Planet will boil over if living standards raised to American levels.

[Pliny]

Well, If anything the President has proven himself not to be a deep thinker.

He makes a statement that "If everyone in the world owned a car and lived in a mansion the planet will boil over."
What he says is not untrue and if you imagine it. "Wow! He's right!"

Of course, that is what is supposed to happen. We're supposed to think we all need to lower our expectations - excpet him and Al Gore!


First of all, that is not a scenario that is about to happen and second of all, all things do not remain constant. If we wished to do that it would take several centuries and I.m certain the error of our ways would be known long before the planet boils over. We can make progress in raising the standard of living of those that impoverished over time and make adjustments as we go.

Am I just being inflammatory?

[jacee]

If we wished to do that it would take several centuries and I.m certain the error of our ways would be known long before the planet boils over.

Well we're in century 2 and 'the error of our ways' has been pointed out for half a century now.

Obama's saying we KNOW our current lifestyles dependent on fossil fuels are not sustainable as we KNOW we will destroy the earth and ourselves.

[waldo]

We're supposed to think we all need to lower our expectations - excpet him and Al Gore!

Am I just being inflammatory?

you're just being you, Pliny! Perhaps you should put up the actual quote:

We're going to all have to work together to find ways in which collectively, we reduce carbon but we make sure that there's some differentiation so that countries that are very wealthy are expected to do more, and countries that are still developing, obviously they shouldn't be resigned to poverty simply because the West and Europe and America got there first. That wouldn't be fair. But everybody is going to have to do something. Everybody is going to have to make some important choices here. And I expect that it's going to be your generation that helps lead this, because if we don't, it's going to be your generation that suffers the most.

Ultimately, if you think about all the youth that everybody has mentioned here in Africa, if everybody is raising living standards to the point where everybody has got a car and everybody has got air conditioning, and everybody has got a big house, well, the planet will boil over -- unless we find new ways of producing energy.

you're reading "(most) everyone must lower expectations" in that quote extract - really? About your referenced 'deep thinking'... how deep are you, Pliny... if you need to purposely manufacture your premise? Actually, I'm surprised that your libertarian bent didn't come slamming down, hard, on the "socialism" Obama espouses in those statements!

.

[Shady]

Well, If anything the President has proven himself not to be a deep thinker.

He makes a statement that "If everyone in the world owned a car and lived in a mansion the planet will boil over."

What he says is not untrue and if you imagine it. "Wow! He's right!"

Of course, that is what is supposed to happen. We're supposed to think we all need to lower our expectations - excpet him and Al Gore!

First of all, that is not a scenario that is about to happen and second of all, all things do not remain constant. If we wished to do that it would take several centuries and I.m certain the error of our ways would be known long before the planet boils over. We can make progress in raising the standard of living of those that impoverished over time and make adjustments as we go.

Am I just being inflammatory?

I'll be glad when he's finally out of office. What a colossal failure. Of course, it's ok for him to live in a mansion, and own a car. It's just us serfs that need to comply.

[Pliny]

you're just being you, Pliny! Perhaps you should put up the actual quote:

you're reading "(most) everyone must lower expectations" in that quote extract - really? About your referenced 'deep thinking'... how deep are you, Pliny... if you need to purposely manufacture your premise? Actually, I'm surprised that your libertarian bent didn't come slamming down, hard, on the "socialism" Obama espouses in those statements!

.

The point is, waldo... the painting he creates in everyone's mind is not one of hope and change but scarcity, want, sacrifice and dependency, not a very bright future for youth. You and Obama are pretty tight. You seem to have the same vision for everyone.

Well we're in century 2 and 'the error of our ways' has been pointed out for half a century now.

Obama's saying we KNOW our current lifestyles dependent on fossil fuels are not sustainable as we KNOW we will destroy the earth and ourselves.

