Science Greta Thunberg Megathread - Dax Herrera says he wouldn't have a day ago (I somewhat doubt that)

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering? How can a 16-year-old girl in plaits, who has dedicated herself to the not-exactly sinister, authoritarian plot of trying to save the planet from extinction, inspire such incandescent rage?

Last week, she tweeted that she had arrived into New York after her two week transatlantic voyage: “Finally here. Thank you everyone who came to see me off in Plymouth, and everyone who welcomed me in New York! Now I’m going to rest for a few days, and on Friday I’m going to participate in the strike outside the UN”, before promptly giving a press conference in English. Yes, her second language.

Her remarks were immediately greeted with a barrage of jibes about virtue signalling, and snide remarks about the three crew members who will have to fly out to take the yacht home.

This shouldn’t need to be spelled out, but as some people don’t seem to have grasped it yet, we’ll give it a lash: Thunberg’s trip was an act of protest, not a sacred commandment or an instruction manual for the rest of us. Like all acts of protest, it was designed to be symbolic and provocative. For those who missed the point – and oh, how they missed the point – she retweeted someone else’s “friendly reminder” that: “You don’t need to spend two weeks on a boat to do your part to avert our climate emergency. You just need to do everything you can, with everyone you can, to change everything you can.”

Part of the reason she inspires such rage, of course, is blindingly obvious. Climate change is terrifying. The Amazon is burning. So too is the Savannah. Parts of the Arctic are on fire. Sea levels are rising. There are more vicious storms and wildfires and droughts and floods. Denial is easier than confronting the terrifying truth.

Then there’s the fact that we don’t like being made to feel bad about our life choices. That’s human nature. It’s why we sneer at vegans. It’s why we’re suspicious of sober people at parties. And if anything is likely to make you feel bad about your life choices -- as you jet back home after your third Ryanair European minibreak this season – it’ll be the sight of small-boned child subjecting herself to a fortnight being tossed about on the Atlantic, with only a bucket bearing a “Poo Only Please” sign by way of luxury, in order to make a point about climate change.

But that’s not virtue signalling, which anyone can indulge in. As Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and their-four-private-jets-in-11-days found recently, virtue practising is a lot harder.

Even for someone who spends a lot of time on Twitter, some of the criticism levelled at Thunberg is astonishing. It is, simultaneously, the most vicious and the most fatuous kind of playground bullying. The Australian conservative climate change denier Andrew Bolt called her “deeply disturbed” and “freakishly influential” (the use of “freakish”, we can assume, was not incidental.) The former UKIP funder, Arron Banks, tweeted “Freaking yacht accidents do happen in August” (as above.) Brendan O’Neill of Spiked called her a “millenarian weirdo” (nope, still not incidental) in a piece that referred nastily to her “monotone voice” and “the look of apocalyptic dread in her eyes”.

But who’s the real freak – the activist whose determination has single-handedly started a powerful global movement for change, or the middle-aged man taunting a child with Asperger syndrome from behind the safety of their computer screens?

And that, of course, is the real reason why Greta Thunberg is so triggering. They can’t admit it even to themselves, so they ridicule her instead. But the truth is that they’re afraid of her. The poor dears are terrified of her as an individual, and of what she stands for – youth, determination, change.

She is part of a generation who won’t be cowed. She isn’t about to be shamed into submission by trolls. That’s not actually a look of apocalyptic dread in her eyes. It’s a look that says “you’re not relevant”.

The reason they taunt her with childish insults is because that’s all they’ve got. They’re out of ideas. They can’t dismantle her arguments, because she has science – and David Attenborough – on her side. They can’t win the debate with the persuasive force of their arguments, because these bargain bin cranks trade in jaded cynicism, not youthful passion. They can harangue her with snide tweets and hot take blogposts, but they won’t get a reaction because, frankly, she has bigger worries on her mind.

That’s not to say that we should accept everything Thunberg says without question. She is an idealist who is young enough to see the world in black and white. We need voices like hers. We should listen to what she has to say, without tuning the more moderate voices of dissent out.

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering? Because of what she represents. In an age when democracy is under assault, she hints at the emergency of new kind of power, a convergence of youth, popular protest and irrefutable science. And for her loudest detractors, she also represents something else: the sight of their impending obsolescence hurtling towards them.

joconnell@irishtimes.com
https://twitter.com/jenoconnell

https://web.archive.org/web/2019090...certain-men-1.4002264?localLinksEnabled=false
Found this thought-provoking indeed.

 

[MeatRokket08]

I have nothing personal against her, but if she truly wants to fight climate change she'll need to have the balls to start pointing at China amd India.

 

[MembersSchoolPizza]

Carbon Taxes do the opposite of obfuscating the cost of adding CO2 to the environment, to the contrary they make it very, very, very clear.

No, they don't. That's not how taxes work. That's not how taxes work at all. There's a reason there's an old adage to the effect of "You can't tax corporations". To say nothing of taxing governments.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

No, they don't. That's not how taxes work. That's not how taxes work at all. There's a reason there's an old adage to the effect of "You can't tax corporations". To say nothing of taxing governments.

