The real reason for climate change alarmism is to destroy Capitalism

[Army Guy]

11 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That is incorrect. A sudden drop in temperature brought down the western Roman Empire.

climate change has nothing to do with politics.

In Canada it has everything to do with politics.. It does not matter if it is real or not...Canadians are not worried about climate change... if they were why would they not be massive protests about the liberal policies..., How many time shave we heard the Conservatives don't have a plan, atleast the liberals have a plan...which indicates to me they are satisfied with the liberal plan...your going to give we 1800.00, then at the end of the year I'm going to give it all back to you...If your neighbor ask you that you think he was crazy... but here in Canada thats a climate policy sir...

[Moonlight Graham]

The OP is full of hot air.

Edited August 14, 2023 by Moonlight Graham

[CdnFox]

44 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The OP is full of hot air.

It took me a second to get that pun   well played.   

[Michael Hardner]

On 8/11/2023 at 11:52 AM, Zeitgeist said:

This is a distraction.  The term conspiracy theory is usually the term used to dismiss criticism.  “Alt” or “far right” is another dismissive term.  Same goes for “misinformation.”

No, it's used to dismiss preposterous ideas.  

[Michael Hardner]

On 8/11/2023 at 5:24 PM, CdnFox said:

Communism provides the elites with FAR more power than capitalism does

So you believe that the wealthy and powerful now want communism?

[Zeitgeist]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, it's used to dismiss preposterous ideas.  

Once you use one of those terms, you have indicated implicitly that you’re unwilling or unable to discuss the topic.  It’s lazy.  Conspiracies are sometimes real or there’s at least some truth in some of them, so discuss what is or isn’t true.  “The media in Canada is generally left wing and influenced by government” is demonstrably true.  “The Canadian government is too beholden to unaccountable international organizations like the WEF” is also quite evident.  You don’t like these observations and dismiss them as “conspiracy theories” because you’re a radical left loonie.  See what I did there?  Calling someone a radical left loonie is another way of dismissing someone (apt as the description may seem).

Edited August 14, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

So you believe that the wealthy and powerful now want communism?

You don't? What do you need? A bat across your head?

Tax levels are insane and are trampling on the economy.

Government is now trampling on the base of the global economy.

Inflation is rampant. 

Bureaucracies are growing and gaining more and more control.

Leaders now lie openly with impunity.

Sounds like the soviet union.

Edited August 14, 2023 by Nationalist

[Zeitgeist]

I wouldn’t call it communism exactly, more like subsistence living for the majority after the middle class is gutted through regulation, taxation, and higher living costs to pay for the deluded vision of how the elites think “the people” should live.  The elites of course don’t have to live like everyone else because they’re doing important work to save us all.  They’ll continue to need to fly private jets to obscenely luxurious resorts for conferences where they can pat each other on the back for how they’re improving the world.

They feel pretty great about the fact that people can’t afford to operate vehicles or buy homes anymore and have to share small apartments and take transit long distances, because they’re saving the planet.  Why are you so ungrateful?

Edited August 14, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

Once you use one of those terms, you have indicated implicitly that you’re unwilling or unable to discuss the topic.  It’s lazy.  Conspiracies are sometimes real or there’s at least some truth in some of them, so discuss what is or isn’t true.  “The media in Canada is generally left wing and influenced by government” is demonstrably true.  “The Canadian government is too beholden to unaccountable international organizations like the WEF” is also quite evident.  You don’t like these observations and dismiss them as “conspiracy theories” because you’re a radical left loonie.  See what I did there?  Calling someone a radical left loonie is another way of dismissing someone (apt as the description may seem).

Calling me a loonie is a conspiracy theory.

 

I don't have to justify the hours I have spent on here talking to the wall that is the conspiracy theory set.

Poilievre, Harper and so on praised the WEF in the past... It's pretty clear that PP is being disingenuous at best when he exploits this conspiracy.

