Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-27-2019, 05:33 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,378

Will having children solve climate change?


Fifty-three Republican Senators voted unanimously against holding hearings on climate change. Let's listen in as the key Senator explains his reasons:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Lee (R-Utah)

As the Senate voted against a measure sponsored by Ms Ocasio-Cortez and others that sought to push the US towards the use of renewable energy, Republican Mike Lee said their plan – the so-called Green New Deal – was “ridiculous”.

During a speech that he illustrated with pictures and posters of dinosaurs, cartoon characters, babies and Aquaman, the senator from Utah claimed he was treating Ms Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal “with the seriousness it deserves”.

“Unfortunately, fear is unavoidable when debating the substance of the resolution before this body today – that is climate change, socialism, and the Green New Deal,” Mr Lee said.
...
Mr Lee, a staunch conservative, also tweeted a photograph of his presentation. “The solution to climate change is not this unserious resolution, but the serious business of human flourishing – the solution to so many of our problems, at all times and in all places: fall in love, get married, and have some kids,” he wrote.
Since this is in GD, I guess I'm obligated to start the debate. I think Lee and the other Gopsters are wrong — why will having kids stop climate change? — but don't understand his argument well enough to argue in detail.

There are Republican Dopers. Can any help flesh out Lee's argument?
  #2  
Old 03-27-2019, 05:39 AM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,030
Non-Republican WAG: He has no idea what he's talking about, so he's just pulling the old Republican standby "family values" talking point out of his ass.

In fact, what will help reduce our carbon footprint is fewer people having kids, especially those of us in developed countries with extravagant resource use.
  #3  
Old 03-27-2019, 05:47 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,338
Senator Mike Lee is a reminder that democratic means are utterly insufficient to the scope of the problem we're faced with. Look at this shit. Seriously - look at this shit! He's not even trying to form a coherent response to what amounts to a world-defining problem. This is as if a congressman had responded to Russia aiming nukes at the US with, "Eh, just have more kids, there's no real problem here, your proposal for a disarmament treaty is totally unserious." It speaks poorly to Mike Lee's constituents that he holds office, and it speaks poorly to congress as a whole that he wasn't laughed and/or bodily thrown out of the room. This isn't a serious argument. He's not making a serious argument. The point is not for it to be a serious argument. He's laughing in the face of anyone who gives a damn about the single most pressing issue facing humanity. He is spitting in the faces of our children. Do you have a child under the age of, say, 30? He is spitting in that child's face and laughing. Treat it as such.

What we are facing amounts to nothing less than gross institutionalized violence. Even if we get our shit together, our inaction to date will lead to suffering beyond measure. If we don't get our shit together now, it's only going to get worse. The clock is fucking ticking, and these dirtbags cannot and will not do anything about it. Direct action - taking whatever steps necessary, legal or not, to remove people like Mike Lee, James Inhofe, and Mitch McConnell from positions of power - is necessary. I wish I knew how to pursue such an agenda in a useful manner. These people are aiding and abetting making the world uninhabitable for our children. They cannot be allowed to continue, and as has been shown over the past two decades, just expecting the American people to wake up and vote them out isn't fucking good enough.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 03-27-2019 at 05:51 AM.
  #4  
Old 03-27-2019, 05:58 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,338
Let me be clear.

In a sane world, the response following a presentation like Mike Lee's would be, in order:

- Shocked silence
- Angry shouting
- Mike Lee running from the room bleeding chased by an angry mob, because anyone in the caucus under the age of 40 jumped his fat, ugly, rich, oil-money-bloated ass and started beating the shit out of him
- An immediate and successful campaign to recall him and replace him with a congressperson who isn't scientifically illiterate and horribly corrupt

Now, granted, we don't live in a sane world, and Mike Lee is far from the worst offender. But the blase way that even the people who otherwise know to take this shit seriously are responding to this goddamn insult is just... What? What?! You're going to sit there and let this asshole just piss on your face like that?

