economic catastrophe - estimated to cost Oregon more than $40 billion by 2100 - simply because it's mildly inconvenient for the 6,000 loggers in Oregon. Oregon's legal marijuana industry is practically brand-new and already is about the same size, why are we only talking about such a tiny sliver of Oregonians when everyone is impacted by climate change?
Kaal fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Jun 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 20:56
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:Are you sure? A bunch of armed terrorists took over a federal property and the only one that actually suffered any punishment was the quickdraw artist who drew down on the FBI. They let the rest off. We briefed the FBI that Finicum was the most likely to actually kill people out of the entire group. And while some say they will die to the govt demons, they would rather sit in jail with the AB protecting the perceived white heros.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 21:42
|
|
|
Kaal posted:22 cents is nothing and the logging and trucking industries are already heavily subsidized in a wide variety of ways despite forming a small part of the economy. It would be irresponsible to continue ignoring the oncoming economic catastrophe - estimated to cost Oregon more than $40 billion by 2100 - simply because it's mildly inconvenient for the 6,000 loggers in Oregon. Oregon's legal marijuana industry is practically brand-new and already is about the same size, why are we only talking about such a tiny sliver of Oregonians when everyone is impacted by climate change? Because they are honkin their dang horns in front of the capitol building. I think most people who believe in climate change are on board with, "Cap and trade sucks but its better than the literally nothing we're currently doing." Industry is going to change, hopefully globally (lol), in order to exist in a carbon-conscious world. Suck it up, dummies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 22:26
|
|
|
Kaal posted:22 cents is nothing and the logging and trucking industries are already heavily subsidized in a wide variety of ways despite forming a small part of the economy. It would be irresponsible to continue ignoring the oncoming economic catastrophe - estimated to cost Oregon more than $40 billion by 2100 - simply because it's mildly inconvenient for the 6,000 loggers in Oregon. Oregon's legal marijuana industry is practically brand-new and already is about the same size, why are we only talking about such a tiny sliver of Oregonians when everyone is impacted by climate change? It's the same bullshit with coal miners. Who gives a gently caress about coal miners? There are literally more people who work as cashiers at Walmart than there are coal miners.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 22:30
|
|
|
I haven't read the thing so I'm just going on the posts going around: It's not just the gas cost, the less angry posts indicate it will force a lot of older commercial vehicles out of service, which royally fucks a lot of people the day it goes into effect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Javid posted:I haven't read the thing so I'm just going on the posts going around: So let’s keep burning coal cause jobs?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 02:28
|
|
|
Javid posted:I haven't read the thing so I'm just going on the posts going around:
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
"gently caress their jobs, muh CARBON" is why people are protesting, so good luck with that I guess
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 05:31
|
|
|
Javid posted:"gently caress their jobs, muh CARBON" is why people are protesting, so good luck with that I guess I mean yeah. Either we deal with climate change or we agree that change is too hard and too expensive and somebody else will figure it out later and I’m sure it’ll be alright. Somebody else is going to figure it out. If we change anything now it’s going to kill jobs for no reason HashtagGirlboss fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Jun 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 06:13
|
|
|
Unemployment will be 100% when the entire human species is extinct.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
pseudorandom name posted:Unemployment will be 100% when the entire human species is extinct.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 06:48
|
|
|
Javid posted:I haven't read the thing so I'm just going on the posts going around: This sounds like a misunderstanding, there aren't any restrictions on vehicles of that sort. People can continue using their vehicles regardless of their age, and the plan takes years to come into full effect. The whole point is that it's a market-based fuel tax which deexternalizes the environmental costs. If an older vehicle has such low fuel efficiency that it makes economic sense to replace it, then the system is working. Those heavy polluters shouldn't be on the road, and Oregon needs to stop subsidizing them. Kaal fucked around with this message at 13:17 on Jun 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 13:12
|
|
|
Javid posted:I haven't read the thing so I'm just going on the posts going around: Have you smelled what comes out of the tailpipe of those old commercial vehicles? The ice cream man drives down the street and it smells like industrial tracting
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:22 cents/gal isn't pocket change, especially for the logging truck drivers that had a rolling protest convoy down I-5S last week - went on for miiiiiles. Alright, so what confuses me is, why can't they just raise their delivery prices to reflect the increased cost? Everyone's getting hit by the same fuel price bump, and especially with lumber I doubt the demand is so elastic that they'll see a big dropoff in business.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 16:48