It's already been debunked on here, and so I am not obliged to give it respect.  It's ridiculous.

As for accusing me of being a leftist, I haven't seen a cogent argument on that.

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

You don't? What do you need? A bat across your head?

Tax levels are insane and are trampling on the economy.

Government is now trampling on the base of the global economy.

Inflation is rampant. 

Bureaucracies are growing and gaining more and more control.

Leaders now lie openly with impunity.

Sounds like the soviet union.

So... You want to lead a peaceful revolt against the rich and powerful?

 

What does this make you then.  Sounds like the Communist Manifesto to me.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Calling me a loonie is a conspiracy theory.

 

I don't have to justify the hours I have spent on here talking to the wall that is the conspiracy theory set.

Poilievre, Harper and so on praised the WEF in the past... It's pretty clear that PP is being disingenuous at best when he exploits this conspiracy.

It's already been debunked on here, and so I am not obliged to give it respect.  It's ridiculous.

As for accusing me of being a leftist, I haven't seen a cogent argument on that.

So... You want to lead a peaceful revolt against the rich and powerful?

 

What does this make you then.  Sounds like the Communist Manifesto to me.

What I want...is for this socialist BS to end.

The climate panic that has our government killing the economy.

The free hand-outs and the printing of money.

The squashing of free speech and thought.

And, of course, an end to the reign of fcking Pixie-Dust.!

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

So you believe that the wealthy and powerful now want communism?

Sure,  a number of them do.  Well - something sort of similar to it anyway, various forms of market socialism and such.   Who are the richest men in the world? They tend to be part of heavily socialistic or communistic countries.  Putin for example, MANY of his "Friends",  the chinese upper gov't echelon, the saudi princes, etc etc.

They enjoy the power more than they enjoy the money - and socialism and totalitarianism is real power.

[Moonlight Graham]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

So you believe that the wealthy and powerful now want communism?

Corporations don't want communism, nor most politicians.  Liberal politicians do like population control though, and steering society in their vision.

They like social programs, a large beaurocracy, propaganda, mass surveillance etc.  Individual liberties are counter to this.

There's a big difference between being herded like sheep and being left alone.

[Moonbox]

59 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure,  a number of them do.  Well - something sort of similar to it anyway, various forms of market socialism and such.   Who are the richest men in the world? They tend to be part of heavily socialistic or communistic countries.  Putin for example, MANY of his "Friends",  the chinese upper gov't echelon, the saudi princes, etc etc.T

Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Berny Arnault, Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos etc are the richest men in the world.  

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Berny Arnault, Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos etc are the richest men in the world.  

Nope.  Those are only the ones who report their net worth (and even that is questionable).

Putin for example doesn't - he's listed as having a couple of cars and owning an apartment and earning 140 k a  year american. Same with some of the chinese oligarchs etc.

 

But its' believed he's actually worth 200 billion - far far and above elon musk at 180 billion

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/28/business/vladimir-putin-wealth-sanctions/index.html

And when you start doing a little research - you realize that's the case for a LOT of the 'wealthy' in the world and most control their wealth through the gov't.  And-or owe their success to connections to the gov't.

Socialism pays for the people at the top  

 

[Michael Hardner]

40 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

1.  Liberal politicians do like population control though, and steering society in their vision.

2. There's a big difference between being herded like sheep and being left alone.

1. Ye to the second one, for all politicians though.  Population control?  Why do they have such high immigration?

2. None of them want to leave us alone.  Communism means that industry isn't in privacy hands.

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Nope.  Those are only the ones who report their net worth (and even that is questionable).

It's even more questionable to assess the net-worth of dictators in police states, on account of the blurred distinction between the dictator's assets and the state's.

Either way, I think talking about communism is pretty silly in this context.    

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

And when you start doing a little research - you realize that's the case for a LOT of the 'wealthy' in the world and most control their wealth through the gov't.  And-or owe their success to connections to the gov't.

Socialism pays for the people at the top.