Even if we cannot expect such a response forthcoming from congress, we could at least expect it the next time he goes to a town hall meeting. Make this fucker feel as afraid as the people who will suffer because of his denialism.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 03-27-2019 at 05:59 AM.
  #5  
Old 03-27-2019, 05:59 AM
kanicbird is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 19,462
I sort of agree with the statement. Sort of...

As I do believe in humanity and we are learning to become a species that learns to live in harmony and oneness with the planet, and universe, not in the sense of devolving ourselves, but by going forth with technology and even use terraforming in positive ways instead of the negative way we accidentally discovered via the burning of fossil fuels. But there is more in achieving this...

Loved and well raised children will carry forth that ideal, and that required generations of children raised and refining this harmony of love and acceptance and getting the bigger picture. Even realizing the spirit of Love in the spirit of Mother Earth and other habitable places and places with life.

So he has part of it correct, we need children, but the part he misses is he doesn't want open minded and accepting of others children
  #6  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:35 AM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,691
Sounds like meaningless garbage to me.
  #7  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:40 AM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Senator Mike Lee is a reminder that democratic means are utterly insufficient to the scope of the problem we're faced with. Look at this shit. Seriously - look at this shit! He's not even trying to form a coherent response to what amounts to a world-defining problem. This is as if a congressman had responded to Russia aiming nukes at the US with, "Eh, just have more kids, there's no real problem here, your proposal for a disarmament treaty is totally unserious." It speaks poorly to Mike Lee's constituents that he holds office, and it speaks poorly to congress as a whole that he wasn't laughed and/or bodily thrown out of the room. This isn't a serious argument. He's not making a serious argument. The point is not for it to be a serious argument. He's laughing in the face of anyone who gives a damn about the single most pressing issue facing humanity. He is spitting in the faces of our children. Do you have a child under the age of, say, 30? He is spitting in that child's face and laughing. Treat it as such.

What we are facing amounts to nothing less than gross institutionalized violence. Even if we get our shit together, our inaction to date will lead to suffering beyond measure. If we don't get our shit together now, it's only going to get worse. The clock is fucking ticking, and these dirtbags cannot and will not do anything about it. Direct action - taking whatever steps necessary, legal or not, to remove people like Mike Lee, James Inhofe, and Mitch McConnell from positions of power - is necessary. I wish I knew how to pursue such an agenda in a useful manner. These people are aiding and abetting making the world uninhabitable for our children. They cannot be allowed to continue, and as has been shown over the past two decades, just expecting the American people to wake up and vote them out isn't fucking good enough.
I don’t think direct advocation of violence is the proper response to an aqua man drawing.
  #8  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:50 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
I don’t think direct advocation of violence is the proper response to an aqua man drawing.
How about to encouraging, abetting, and enabling crimes against humanity?
  #9  
Old 03-27-2019, 07:24 AM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 28,359
The problem is not that the Abrahamic God told his follower to "be fruitful and multiply" and fill the Earth, the problem is that he failed to tell them what to do after they had accomplished that goal.

Guys, we were fruitful and multiplied. Now we need to do something before we become a bipedal locust swarm.
  #10  
Old 03-27-2019, 07:59 AM
PoppaSan's Avatar
PoppaSan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West shore Lake Michigan
Posts: 2,277
Sheesh, do I have to do all the thinking around here? You failed to connect the dots. He said " fall in love, get married, and have some kids," The GND is being pushed by a presumably fertile female on the floor of Congress, where she happens to be employed. Not from where she and her swollen with child belly should be cooking dinner for her ol' man and their gaggle of youngsters.
__________________
This place is beginning to feel like a tin foil hat convention.
  #11  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:15 AM
Kobal2's Avatar
Kobal2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 17,846
For the record, I tried watching Lee's argument to the end but I couldn't - because it was ridiculous and stupid, yes ; but mostly because he was egregiously and deliberately misrepresenting AOC's plan. The fuckwit spent over 10 minutes showing how the US would be worse off if air travel was banned overnight (FTR, I'm being generous about the thesis of the arguments, in that I posit that there was, in fact, a thesis) ; entirely ignoring that the whole POINT of her plan is to replace the majority of (BUT NOT ALL. She happens to be aware Hawai'i exists, you buffoon) air travel with green-friendlier rail.