You think Carbon Tax is a tax on the government? Nigger what? Its literally putting a price on carbon output. And the whole point of that is that you largely don't care where that price is felt, because taxes are incentives, if you tax carbon you DISINCENTIVE carbon.

Seriously, right now when a company does something that releases an amount of carbon into the atmosphere, they pay nothing to do that. I want to make them pay to do that. Because if they have to pay they'll -want- to do less. (provided the price is set right).

I have no idea how its possible to misunderstand that. And the beauty of the carbon tax is I DO NOT CARE IF THE TAX INCIDENCE FALLS ON CONSUMERS OR CORPORATIONS. If it falls on consumers they'll be incentized away from that product, if it falls on the company the company will be incentivized to reduce that cost.

And you can tax corporations. Its really effective on corporations whom produce goods that have elastic demand. Not so useful if the demand for that good is inelastic and likely passed onto the consumer.

 

[TFT-A9]

...Tax the shit out of private jet fuel if you want to aim that tax somewhere useful.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

...Tax the shit out of private jet fuel if you want to aim that tax somewhere useful.

Carbon tax is universal, so it would necessarily hit private jet fuel, and that tax would be significant.

 

[Count K. Rumulon]

This went from people talking about Greta Thunberg to one guy sperging about carbon tax.

Also the people getting triggered by her are like how tumblr was for the longest time, but on the exact opposite end of the political spectrum.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

This went from people talking about Greta Thunberg to one guy sperging about carbon tax.

Also the people getting triggered by her are like how tumblr was for the longest time, but on the exact opposite end of the political spectrum.

Honestly she's annoying but also valueless, and is a pretty obvious puppet. She's going to do nothing but hurt the movement in the long run as children kill themselves from being literally terrified to death.

 

[Oh Long Johnson]

Its literally putting a price on carbon output. And the whole point of that is that you largely don't care where that price is felt, because taxes are incentives, if you tax carbon you DISINCENTIVE carbon.

I believe you meant to say it incentivizes consumers or corporations to purchase goods and services from cheaper, non-compliant sources.

 

[GeorgiaGuidestones]

I went and searched for a timeline about Greta because I didn’t know much about her.

If she had started off by cleaning up trashy areas in Swedistan with other groups that do environmental clean ups without cameras on her, then she’d have my respect now. Sperging outside of Parliament, knowing perfectly well it would have made her an international star is where she lost me. Going through her timeline I don’t see one time where she helped clean up any messes. So, she can fall off that yacht for all I care.

Timeline

 

[MembersSchoolPizza]

You think Carbon Tax is a tax on the government? Nigger what? Its literally putting a price on carbon output.

You think the government doesn't have a carbon footprint that would make Bigfoot blush?

Excuse me while I go over in this corner and laugh until I shit my pants.

And the whole point of that is that you largely don't care where that price is felt, because taxes are incentives, if you tax carbon you DISINCENTIVE carbon.

No, you don't, because the people paying the taxes don't see where the carbon is and have a call in using it, or investing in alternatives, or what have you. They just get a bill.

You're creating a disincentive to consumer behavior, perhaps, but not carbon output specifically.

Seriously, right now when a company does something that releases an amount of carbon into the atmosphere, they pay nothing to do that. I want to make them pay to do that. Because if they have to pay they'll -want- to do less. (provided the price is set right).

I have no idea how its possible to misunderstand that. And the beauty of the carbon tax is I DO NOT CARE IF THE TAX INCIDENCE FALLS ON CONSUMERS OR CORPORATIONS. If it falls on consumers they'll be incentized away from that product, if it falls on the company the company will be incentivized to reduce that cost.

And you can tax corporations. Its really effective on corporations whom produce goods that have elastic demand. Not so useful if the demand for that good is inelastic and likely passed onto the consumer.

A sin tax works, generally, at moderating optional behavior, and it does so by directly targeting the behavior intended to be moderated. Price of tobacco goes up, people smoke less. Simple, it works... sort of. But when you're suddenly taxing everything and everyone, nobody can see where the tax is targeting, nor what they can do about it. Price of gas went up? Well, no shit, but so did the price of milk and bread and carrots and diapers and medicine and, well, everything else. So now people are paying more to drive to work, to get a paycheck that doesn't stretch as far.

You might successfully get people to stop buying a new iPlacebo every year, or eating less avocado toast as they have to cut back on luxuries, but you're going to be bending over and fucking without lube the people who already don't do those things. What are people supposed to do? Drive to work less? Tell the farmers they'll never see to buy more fuel-efficient tractors, or they'll stop buying food? Even if they could, they wouldn't, because they don't see those things. They see the price they pay, the taxes they pay.

 

[captn_kettle]

I have nothing personal against her, but if she truly wants to fight climate change she'll need to have the balls to start pointing at China amd India.

"We do not need to look at India and China, we should be looking at ourselves. We can do better as a country and we can lead the flight against climate change".