And better transparency wouldn't change a thing cuz lefties like it when billionaires and governments control everything.

1 minute ago, Moonbox said:

It's even more questionable to assess the net-worth of dictators in police states, on account of the blurred distinction between the dictator's assets and the state's.

We might have a better handle on knowing this if we had a better handle on how much money is laundered on dictators behalf thru democratic states.

[Moonbox]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

We might have a better handle on knowing this if we had a better handle on how much money is laundered on dictators behalf thru democratic states.

Especially true in Canada.  Good thing we gutted the CRA years ago.  ?

[eyeball]

9 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Especially true in Canada.  Good thing we gutted the CRA years ago.  ?

I'm being audited as we speak for medical expense claims for a stair lift and access ramp.

You'd think all the receipts and such indicating hospitalizations and other equipment the last few returns would suggest why we might need these things.

[eyeball]

14 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Especially true in Canada.  Good thing we gutted the CRA years ago.  ?

I wonder how many lobbyists it took to get the government on side with that?

[Moonbox]

11 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I wonder how many lobbyists it took to get the government on side with that?

Is that a rhetorical question?  The answer is zero.  ?

[CdnFox]

35 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

It's even more questionable to assess the net-worth of dictators in police states, on account of the blurred distinction between the dictator's assets and the state's.

Sure.  And lets be honest - the billionares we DO know about like Bezoz probably in many cases manage to hide a good hunk of their wealth - and some like trump have a significantly over-inflated wealth.

But you take the estimates etc and do your best.  And as near as can be determined the wealthiest people by and large tend to be a result of abuse of socialistic gov'ts or corruption within those gov'ts. Socialism pays big at the top.

 

Quote

Either way, I think talking about communism is pretty silly in this context.    

Well you kinda brought it up

But i think you'll find that people who have lots of money also tend to be people that love power.  And power comes from control.  The idea of socailstic authortarian gov'ts appeals to these people.  Look at trudeau.

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Well you kinda brought it up

Wasn't me.  ?

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

But i think you'll find that people who have lots of money also tend to be people that love power.  And power comes from control.  The idea of socailstic authortarian gov'ts appeals to these people.  Look at trudeau.

Power comes in different forms and from different places.  Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are quite happy, I imagine, with how the capitalist system is working.  

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Wasn't me.  ?

 

You're right. it was Michael  Sorry - it had been a bit and i forgot it wasn't you who responded initially.

Quote

Power comes in different forms and from different places.  Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk are quite happy, I imagine, with how the capitalist system is working.  

I don't know that either are power maniacs.  (well - there's room for jokes about elon and "power" of course but i'll let it slide )

But money isn't enough for people who love real power.  Some address it differnetly, they may try to 'buy themselves  a few politicians" within a democratic system or the like, but many do like the idea of having control over the population. It's as simple as that.

It's the closest thing Michael comes to sharing something with the ultra rich  

[Moonlight Graham]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ye to the second one, for all politicians though.  Population control?  Why do they have such high immigration?

2. None of them want to leave us alone.  Communism means that industry isn't in privacy hands.

1.  I assume for tax revenue and votes.

2. The Liberal Party tried to access the bank account info of hundreds of thousands of random Canadians without their consent "to study spending habits".  They brought back the legally mandatory long-form census after the Harper gov killed it.  They tracked every Canadian via their cell phone location data during COVID without their knowledge or consent.  They mandated COVID vaccines for federal employees.

You probably have no issue with any of those things, unless I'm mistaken?  Population control over civil liberties.

There is no equivalency with the CPC from what I remember.  What I observed with Harper was that he wanted a lot of political control within his own party, similar to Trudeau, and did things like unethical proroguing of Parliament to silence criticism from political opponents.  For these reasons, he needed to go.  But in terms of control of the general population I don't see an equivalency.  The CPC were criticized for reducing the size of the federal public service, and reducing taxes like GST.  Their leaders also aren't BFF's with communist dictators.