Big Picture

[Tbeck]

I know from being around the block a few times that Americans are very centralized in their thinking. However pointing this out normally meets with resistance.
So rather than TELL folk's to look at the bigger picture, I thought maybe a different approach was called for. So here's a few examples to ponder;

Solar and wind power
EV's
COVID

Now what do all three of those things have in common ?
If you thought it a political agenda for the democratic party and politicians, your CORRECT, BUT you are also NOT seeing the bigger picture.

ALL three of those things are happening GLOBALLY, not just in the USA, so clearly it has to be something besides the democratic party driving the agenda for these things.
Sure the US has a great deal of influence globally, but the push for alternative energy and EV's began in Europe LONG before ole Slow Joe came to office, or Obama for that matter.

So in conclusion, it might be of benefit to consider the bigger picture, or really the global one rather than resorting to the fall back position that your government is trying to control you. It's far more likely that it's driven by the global economy.

[hillsy v2]

Yeah but where's the fun in that, T?

[tabasco]

A bigger picture than that would be that though these scenarios may be present around the globe, it is the leftists in the democratic party pushing them HERE.

[Tbeck]

Tom, maybe? But you have to look at the big picture. Nothing gets passed into law in this country without the support of both parties. So while the legislation may originate on the left, it clearly has support on the right.
That gets us right back to the big picture which is economics.

On a side note, I wonder how much resistance there was for petroleum usage versus steam? Or natural gas versus coal?
We definitely don't like change

[Suzuki Johnny]

Okay T.. I will concede that there are times in our American lives where the policies of foreign countries do come into play on a political and economic basis, but do a survey of what Americans think is affecting their lives during these present times and none of the three topics rarely come into play.
It would be more like Immigration at the southern border and the high cost of living and providing for their families.
It what affects their personal lives that the average Joe and Jane is concerned about, global economics are not given any thought, even though they may play a big part like you mention.

JMHO

[Tbeck]

SJ, and I believe you hit on the crux of my post. We are concerned about the thing's that affect us on a day to day basis, BUT the big picture is that the cost of living is up globally, wages are down globally, and damn sure immigration, particularly the illegal type is way up globally.
I doubt very seriously that the folks in Greece think Joe Biden policy is responsible for the immigrants swarming their borders.

My point is that the world, developed and emerging nation's are in a rough spot since 9/11. Wars, plague, and the resulting downturn in the global economy hits EVERYONE.
That's worth bearing in mind while we're bitching about our grocery bill , cost of living, government activities, etc... It ain't just here.

[navigator]

... Nothing gets passed into law in this country without the support of both parties.

Have you examined the "assault" weapons ban in New York.

[sgtcall]

This all comes down to a business decision and how to make more money. Politicians are funded by lobbyists so they will do whatever the lobby says. Just like big pharma comes out with a new pill to end all of your ills every few years other businesses need to change in order to stay profitable. Big pharma comes out with new stuff not because the old one stopped working but because the patent runs out on the old one so they create a new one with a new patent. The oil industry started to stagnate years ago so businesses started pushing this new era of climate change so that they had a brand new industry to profit from. Now everyone needs solar panels on their house and a new electric car. The companies get rich and politicians get funded. Just look into how many former board members or CEOs from the oil industry are now with the climate change crowd. Plus their is a huge slush fund for the climate change agenda that can be divided up with no real tracking as to where the money goes. We pay billions a year to organizations throughout the world to "fight climate change" but never really see any measurable results.

It's all a scam.

[sgtcall]

[YoutubeID][/YoutubeID]

[Tbeck]

navigator, YOU might wish to read up on the NY assault weapons ban, AKA Safe Act. Passed the NY Senate with BIPARTISAN support. Nine republican senator's voted in favor.

So as I stated CORRECTLY, nothing gets signed into law without support from BOTH sides...

[HARRIS]

IT'S A SHAME CARLIN AIN'T WITH US ANY LONGER ...

[navigator]

navigator, YOU might wish to read up on the NY assault weapons ban, AKA Safe Act. Passed the NY Senate with BIPARTISAN support. Nine republican senator's voted in favor.

So as I stated CORRECTLY, nothing gets signed into law without support from BOTH sides...

The safe act was signed in Cuomos office in the dead of night, with 3 people in the room, as an emergency response to a school shooting.
That's a fact.

[MadCow]

navigator, YOU might wish to read up on the NY assault weapons ban, AKA Safe Act. Passed the NY Senate with BIPARTISAN support. Nine republican senator's voted in favor.

So as I stated CORRECTLY, nothing gets signed into law without support from BOTH sides...

The safe act was signed in Cuomos office in the dead of night, with 3 people in the room, as an emergency response to a school shooting.
That's a fact.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NY_SAFE_Act

"The legislation was written in response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, and the Webster, New York, shooting.

The law was passed by the New York State Legislature and was signed into law by Governor of New York Andrew Cuomo in January 2013.

The New York State Senate approved the act on a 43–18 vote on January 14, 2013. The vote was bipartisan,with nine Senate Republicans voting in favor."

[Herb]

A few rinos voting for something does not make it "bi-partisan". Without the 9 rinos it still would have passed 34-27.

Fact is that real constitutional conservatives, of whichever party, will not vote for these useless unconstitutional laws. Red flag laws are the worst.

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/loc ... t-we-know/

...In a late-night session, the Michigan House voted for universal background checks along party lines 56-53...

[Herb]

This is in addition to my previous post.

https://michiganadvance.com/2023/03/17/ ... gislation/

...Nine of the bills approved by the Senate on Thursday were passed 20-17 along party lines. Sen. Roger Victory (R-Hudsonville) was not present and was excused from voting for the day.