Thats exactly what will be said. And there will be claps and standing ovations and god knows what else for the autistic child going through a meltdown.

"But Greta, what about the fact we haven't actually combated climate change, but rather displaced it to countries who rely on these jobs". Because these countries depend on the industrial jobs much like western countries depended on them in the industrial revolution when they had fuck all money in their pockets.

 

[InvertedDickEnthusiast]

Carbon tax is universal, so it would necessarily hit private jet fuel, and that tax would be significant.

Great, can't wait to get fucked up the ass just driving my car to work and back while people with thousands of times my net worth hire a lobbyist and an accountant to wriggle out of paying any of it.

 

[AnOminous]

Carbon taxes sound a lot to me like buying indulgences. Anyone else get that vibe?

The problem with taxation as a means of controlling behavior as opposed to a means of raising revenue is it gets very addictive to the government doing it and it gets only more and more prone to abuse as the government treats this kind of sin tax as both a bottomless source of free revenue and as a way of punishing a disliked class.

However, the current system lets a tiny minority of the population make enormous amounts of money by poisoning everyone else. I'm not sure why poisoning everyone who breathes should be a freebie while you should get to keep the entirety of the profits from stealing everyone's air.

Look at China. You practically choke to death getting off the plane and if you're from the West you've never experienced air that bad, and that's what you'd be breathing here if those people had their way. That's what you get when the government is completely unresponsive to the needs of the citizens who are treated as little better than worker insects.

You might successfully get people to stop buying a new iPlacebo every year, or eating less avocado toast as they have to cut back on luxuries, but you're going to be bending over and fucking without lube the people who already don't do those things. What are people supposed to do? Drive to work less? Tell the farmers they'll never see to buy more fuel-efficient tractors, or they'll stop buying food? Even if they could, they wouldn't, because they don't see those things. They see the price they pay, the taxes they pay.

No shit. Hey, I know, I'll take chartered jets less often. Oh wait I don't fucking do that, Al Gore does. And this dour faced fucking munchkin bitch preaching at me.

 

[Crystal Golem]

Guys come on just accept the carbon tax. Corporations and the rich will totally pay their fair share. We totally won't end up footing the entire bill while the worst offenders are also the ones with the most ability to avoid that tax.

THE SONG THAT NEVER ENDS MANG!

 

[CWCissey]

Tax child activists.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

durrr

Yes i'm aware you don't understand that there are goods with inelastic demands and those with elastic demands.
Carbon tax literally works by taxing carbon, the price of your avocado toast doesn't go up as much as say, the price of jet fuel, because one produces a lot more CO2 than the other

Shocking that you find simple math so hard to understand.

Guys come on just accept the carbon tax. Corporations and the rich will totally pay their fair share. We totally won't end up footing the entire bill while the worst offenders are also the ones with the most ability to avoid that tax.

THE SONG THAT NEVER ENDS MANG!

Some taxes are more prone to avoidance than others. For instance if demand for your good is largely inelastic, like food, a corporation is obviously just going to pass that tax on to the consumer, because the consumer NEEDS food.

Land taxes are also harder to avoid, and Carbon is likely a better metric to disincentive than almost anything else possible.
Or whatever, let everyone shit as much CO2 into the atmosphere as they like, the world over, nothing bad will happen.

I mean its either that or we nuke China and India which would help solve the problem too. Since they're the really problematic polluters in the long term and Greta and the rest of the climate cult's focus on the US and Europe is.. Pathetic.

 

[TFT-A9]

So how do you plan to make Mr. Executive with his private jet actually pay his carbon tax without weaseling out of it?

 

[AnOminous]

Yes i'm aware you don't understand that there are goods with inelastic demands and those with elastic demands.
Carbon tax literally works by taxing carbon, the price of your avocado toast doesn't go up as much as say, the price of jet fuel, because one produces a lot more CO2 than the other

Shocking that you find simple math so hard to understand.

You shouldn't eat avocados because the demand by hipster assholes for them drove up the price so much that drug cartels swooped in, intimidated and/or murdered farmers who grew them, and took over the farms to make profits
on a level of what they make dealing drugs. So if you're buying avocados from south of the border, you're funding drug cartels.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

So how do you plan to make Mr. Executive with his private jet actually pay his carbon tax without weaseling out of it?

Its really not that easy to avoid some taxes, especially not a tax on a product, unless he's magically producing his own jet fuel I guess?

You shouldn't eat avocados because the demand by hipster assholes for them drove up the price so much that drug cartels swooped in, intimidated and/or murdered farmers who grew them, and took over the farms to make profits
on a level of what they make dealing drugs. So if you're buying avocados from south of the border, you're funding drug cartels.

Funding the cartels is good actually and here's why... I like cocaine.

 

[InvertedDickEnthusiast]

If you buy anything in America from anywhere you're contributing the 70% of all oil use in America dedicated to the transportation sector, which is going to be a big part of where the cost get passed on to you and those less fortunate than you.