So that was 10 minutes of solid straw man I'll never get back. The worst part is, I legit think he thought he was being clever and funny. And that's really depressing.

OTOH, good news : AOC is now at Gandhicon 2 and halfway to 3. Progress !
__________________
--- ---
I'm not sure how to respond to this, but that's never stopped me before.

Last edited by Kobal2; 03-27-2019 at 08:18 AM. Reason: formatting
  #12  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:35 AM
wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,850
No. It's a ridiculous argument put forth by a ridiculous side of politics. "Gee, we can't solve climate change now so let's have lots of white, US children and hope some of them can...derp derp."
  #13  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:48 AM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,147
Indirectly, this is definitely true if you view democrats as the saviors of the world. Republicans have 41% more children than democrats do, and 80% of people vote like their parents.

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/...2344929&page=1

The common wisdom (or wish) that Republicans are just going to die out is very specious. You know those MAGA-hatted teens? Those aren't the only ones.
  #14  
Old 03-27-2019, 08:49 AM
Triskadecamus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: I'm coming back, now.
Posts: 7,543
He's campaigning for office in a state where religious doctrine is an element of politics, and it will work.

Tris
____________________
You know how smart the average guy is? Well, half of them are not that smart.
  #15  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:20 AM
l0k1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 211
Babies are probably not the best way to sequester carbon, even if you immediately land fill them.
  #16  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:36 AM
puddleglum's Avatar
puddleglum is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: a van down by the river
Posts: 6,520
There are two ways to fight global warming, sacrifice and technology.

Sacrifice means using less electricity, steel, concrete, meat, gasoline, etc. In order to be effective sacrifice must be world wide. The US emits 15% of global emissions and that is shrinking. Completely eliminating US carbon emissions alone would not be enough to make a dent in global warming.

Technology means using new breakthroughs to use less carbon or reduce existing carbon.
According to the Solow model, more population means more economic growth, and more economic growth means more technology. Countries with higher population have more technology. If the US develops new technology for reducing or eliminating carbon then that can be used around the world to and can have a huge impact on global warming. An example, is the technology of fracking which allows new sources of natural gas to replace coal and thus reduce carbon emissions. It was developed in the US and is being used around the world.
  #17  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:38 AM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triskadecamus View Post
He's campaigning for office in a state where religious doctrine is an element of politics, and it will work.

Tris
____________________
You know how smart the average guy is? Well, half of them are not that smart.
Ah! This explains the meaningless garbagosity of his little dog-and-seahorse show.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #18  
Old 03-27-2019, 10:47 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,320

Moderating


Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Let me be clear.

In a sane world, the response following a presentation like Mike Lee's would be, in order:

- Shocked silence
- Angry shouting
- Mike Lee running from the room bleeding chased by an angry mob, because anyone in the caucus under the age of 40 jumped his fat, ugly, rich, oil-money-bloated ass and started beating the shit out of him
- An immediate and successful campaign to recall him and replace him with a congressperson who isn't scientifically illiterate and horribly corrupt
Avoid any semblance of a call for violence.

[/moderating]
  #19  
Old 03-27-2019, 11:00 AM
Stranger On A Train is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 19,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
Technology means using new breakthroughs to use less carbon or reduce existing carbon.
According to the Solow model, more population means more economic growth, and more economic growth means more technology. Countries with higher population have more technology. If the US develops new technology for reducing or eliminating carbon then that can be used around the world to and can have a huge impact on global warming. An example, is the technology of fracking which allows new sources of natural gas to replace coal and thus reduce carbon emissions. It was developed in the US and is being used around the world.
A nonsensical response which fails to address the question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Tooth View Post
Ah! This explains the meaningless garbagosity of his little dog-and-seahorse show.
Lee’s diatrabe is meaningless even by Mormon standards. At least Joseph Smith had a narrative; Lee’s presentation was as if someone mashed an old copy of Unearthed Arcana into a Thomas Kinkade as his entry into the science fair, which tells you everything you need to know about the GOP response to climate change, e.g. they are determined to ignore it whenever possible, and ridicule it in all ways subtle and otherwise.