Well, golly gosh. You got the picture. Obama is just making it more real for you. What's the solution? Grab Big Brother by the hand? I wonder who will be first to be deemed expendable? (There you go, waldo)

Edited July 4, 2013 by Pliny

[Guest American Woman]

I'll be glad when he's finally out of office. What a colossal failure. Of course, it's ok for him to live in a mansion, and own a car. It's just us serfs that need to comply.

As has been pointed out, that's not what he said at all. What he said is that we need to find new ways of producing energy - and we do.

Edited July 4, 2013 by American Woman

[Michael Hardner]

Also - I'm not sure how everybody living in a mansion with a car represents 'hope and change'. I think those things speak to higher aspirations for humanity than just whitewall tires vs blackwall tires.

[Pliny]

As has been pointed out, that's not what he said at all. What he said is that we need to find new ways of producing energy - and we do.

What does this mean?

But everybody is going to have to do something. Everybody is going to have to make some important choices here.

It does not mean we need to find new sources of energy.

It is very vague but he has something in mind for us, I'm sure. I don't find him specific in whatever he says and I find those kinds of general statements threatening. Of course, the west, while the third world is catching up, is going to have to make the most important "choices".

And of course he is being his usually divisive self by saying:

...we make sure that there's some differentiation so that countries that are very wealthy are expected to do more, and countries that are still developing, obviously they shouldn't be resigned to poverty....

So what is the thing he has in mind that wealthy countries are suppose to do while developing nations are rising out of poverty?

He is not simply saying, "we need to find new ways of producing energy".

Obama's vision is entirely the redistribution of wealth. It comes through in most of what he says, couched in generalities and vague platitudes. Once in awhile, in a candid moment, he lets slip a direct statement - that we need to redistribute the wealth.

Even waldo noted "the socialism Obama espouses in those statements".

But, of course, all he said was, "we need to find new ways of producing energy." Someone has their head in the sand.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Pliny

[Michael Hardner]

He is not simply saying, "we need to find new ways of producing energy".

Obama's vision is entirely the redistribution of wealth. It comes through in most of what he says, couched in generalities and vague platitudes. Once in awhile, in a candid moment, he lets slip a direct statement - that we need to redistribute the wealth.

Even waldo noted "the socialism Obama espouses in those statements".

But, of course, all he said was, "we need to find new ways of producing energy." Someone has their head in the sand.

This comes down the 'coded messages' meme. It's been used before, in saying that Republicans in the South make coded anti-African American messages. So, if it's good for the Dem goose it's good for the Repub gander right ?

[waldo]

Even waldo noted "the socialism Obama espouses in those statements".

But, of course, all he said was, "we need to find new ways of producing energy." Someone has their head in the sand.

yes, Pliny - those statements. The full statements I quoted. Not your isolated, cherry-picked, out of context, skewed, narrow-minded, myopic, single line statement that you're trying, ever so hard, to squeeze your wealth distribution boogeyman out of!

[Pliny]

yes, Pliny - those statements. The full statements I quoted. Not your isolated, cherry-picked, out of context, skewed, narrow-minded, myopic, single line statement that you're trying, ever so hard, to squeeze your wealth distribution boogeyman out of!

The idiocy of the statement that "everyone having their own car and mansion will make the planet boil over" is what I was pointing out. Contrary to what you think, he did say that. Whether in context or out of context, its an idiotic demagogic statement.

Wealth redistribution seems the aim from the full statements you quoted.

[Pliny]

This comes down the 'coded messages' meme. It's been used before, in saying that Republicans in the South make coded anti-African American messages. So, if it's good for the Dem goose it's good for the Repub gander right ?

Politicians of all stripes have been deceitful or at best not quite forthright in what they say. I believe that Obama wishes to make everything "fair" and "equal". He is quite straightforward about that but he is not quite forthright about how he will achieve it. de Tocqueville mentions that despotism can be reduced down to the single principle that "the only condition one needs in order to reach a centralized public power in a democratic society is to love equality or to make men believe you do."

Edited July 5, 2013 by Pliny

[Michael Hardner]

de Tocqueville mentions that despotism can be reduced down to the single principle that "the only condition one needs in order to reach a centralized public power in a democratic society is to love equality or to make men believe you do."