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Alright, so what confuses me is, why can't they just raise their delivery prices to reflect the increased cost? Everyone's getting hit by the same fuel price bump, and especially with lumber I doubt the demand is so elastic that they'll see a big dropoff in business. Some of the old trucks are used for drayage. Drayage is super competitive and basically has been getting hosed over by everybody for a long time. They've been pushing back new emissions standards up here for those trucks for a quite a while, because it would kill a lot of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
xrunner posted:It’s a bit more complicated than that - but sure. Cap and trade isn’t ideal but it’s also not completely ineffective. If you’d gone with inadequate over zero functional difference I’d be more inclined to agree. This country and this state is in love with market based half measures and if that’s what you can get it’s better than holding out for whatever it is exactly that you’d rather see (I’m curious what that would be). If nothing else it demonstrates you can take action without everything falling apart which is useful. I’m curious what your proposal is and how feasible it might be?. I ask this question a lot and I mostly get hemming and hawing and pie in the sky responses that amount to everybody else makes changes in a way that doesn’t impact me. The logging industry is kind of our coal miners. We need to just keep letting them do what they’re doing because the jobs now are more important. That 22 cents a gallon they’re saving isn’t really being saved. It’s just being pushed out into the future when it’ll need to be made up with interest. Keep in mind when the catastrophe hits who’s going to get hit the hardest is exactly the people you think this will hit the hardest so I don’t even know that you’re doing them any good Zero functional difference may have been an exaggeration but would you actually defend it as something more substantial given the scope of the crisis we're facing? If we're going to actually have a hope of fixing this we need to be talking about decimating the military budget and nationalization of infrastructure at minimum. How is it pie-in-the-sky if it is what is needed? I just don't understand this line of reasoning. We're marching to extinction with a very very limited timeframe to address it and it's blatantly obvious that the existing political structure has zero will to address it an a scale even remotely appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Alright, so what confuses me is, why can't they just raise their delivery prices to reflect the increased cost? Everyone's getting hit by the same fuel price bump, and especially with lumber I doubt the demand is so elastic that they'll see a big dropoff in business. The very nature of capitalism essentially means that literally every cost will be passed on to the end consumer. We ain't gonna solve the climate catastrophe without socialism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:Alright, so what confuses me is, why can't they just raise their delivery prices to reflect the increased cost? Everyone's getting hit by the same fuel price bump, and especially with lumber I doubt the demand is so elastic that they'll see a big dropoff in business. Margins Margins Margins
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 20:05
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Zero functional difference may have been an exaggeration but would you actually defend it as something more substantial given the scope of the crisis we're facing? Well lol if you think Fox News brainwashed loggers are gonna get behind those plans.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 20:06
|
|
|
Eggnogium posted:Well lol if you think Fox News brainwashed loggers are gonna get behind those plans. We can't even get the Very Serious Responsible Democrats to do more than these token cap-and-trade efforts as a self-serving pat on the back so singling out loggers doesn't seem entirely fair.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Have you smelled what comes out of the tailpipe of those old commercial vehicles? The ice cream man drives down the street and it smells like industrial tracting Yeah there needs to be some pressure to get old trucks (many of the fedex ones are loving awful) out of service.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 20:53
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Zero functional difference may have been an exaggeration but would you actually defend it as something more substantial given the scope of the crisis we're facing? Good luck then. I'm not the world's biggest fan of incrementalism, but I think cap and trade is better than nothing because it gets things moving. Every time you move things forward you make the long term changes seem less daunting and more doable. The changes we need to take involve significantly changing the way all of us live and the way we order our society. An absolute great way to do that is to make it increasingly economically unviable to participate in consumer culture. There's a lot of pain and you and me and everyone else will have their share of it. I wish we could start with the billionaires but that's not the way things work. The long game is that this inevitably leads to socialism or societal collapse - capitalism can't survive this - but we need to start now and work up to it because it'll be a lot more painful and a lot harder to make work if we wait for