You may agree or disagree with the principles set forth in the “Green New Deal” (which, as a resolution with a broad statement of goals hardly qualifies as any kind of policy statement the costs of which can be assessed) but the fact is that the effects of global climate change, along with automation of intellectual labor, aging populations of industrialized nations, and the need to transition away from natural hydrocarbon “fossil” fuels into energy sources that are ultimately sustainable will require radical changes to energy and economic policies. The people on both sides of the aisle arguing that they shouldn’t even consider the ideas of the Green New Deal because they are politically infeasible are ignoring the fact that change will happen whether we prepare for or will it, and nature cares not one wit for ‘rational politics’ or economics. Interestingly, the Department of Defense is going all in on sustainability and renewable energy, not because they’ve turned into tree-hugging hippies but because energy security is necessary for the military to function. It is interesting that such a conservative institution recognizes the reality and gravity of the effects of climate change while “Conservatives” blather on about Reagan in a dragon-jousting contest.

Stranger
  #20  
Old 03-27-2019, 11:01 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 15,796
Yes. Immediately. Well, nine months from now, anyway.
__________________
"It’s not who starts the game, but who finishes it." John Havlicek
  #21  
Old 03-27-2019, 11:58 AM
The Tooth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,691
On the other hand, "Republicans, go fuck yourselves" is a sentiment I can get behind.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #22  
Old 03-27-2019, 01:49 PM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Senator Mike Lee is a reminder that democratic means are utterly insufficient to the scope of the problem we're faced with....
^ Here is the problem. There are a lot of people who can't, wont, don't acknowledge the problem, and therefore can't, wont, don't treat it seriously.
  #23  
Old 03-27-2019, 02:04 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowthx View Post
^ Here is the problem. There are a lot of people who can't, wont, don't acknowledge the problem, and therefore can't, wont, don't treat it seriously.
And those people need to be disempowered. We're out of time to fuck around on this. Mike Lee needs to go. James Inhofe needs to go. And if democratic means are insufficient, we need to find other means.
__________________
The United States is currently running a series of concentration camps at the border. If you support or defend this, you're a monster and we cannot be friends.
  #24  
Old 03-27-2019, 02:11 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 16,802
It's not the having children that will solve the problem, it is the having of American children, because only Americans can solve world problems. That's what Lee was saying.
  #25  
Old 03-27-2019, 02:11 PM
tomndebb is offline
Mod Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N E Ohio
Posts: 40,814

Moderating


Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
Direct action - taking whatever steps necessary, legal or not, to remove people like Mike Lee, James Inhofe, and Mitch McConnell from positions of power - is necessary.
Calling for illegal actions, especially actions of violence, is a violation of the Registration agreement.

This is a Warning to avoid this behavior in the future.

[ /Moderating ]

Last edited by tomndebb; 03-27-2019 at 02:13 PM.
  #26  
Old 03-27-2019, 02:15 PM
wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kitchen View Post
It's not the having children that will solve the problem, it is the having of American children, because only Americans can solve world problems. That's what Lee was saying.
You know he hated having to include some non-white babies in his baby poster.
  #27  
Old 03-27-2019, 02:16 PM
Jasmine's Avatar
Jasmine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,970
Since the average human exhales about 2.3 pounds of carbon dioxide on an average day, which is in the neighborhood of 60,000 pounds in a lifetime. Having kids will only spike the population and make matters worse, not better.
  #28  
Old 03-27-2019, 03:25 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,359
I've never liked the idea of "I care for the environment and there are way too many humans so I'm going to do my part and not have children".

What good are you doing?
  #29  
Old 03-27-2019, 03:32 PM
wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
I've never liked the idea of "I care for the environment and there are way too many humans so I'm going to do my part and not have children".

What good are you doing?
So you believe having lots of children is the best way to solve issues related to climate change? And the more they are from the USA, the better?

