oh golly that’s a hard one! What shall we do, burn everything so we can see how hot it gets, or deploy alternative energy as fast as possible, conserve, use all the “wedges” of “mitigation”?
Destroy or change? Destroy? Change? How can anyone decide?
Oh by the way WW II must have been a myth. It can’t be that we stopped building cars and many other things, started producing other things instead, conserved like mad, had a gigantic government hiring (aka spending!) program, and this actually made our economy the strongest in the world. that’s not possible. Those actions would have destroyed the economy, surely.
Constructive comments that move the discussion on are always welcome, no matter what line of argumentation they take. Comments that add nothing interesting or which try to derail the ongoing discussion are ruthlessly purged. In doing this, we are not worrying about fairness, balance, etc. All we care about is constructive engagement. Comments from nonmembers must be explicitly approved, while comments from members may on occasion be demoted. Comments which are rejected or demoted, or where part of the article is edited, will be visible in full here
Registered users can login to bypass comment moderation
oh golly that’s a hard one! What shall we do, burn everything so we can see how hot it gets, or deploy alternative energy as fast as possible, conserve, use all the “wedges” of “mitigation”?
Destroy or change? Destroy? Change? How can anyone decide?
Oh by the way WW II must have been a myth. It can’t be that we stopped building cars and many other things, started producing other things instead, conserved like mad, had a gigantic government hiring (aka spending!) program, and this actually made our economy the strongest in the world. that’s not possible. Those actions would have destroyed the economy, surely.
This trip down memory lane should give us all furiously to think:
Taking another look. This is terrific!