Which would be a generally good idea if 99% of the country didn't require a car to do anything.
post
Again a reference to communism, when the price increase is a direct result of unregulated capitalism.
The fact that you associate rationing to communism speaks for itself.
I don't have problem with just communism itself, but so far the Marxist-Leninist version is the one that was implemented around the world and unfortunately it comes with totalitarianism and heavy corruption, which delivers the opposite of what it promised.
The reference is literally in the tweet, Newsom calls trump "Chairman Donald" which should be a fairly obvious dogwhistle.
The best deals, the BIGGEST and BESTEST. Fucking cuck can't even negotiate himself out of an easy one. This is the wet paper bag training course, and he's flunking it magnificently.
I agree but I think he will do the Republican thing and weasel out of it. The whole thing will collapse just as Democrats are elected and left to fix the mess. Then the media will happily pivot to blaming Dems on not fixing the mess fast enough. It's just too predictable at this point.
Russia US doesn’t pay out for dead soldiers.
Russia US rations gas.
Russia US is down to the dregs of their munitions.
Russia US tells lies about victory in war.
Russia US targets civillian infrastructure.
On and on. Trump is just another shitty dictator.
Next on the list will be beating the shit out of people at the polls and jailing them for voting opposition, and I’m sure there’s more I’m missing.
All that whining when gas still costs nothing in US.
Yes, but Americans are spoiled and think gas should actually be $1/gallon. If it wasn't for the damn evil regulations and climate crap we would have cheap gas! Other countries just aren't doing capitalism as good as we are that's why we deserve the cheapest gas! I'm not defending it, I'm just pointing out my perspective when people complain to me about gas prices. I don't drive daily only on long trips so I'm disconnected from the prices usually.
Gas prices? Skill issue, just don't buy it. I haven't bought any in years.
If you buy food, you buy diesel. It's what's in the tractors and delivery trucks.
This is why it's literally impossible for an American to live a two tonne CO2 lifestyle. Emissions are imbedded in the supply chains and government.
How much of that food emissions is from beef though? Like even if you insist on still eating meat if you were to change to pork/chicken it would reduce emissions a lot.
Although might be right for Americans, they have 3x what we do here per capita. Should be easier for me if I just need to do around half of what the average person does to get under 2. So heat pump, eat minimal meat with plenty of grains and veg instead, cycle to work, probably already most of the way there.
Everything regarding Agriculture (not just in the US, look at how much of the russian harvest is just rotting on the fields this year because of the lack of fuel) is heavily dependent mostly on diesel fuel. All those large machines use lots of fuel, and they are used in every step - preparing the ground, fertilizing, planting and harvesting. The way the US is doing things, transportation also uses fuel for giant fleets of trucks for most of the distance - transportation by train exists, but suffers from decades of neglect and having to compete with subsidized fuel prices. If americans had to pay for fuel without externalizing costs, i'm sure that the train network would suddenly have enough resources to expand and do long overdue maintenance.
Sure, cattle is a huge part of the problem, but the above process is CO2-heavy even in areas where it would not have to be.
Do you have a source for this?
I find that everything related to meat and fish production produces 13.78% of global emissions excluding transport ([wikipedia] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas_emissions_from_agriculture?wprov=sfti1)) or 53% of all agricultural emission, while the whole supply chain is 18% of agricultural emissions, thus 4.6% of total.
So meat production is by far the driver of agricultural emission, even if obviously the whole chain could become cleaner.
Additionally, all freight transport accounts for 30% of transport emissions, so a total of 6% of global emissions. So banning all camions would achieve half of what vegetarianism would achieve.
As i said, cattle is a huge part of the problem - i fully agree with you on that point. But the emissions are only one part of the equation: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_agriculture. The environmental effects of agriculture go much farther than their emissions, in many areas actively hindering reuptake of CO2 (or destroying CO2 binding capacity outright), or causing greenhouse gases to be emitted as a result of their actions (By heavily damaging / killing functioning ecosystems). These effects go much farther than anything that is discussed in the "official" count, and they don't disappear by becoming vegetarian/vegan. The fuel addiction of our current agricultural practices only makes everything a lot worse.
Edit: I just checked - land use is somewhat counted into the stats you posted, but things like damage to ecosystems by pesticides, plastic use and damaging waterways because fertilizer runoff i can't see anywhere.
Little is from beef. Beef, while the worst for emissions per calorie, is a tiny part of the overall food chain. Grains dominate.
You will get closer, but I suspect your nation is simply too wealthy to hit the target. The UK is 2.25x higher than two tonnes per capita.
It might be achievable if you cycle, never step foot on an aircraft, eat a local vegetarian diet, live in a small space heated with a heat pump, and buy solely used durable products. Again, there's too much carbon in the supply chain and government services like road maintenance
Of course, you are miles ahead of the US.
Beef is like 40x the emissions of grain per kcal. Grains are also a lot of the overall value because they are uses as animal feed. Drop the need for animal feed and you significantly drop the need for grains.
Nice privilege. A lot of the rest of us don't have a choice.
Why is this being downvoted, it's correct. The way shit is set up right now a lot of people do not have a choice but to drive, and not just in the US. Oil has been purposefully made a hard dependence.
We're all on the same team bud. At least you're here in this community hoping one day to be free from the bondage of gasoline! Good luck on your journey!
Nice privilege
Oh yeah, so privileged to have grown up unable to afford to learn to drive a car
Not owning a car in a suburb of Bumfuckville, USA is a much bigger disadvantage than not owning a car in NYC, Tokyo, or Hanoi.
Yes, it is a privilege. I grew up in a rural area (about 60 miles away from the nearest city) with no access to public transportation or services. It would take FOUR HOURS to walk to my nearest friend's house. I also grew up dirt poor and couldn't afford driving school. So, I had to convince friends to show me how to drive, or get friends' parent to show me, and eventually during my senior year, I convinced one of my teachers to let me take the behind the wheel test in his car. All of this because without a license where I grew up, you're never going ANYWHERE. No job, no friends, no mobility to get out of a shitty rural town. So yes, to not have had to do all of that, that is indeed privilege
Wait, isn't he supposed to be on the team that's trying to stop climate change?
Or does he think it's safe to let his backroom deal persona out into the public now?
Yeah Newsom is an interesting character. Sometimes I don't know what he really stands for. He's been playing the "hate on Trump regarding everything" game for a while though so this is a continuation of that?
Sounds like an opportunist. Someone who just says what he needs to get his way, but has no guiding principles.
I can see how a message like this would sound coming from someone like Bernie Sanders, ie. high prices are squeezing regular people while oil companies bag the profit. Even if it's good for people to drive less from a climate perspective, it has to be done in a way that doesn't harm real people. But this guy just sounds like he's angling for political points with no concern for real issues. Would make a terrible president, so I guess he has high chances to become the Democratic nominee.
Sometimes I don’t know what he really stands for.
He’s like the head of the wing of the Democrats who see MAGA’s cult of personality around Trump and think “man, I wish we had that.”
Liberals won't stop climate change, but some may want to look like they're trying.
gas rationing, even when you're trying to reduce gas usage, drives up prices for everything
if you were alive in the 70s, those words strike fear
Honestly gas rationing is a good thing, fuck oil, fuck burning into climate change. Gavin is not on the left but kinda conservative since he wants to drive gas prices down.
Will this finally convince MAGAts that they fucked up?... nah they still think they are winning.
Well it's a good thing that every kid in the US is back in school, riding diesel buses to get there.
And it's harvest season.
No problem, drive less.
top 50 comments