the crisis to hit. SyHopeful posted:We can't even get the Very Serious Responsible Democrats to do more than these token cap-and-trade efforts as a self-serving pat on the back so singling out loggers doesn't seem entirely fair. Those loggers are just as complicit as anyone else - demanding the rest of us keep their dying communities alive at the expense of everyone else - and honestly small towns and rural communities are a massive carbon intensive resource drag in a million ways. I'm not unsympathetic - but I'm not particularly eager to prioritize them either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:We can't even get the Very Serious Responsible Democrats to do more than these token cap-and-trade efforts as a self-serving pat on the back so singling out loggers doesn't seem entirely fair. The loggers are singling themselves out because the Koch Brothers who are funding the anti-environmental politicking think they would be a good mouthpiece. In reality the logging industry already carved out all sorts of exemptions and rebates in the proposed reform. They would be perfectly fine, and certainly are not being singled out. You seem to be simultaneously complaining that the reform goes too far, and not far enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 22:40
|
|
|
xrunner posted:Good luck then. Do you disagree on the scope of the crisis or the timeframe? If not, making any kind of defense of this cynical incrementalism is just baffling. We got less than a decade or game over but hey, it's better than nothing? Just lmao at focusing on consumer culture - how is that less pie-in-the-sky than slashing the military? Why should those who have the least suffer the most? It's not a huge secret that those who are going to (and currently are) suffering the most are those in the global South, which makes your comment come off as severely chauvinistic. And "that's not the way things work" is also really poor argumentation - there's way more of us proles than there are billionaires, seems like going after them would be a pretty drat good place to start. "Capitalism can't survive this" our human race isn't going to survive capitalism unless we do something significantly greater than cap-and-trade. quote:Those loggers are just as complicit as anyone else - demanding the rest of us keep their dying communities alive at the expense of everyone else - and honestly small towns and rural communities are a massive carbon intensive resource drag in a million ways. I'm not unsympathetic - but I'm not particularly eager to prioritize them either. Those loggers are not just as complicit as the shareholders of Exxon or Lockheed-Martin or Jeff Bezos, what a stupid thing to assert. And who said anything about prioritizing them? did I? Pretty sure I simply said that we aren't going to end climate change by squeezing an already squeezed working class. Kaal posted:The loggers are singling themselves out because the Koch Brothers who are funding the anti-environmental politicking think they would be a good mouthpiece. In reality the logging industry already carved out all sorts of exemptions and rebates in the proposed reform. They would be perfectly fine, and certainly are not being singled out. You seem to be simultaneously complaining that the reform goes too far, and not far enough. Yes, it's possible for legislation to go too far in placing a financial burden on those who have the least and also not go far enough in addressing the climate crisis. E: Would you also take issue with me saying the '94 crime bill went too far on African Americans and not far enough on addressing the roots of crime? SyHopeful fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Jun 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2019 23:06
|
|
|
I'm more interested in doing what is possible now (and cap and trade - even in defeat today - still feels possible in the near term) than I am in keeping the status quo until things finally get bad enough that we reach for the huge top down solutions. Maybe we don't have enough time to do incremental changes - maybe we get stuck in the details and it's too little and too late - but at least there's a real effort and progress that hopefully can be leveraged into bigger and bigger changes. Waiting for things to get so bad that your policy solution (such as it is because "kill the military budget and invest in infrastructure" while it sounds lovely doesn't really feel particularly tangible) becomes feasible means that we may very well have waited until the point that we don't have time to execute it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
Also if "invest in infrastructure" has a caveat of "without raising costs on the most polluting industries" then it's still meaningless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:27
|
|
|
I hope those people that lobbied the Democrats really got their money's worth on their reps. One thing you can say about Republicans, when you buy them, they stay bought until a better deal comes along.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
xrunner posted:I'm more interested in doing what is possible now (and cap and trade - even in defeat today - still feels possible in the near term) than I am in keeping the status quo until things finally get bad enough that we reach for the huge top down solutions. Maybe we don't have enough time to do incremental changes - maybe we get stuck in the details and it's too little and too late - but at least there's a real effort and progress that hopefully can be leveraged into bigger and bigger changes. I never said anything about "waiting for things to get so bad", please stop building strawmen out of what I'm saying, just like when I didn't say that loggers should be prioritized in some fashion. If you disagree with my assertion that limited resources and time shouldn't* be spent on efforts that everybody knows fall comically short of what is needed then fine, but at least be honest about it instead of putting words in my mouth. "that's just not how things work" "...while it sounds lovely doesn't really feel particularly tangible" The crisis we are facing doesn't give a flying gently caress about what you feel or think so these are just meaningless musings. SyHopeful fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Jun 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 02:09