How do more US children = a solution to climate change?
  #30  
Old 03-27-2019, 04:02 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
I've never liked the idea of "I care for the environment and there are way too many humans so I'm going to do my part and not have children".

What good are you doing?
Killing off the human species would presumably be good for the planet, and everyone voluntarily choosing not to reproduce is probably the politest way to wipe us all out. Plus in a few years there would be no more small children making noise in movie theaters, so that's a plus.

Of course, the logic fails if it's only the smart people doing it, allowing the idiots to swarm the earth. The part of the earth not underwater anyway.
  #31  
Old 03-27-2019, 04:17 PM
Dr. Crap is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 325
You're going to have so much egg on your face when I've loved my way to a carbon-eating, heat-resistant, amphibious mutant child who I breed relentlessly in a controlled setting over the course of my life.
  #32  
Old 03-27-2019, 04:36 PM
Stranger On A Train is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 19,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Crap View Post
You're going to have so much egg on your face when I've loved my way to a carbon-eating, heat-resistant, amphibious mutant child who I breed relentlessly in a controlled setting over the course of my life.
The secret breeding progam of the LDS Church is finally revealed.

Are Utah voters not upset that their senior senator does not have any better way to represent them than engaging in Shadowrun-themed fantastical storytelling in front of Congress? I don’t mean to shame anyone for their private fantasies and RPG hobbies, but I would think that a senator would have more pressing things to do than geeking out about his personal take on cross-genre Reagan hero worship on the job.

Stranger
  #33  
Old 03-27-2019, 04:43 PM
Kobal2's Avatar
Kobal2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 17,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0k1 View Post
Babies are probably not the best way to sequester carbon, even if you immediately land fill them.

You owe one (1) keyboard, standard, PC, for to use with.
You are also going to Hell, Heck, Hades AND Hel. Wanna carpool ?
__________________
--- ---
I'm not sure how to respond to this, but that's never stopped me before.
  #34  
Old 03-27-2019, 05:25 PM
Lemur866's Avatar
Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 22,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
I've never liked the idea of "I care for the environment and there are way too many humans so I'm going to do my part and not have children".

What good are you doing?
You know what I think? People who don't want kids shouldn't have kids.

I guess your argument is that everyone should start cranking out kids, because maybe one of those kids is going to be a genius who solves climate change, and if people have fewer kids it's less likely that our supergenius savior will be born. The more kids, the better.

Of course we don't wanna spend money on schools or healthcare for these kids, that would be ridiculous socialism. The future supergenius savior of humanity isn't going to need a government school to save us all, Christian homeschooling is a great way to educate the future scientists and engineers America needs.
  #35  
Old 03-27-2019, 05:37 PM
wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur866 View Post
You know what I think? People who don't want kids shouldn't have kids.

I guess your argument is that everyone should start cranking out kids, because maybe one of those kids is going to be a genius who solves climate change, and if people have fewer kids it's less likely that our supergenius savior will be born. The more kids, the better.

Of course we don't wanna spend money on schools or healthcare for these kids, that would be ridiculous socialism. The future supergenius savior of humanity isn't going to need a government school to save us all, Christian homeschooling is a great way to educate the future scientists and engineers America needs.
It sounds almost like Jesus v2.
  #36  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:15 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
... Since this is in GD, I guess I'm obligated to start the debate. I think Lee and the other Gopsters are wrong — why will having kids stop climate change? — but don't understand his argument well enough to argue in detail.

There are Republican Dopers. Can any help flesh out Lee's argument?
I'm a Republican, and one of Senator Lee's constituents. I'll let him flesh out his own argument:

Quote:
...

So let’s be really clear, Mr. President. Climate change is no joke. But the Green New Deal is a joke.

It is the legislative equivalent of Austin Powers’s “Dr. Evil” demanding “sharks with frickin’ lasers on their heads.”

The Green New Deal is not the solution to climate change. It’s not even part of the solution. It’s part of the problem.

The solution to climate change won’t be found in political posturing or virtue signaling like this.