Two bills, SB 81 and SB 82, passed 22-15 with Republican Sens. Mark Huizenga (R-Walker) and Michael Webber (R-Rochester Hills) backing the legislation. Senate bills 81 and 82 would exempt firearm safety devices from the sales tax....

[navigator]

navigator, YOU might wish to read up on the NY assault weapons ban, AKA Safe Act. Passed the NY Senate with BIPARTISAN support. Nine republican senator's voted in favor.

So as I stated CORRECTLY, nothing gets signed into law without support from BOTH sides...

The safe act was signed in Cuomos office in the dead of night, with 3 people in the room, as an emergency response to a school shooting.
That's a fact.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NY_SAFE_Act

"The legislation was written in response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, and the Webster, New York, shooting.

The law was passed by the New York State Legislature and was signed into law by Governor of New York Andrew Cuomo in January 2013.

The New York State Senate approved the act on a 43–18 vote on January 14, 2013. The vote was bipartisan,with nine Senate Republicans voting in favor."

Anybody can submit info to wikipedia, and skew the result.

what really happened:
source:
https://www.citylandnyc.org/assault-rif ... onnecticut.

Drafting took place in relative secrecy over Christmas and New Year’s Day, 2012. Gun control organizations (e.g., New Yorkers Against Gun Violence) were consulted, but gun owners and Second Amendment advocacy organizations (e.g., NYS Rifle and Pistol Association) were not; nor were other interested groups and agencies such as advocates for the mentally ill and county and local government officials who would bear responsibility for implementing and enforcing the Act (e.g., county clerks, county sheriffs and county directors of mental hygiene services). The drafters incorporated many proposals that Assembly Democrats had introduced in prior legislative sessions. Dean Skelos, leader of the Senate Republicans, agreed to support the bill over the opposition of his upstate Republican colleagues. The bill, which filled some 80 single-spaced pages, was introduced into both chambers under a message of necessity on the night of January 14, 2013 and signed into law the next day.

[Herb]

about the only people that had read that bill were the drafters, almost no one that voted on it had read the whole bill.

[Cuban]

I know from being around the block a few times that Americans are very centralized in their thinking. However pointing this out normally meets with resistance. So rather than TELL folk's to look at the bigger picture, I thought maybe a different approach was called for. So here's a few examples to ponder;

Solar and wind power
EV's
COVID

Now what do all three of those things have in common ?
If you thought it a political agenda for the democratic party and politicians, your CORRECT, BUT you are also NOT seeing the bigger picture.

ALL three of those things are happening GLOBALLY, not just in the USA, so clearly it has to be something besides the democratic party driving the agenda for these things.
Sure the US has a great deal of influence globally, but the push for alternative energy and EV's began in Europe LONG before ole Slow Joe came to office, or Obama for that matter.

So in conclusion, it might be of benefit to consider the bigger picture, or really the global one rather than resorting to the fall back position that your government is trying to control you. It's far more likely that it's driven by the global economy.

T, I'm always amazed at how so many people, at least online, want to make almost any subject a political debate. Sure, it's easy to do, but honestly, sometimes things are just things. The pros and cons of solar power and electric vehicles can and should be weighed solely on their merits, and in my opinion that is exactly what the scientific community does. Of course politics will enter the debate when it comes to funding, but the people doing honest research into these issues are generally doing so with a non-partisan attitude, as they should. Maybe, as a non American, I see these things on a more global scale? I'm not sure, all I can say is that I look at big issues from a global/human perspective, and I always have.

I think that's what you were getting at. As a Canadian, that's how I feel anyway.

[Herb]

"The pros and cons of solar power and electric vehicles can and should be weighed solely on their merits, and in my opinion that is exactly what the scientific community does."

No, those things are not weighed on their merits. It is about control. Solar, wind and EVs are NOT scientifically or economically viable and the government pushing them on the populace is ONLY about control of the population. All of them are not viable for the average person to use. If they were really worthwhile there would be no need for the government to require them.

[MattSunn]

I know from being around the block a few times that Americans are very centralized in their thinking. However pointing this out normally meets with resistance. So rather than TELL folk's to look at the bigger picture, I thought maybe a different approach was called for. So here's a few examples to ponder;

Solar and wind power
EV's
COVID

Now what do all three of those things have in common ?
If you thought it a political agenda for the democratic party and politicians, your CORRECT, BUT you are also NOT seeing the bigger picture.

ALL three of those things are happening GLOBALLY, not just in the USA, so clearly it has to be something besides the democratic party driving the agenda for these things.
Sure the US has a great deal of influence globally, but the push for alternative energy and EV's began in Europe LONG before ole Slow Joe came to office, or Obama for that matter.

So in conclusion, it might be of benefit to consider the bigger picture, or really the global one rather than resorting to the fall back position that your government is trying to control you. It's far more likely that it's driven by the global economy.

T, I'm always amazed at how so many people, at least online, want to make almost any subject a political debate. Sure, it's easy to do, but honestly, sometimes things are just things. The pros and cons of solar power and electric vehicles can and should be weighed solely on their merits, and in my opinion that is exactly what the scientific community does. Of course politics will enter the debate when it comes to funding, but the people doing honest research into these issues are generally doing so with a non-partisan attitude, as they should. Maybe, as a non American, I see these things on a more global scale? I'm not sure, all I can say is that I look at big issues from a global/human perspective, and I always have.

I think that's what you were getting at. As a Canadian, that's how I feel anyway.

So much here to discuss, I don't know where to start.