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Also if "invest in infrastructure" has a caveat of "preserving private profit" then it's still meaningless. Fixed
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 02:10
|
|
|
It's just bizarre to see someone try to piggyback "Koch-owned logging companies cannot be touched even incidentally" on top of accelerationist Marxism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 02:15
|
|
|
Kaal posted:It's just bizarre to see someone try to piggyback "Koch-owned logging companies cannot be touched even incidentally" on top of accelerationist Marxism. Cool! Where did someone try to do that? You know the timber industry isn't a monolith, right? That the material and political resources available to the owners of Roseburg Lumber are vastly different than those available to some shmuck with a chainsaw?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 02:18
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:I never said anything about "waiting for things to get so bad", please stop building strawmen out of what I'm saying But you are because what you’re suggesting isn’t a thing that is doable yet. When things get bad enough maybe. But at that point it’s too late. The only thing I’ve heard you suggest is reducing the military budget by ten percent (joking - I know you’re talking about far more) and nationalizing infrastructure. Which. Ok. Yeah. That would be great and have significant impact. My question is how? We live in a nation that’s in love with market based half measures and until things get bad enough that poo poo is collapsing I don’t see that changing. So we take what we can get. SyHopeful posted:Fixed You’re the one standing up for private profit here. Or are loggers socialists pooling their fuel savings that the rest of us have to pay for the externalities of?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
xrunner posted:But you are because what you’re suggesting isn’t a thing that is doable yet. When things get bad enough maybe. But at that point it’s too late. The only thing I’ve heard you suggest is reducing the military budget by ten percent (joking - I know you’re talking about far more) and nationalizing infrastructure. Which. Ok. Yeah. That would be great and have significant impact. My question is how? We live in a nation that’s in love with market based half measures and until things get bad enough that poo poo is collapsing I don’t see that changing. So we take what we can get. You're the one unilaterally deciding what is "doable" and what isn't like you're some kind of all-knowing expert? Like, you keep making these strawmen of my arguments and then I knock them down and you shift the goalposts instead of engaging or even acknowledging that you were doing so. You're shifting the goalposts twice right here, 1. moving from accusing me of saying we shouldn't do anything until it gets worse to you just straight up saying that you don't think anything will change until it gets bad enough, and 2. switching from "oh those aren't even doable" to "okay fine but how". Those are two entirely different subjects. Nationalization of infrastructure has been done many times before, and the slashing of military budgets has been done before, so we can agree that historically it is absolutely possible. As soon as you're ready to shift the focus from "we should be happy with the pittance that's being done" to "lets get serious about the bare minimum that needs to be done and work it out from there" let me know, I'll be right with you. quote:You’re the one standing up for private profit here. Or are loggers socialists pooling their fuel savings that the rest of us have to pay for the externalities of? Jesus gently caress dude, lay off the strawmen. You already agree that taxing loggers isn't even remotely sufficient to address the issue and I already called you to task for your dumbass take about everybody being equally complicit above. Why are you doubling down? Why are you and Kaal more concerned about sticking it to a couple thousand loggers/truckers (I'm really curious to know how a fuel tax in Oregon will stick it to the Kochs) than actually focusing finite resources and time on solutions that rise to the scale and scope of the climate crisis. And I'm supposed to be the irrational one here? A handful of people are steering the world to climate disaster and I'm here trying to figure out why you two think Oregon loggers and truckers are that exact handful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 02:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 22:17 |
|
|
RollingStone just did a breakdown about this for the people who might not know the ins and outs of Oregon's economy. But the Koch's are deeply embedded in the logging industry. I have no particular interest in debating this further with a guy who says he wants a Revolution but just so long as it doesn't actually affect things or ever seem likely to happen. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/oregon-climate-battle-gop-walkout-violence-852643/
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2019 03:05
|
|