It won’t be found in the federal government at all.

You know where the solution can be found? In churches, wedding chapels, and maternity wards across the country and around the world.

This, Mr. President, is the real solution to climate change: babies.

Climate change is an engineering problem – not social engineering, but the real kind.
It’s a challenge of creativity, ingenuity, and technological invention.

And problems of human imagination are not solved by more laws, but by more humans!

More people mean bigger markets for innovation.

More babies mean more forward-looking adults – the sort we need to tackle long-term, large scale problems.

American babies, in particular, are likely going to be wealthier, better educated, and more conservation-minded than children raised in still-industrializing regions.

As economist Tyler Cowen recently wrote on this very point, “by having more children, you are making your nation more populous – thus boosting its capacity to solve [climate change].”


Finally, Mr. President, children are a mark of the kind of personal, communal, and societal optimism that is the true pre-requisite for meeting national and global challenges together.

The courage needed to solve climate change is nothing compared with the courage needed to start a family.

The true heroes of this story aren’t politicians or social media activists.

They are moms and dads, and the little boys and girls they are, at this moment, putting down for naps… helping with their homework… building tree houses… and teaching how to tie their shoes.

The planet does not need us to “think globally, and act locally” so much as it needs us to think family, and act personally.

The solution to climate change is not this unserious resolution, but the serious business of human flourishing – the solution to so many of our problems, at all times and in all places: fall in love, get married, and have some kids.

I yield the floor.
(emphasis mine)

source: https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/in...5-B621E9BAF878
  #37  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:21 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,558
So the argument is that

1) America doesn't have very many people in it at the moment, so we need to make up the shortage.

2) Once we get have enough americans for some of these people to be smart (two or three hundred americans, minimum), then we will surely listen to these people, and not call their smart ideas jokes.
  #38  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:21 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
The secret breeding progam of the LDS Church is finally revealed. ...
It's not a secret.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
... Are Utah voters not upset that their senior senator does not have any better way to represent them than engaging in Shadowrun-themed fantastical storytelling in front of Congress? I don’t mean to shame anyone for their private fantasies and RPG hobbies, but I would think that a senator would have more pressing things to do than geeking out about his personal take on cross-genre Reagan hero worship on the job.

Stranger
I think his speech was generally well-received by his constituents here (just having listened to some local talk radio and read some commentary on the matter). Conservatives were glad to see him poking fun at the Green New Deal and liberals were upset by it, about what you'd expect. Compared to his Senate colleagues, his approval ratings seem to fall in about the middle of the pack.
  #39  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:22 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
So the argument is that

1) America doesn't have very many people in it at the moment, so we need to make up the shortage.

2) Once we get have enough americans for some of these people to be smart (two or three hundred americans, minimum), then we will surely listen to these people, and not call their smart ideas jokes.
Maybe try watching the video. It can be found at the link I posted previously.
  #40  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:24 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
It's not a secret.
The secret part is that they're* breeding so much in the hopes of making mutants, rather than to fill our their membership rolls as is usually assumed.






*and "they" includes my parents, so I guess that makes me a mutant.
  #41  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:25 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Maybe try watching the video. It can be found at the link I posted previously.
I generally don't watch videos. Do you believe that watching the video would change my opinion about the argument that America currently has too few people to produce smart people? Or my opinion that listening to smart people isn't really high on the republican politicians' priority list?
  #42  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:28 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
It's not a secret.



I think his speech was generally well-received by his constituents here (just having listened to some local talk radio and read some commentary on the matter). Conservatives were glad to see him poking fun at the Green New Deal and liberals were upset by it, about what you'd expect. Compared to his Senate colleagues, his approval ratings seem to fall in about the middle of the pack.
And this is why I think democratic means can no longer be trusted. You say "conservative" as though there's some constituency that deserves to be taken seriously that thought this speech made sense. As though we should take those people seriously. As though we should treat them as though they aren't aiding and abetting the greatest global disaster in human history. And you're not wrong - that's a significant number of people. Which means that we're fucked. What Mike Lee had to say was, even if you take it as charitably as possible, completely fucking insane. I really hope this doesn't need explaining. No sane, honest, well-informed person could come away from that speech thinking, "Yeah, that's a good response to an upcoming global catastrophe!" So... those constituents you speak of... stupid or evil? Which one is it? And given that there are massive systems in place to encourage these people to be stupid and/or evil (notably Fox News), what the fuck do we do? How does democracy fix this?