There are counter examples to that. People will accept extremes when faced with extreme circumstances.

I try to dissuade people from reading between the lines, and furthermore from trying to discuss it on here because it doesn't foster a good discussion IMO. That's not to say that it's against the rules or something, but how can somebody discuss "what Obama REALLY MEANS" on MapleLeafWeb authoritatively, assuming they are not Obama ?

[waldo]

The idiocy of the statement that "everyone having their own car and mansion will make the planet boil over" is what I was pointing out. Contrary to what you think, he did say that. Whether in context or out of context, its an idiotic demagogic statement.

Wealth redistribution seems the aim from the full statements you quoted.

Pliny... you took the boil reference literally? Oh my! It's a metaphor... say, like... "drowning in paperwork"!

in any case, your wealth distribution boogeyman is nothing more than Obama speaking to the realities of accountability for the historical accumulation of atmospheric CO₂... as Obama says, the "West and Europe and America"!

[Shady]

As has been pointed out, that's not what he said at all. What he said is that we need to find new ways of producing energy - and we do.

The best new energy production to bridge the gap between better technology is natural gas. It's abundant and much cleaner than oil. But it's a fossil fuel, so Obama doesn't like that.

[waldo]

The best new energy production to bridge the gap between better technology is natural gas. It's abundant and much cleaner than oil. But it's a fossil fuel, so Obama doesn't like that.

gas... America's natural gas... it's a fracking bridge to nowhere Shady!

[bush_cheney2004]

Natural gas has completely changed the energy landscape, forcing "renewables" to face closer economic scrutiny. Sorry warmies and alarmists.

[waldo]

Natural gas has completely changed the energy landscape, forcing "renewables" to face closer economic scrutiny. Sorry warmies and alarmists.

I already provided suggestion/support that speaks to your (claimed) country's days of low gas prices are coming to a quick end... most analysis says another couple of years, at best.

[bush_cheney2004]

I already provided suggestion/support that speaks to your (claimed) country's days of low gas prices are coming to a quick end... most analysis says another couple of years, at best.

So what.....warmies have been very wrong so far...no reason to start believing them now.

[waldo]

no - sorry, the analysis is independent... supply and demand, you know. Of course, it couples with the other theme discussed in recent MLW threads - the rapidly diminishing rate of extraction from peak delivering shale wells... forcing companies to extend their reach to more remote inaccessible fields/wells and to additional costs relative to extended drilling depths/lengths.

of course, you tried (and failed) to trump up some degree of EU concern over the disparity in gas pricing relative to current U.S. pricing. In line with this analysis showing the short-term nature of U.S. low shale gas prices, the EU opted not to directly act to counter... why would they bother given the short-term pricing gap, hey?

[bush_cheney2004]

... why would they bother given the short-term pricing gap, hey?

Because they can buy even cheaper fossil fuels from the U.S., like COAL....LOL!

[waldo]

Because they can buy even cheaper fossil fuels from the U.S., like COAL....LOL!

exactly the point I highlighted to you... that BigCoal was dumping coal on Europe at significantly reduced prices given it has apparently run into some difficultly in the U.S. - go figure! Of course, this EU dumping is also being described as 'short-term'. You should really try to keep up, hey?

Edited July 5, 2013 by waldo

[bush_cheney2004]

exactly the point I highlighted to you...

Sorry....I don't get any useful information from you....just more links to existing American data.

[waldo]

Sorry....I don't get any useful information from you....just more links to existing American data.

say what? You're saying American data is not useful information??? Oh my! In any case, the data/information in question actually originated from the EU - story to steal your thunder!

[bush_cheney2004]

say what? You're saying American data is not useful information??? Oh my! In any case, the data/information in question actually originated from the EU - story to steal your thunder!

Does this mean you have finally reconciled the dichotomy of using so much climate change research and data from a "denier nation" ? I look forward to this EU "pivot" as the basis for more satire and mocking of FAILED policies across the pond.