Oh wait, I wrote this post assuming that you were aware of the facts on climate change. Are you aware of the timeline we're looking at right now? Are you aware that the longer we delay action, the harder it's going to get to keep below levels that will be far worse, far more disastrous than anything we've seen thus far? Are you aware that if I were to have children now, by the time they're out of high school, it'll be too late for them to actually do much about the problem?

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 03-27-2019 at 06:29 PM.
  #43  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:30 PM
Lemur866's Avatar
Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 22,389
So the solution is to have more kids, and the kids are going to solve the problem of climate change. Not today, that's crazy talk. We don't need to do anything today except have a bunch of kids, and those kids are the ones who are going to solve climate change in the future. And there's no need to listen to the kids today who wanna solve climate change, because they're socialist snowflakes who need to grow up and get jobs instead of complaining. The solution to climate change today is to remove socialist environmental protections that are harming our economy, let our economy grow, and then future generations will solve all these environmental problems, not now, but later. We will listen to the smart kids when they grow up in the future, but we absolutely positively cannot listen to smart adults today, because we can't trust scientists who think they know better than us.

Sounds legit.

Last edited by Lemur866; 03-27-2019 at 06:32 PM.
  #44  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:30 PM
Dr. Crap is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 325
If you're a jellyfish professional who's single and ready to mingle, send me a private message!
  #45  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:34 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,558
Democratic means are the most untrustable means, except for all the other means which are all worse.

It is worth noting that the niftiest thing about the "Have more babies! Some of them might be smart!" is that this approach requires us to wait an entire generation before there's any hope of even starting to improve things. Which is good if you're a corrupt politician getting kickbacks from oil companies not to change anything (and if you are a sociopath who cares about nobody else including your own progeny), but is pretty much by definition the third worst plan possible, closely behind "swearing on your mother's souls to never ever ever ever try to correct the problem" and "Fuck it, let's nuke the entire planet now."
  #46  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:35 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet View Post
And this is why I think democratic means can no longer be trusted. ...
Nobody cares. We're going to keep having elections whether you like it or not. In Utah, we're going to keep electing senators that we approve of. They probably won't be ones that you approve of. Learn to cope with that, or don't. IDGAF.
  #47  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:37 PM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,461
There's just one problem with Lee's thesis, more Americans would make the problem worse, not better:

Article:
The United States, the world’s biggest oil consuming country, consumed 18.5 million barrels of oil per day (mbd) in 2012, which accounted for nearly 20% of the world’s total oil consumption per day.

More babies mean more consumers and markets, yes, but that gets cancelled out by more consumption and waste, thru the lens of climate change.

Lee's argument also fails because innovation and new technology is trying to happen today, in spite of Conservatives' best efforts to tamp it down. Ideas are happening now. What if effective solutions are in-hand now, but politicians are preventing them from seeing light?
  #48  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:38 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowthx View Post
There's just one problem with Lee's thesis,
There are multiple problems with Lee's thesis.
  #49  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:40 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Nobody cares. We're going to keep having elections whether you like it or not. In Utah, we're going to keep electing senators that we approve of. They probably won't be ones that you approve of. Learn to cope with that, or don't. IDGAF.
He's proposing ways of coping with that. That's kind of the problem.
  #50  
Old 03-27-2019, 06:41 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowthx View Post
... Lee's argument also fails because innovation and new technology is trying to happen today, in spite of Conservatives' best efforts to tamp it down. Ideas are happening now. What if effective solutions are in-hand now, but politicians are preventing them from seeing light?
How do you think politicians would be "preventing them from seeing light"?
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:56 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017