This is how environmentalists die

I didn't read this in the news, I saw the entire film clip. So, yes, it was true. Google it and you'll find it. And yes, it was hypocrisy. It's okay for Al to have an electricity bill 20 times higher than the national home average. (Hey, he's got a huge swimming pool that he has to heat) It's okay for Al to leave his limo idling so that the interior is nice and cool when he and his family get in. But coming out of his mouth, it's not okay for everybody else to do it.

Once again, DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO!

Let's separate two essentially separate issues.

Al Gore is a representative of a section of the US ruling class. He is committed to capitalism and all that goes with it. Inequality is an intrinsic part of capitalism -- one can scarcely imagine capitalism with out it. Please correct me if I'm mistaken on this matter, but I suspect that you too are a supporter of capitalism, and if so, whether Al Gore or any other capitalist can better bear the consequences of a high price on carbon than your average person is not something you have any business bothering about.

For Al Gore, doing something about carbon emissions amounts to ensuring that everyone who emits pays a suitable price. Contrary to the hysterical squealing of some in here, this is an approach that is utterly consonant with capitalism. Instead of the state saying who can emit and how much a price is attached and people can make their own choices. So what Gore's limo is doing or how he heats his pool is really none of your business. If we who support carbon dioxide emission mitigation were to start advocating rations and government permits and CO2 inspectors at every household and business the "it's all a socialist/big government conspiracy to rob us of our freedom to pollute" crowd would have a field day. So unless you're about to say you want CO2 emissions regulated so everyone including Gore does their bit, it is you who are being hypocritical.

As it happens, I agree that the most practicable and effcient way of reducing emissions is to put a suitable price on CO2 emissions, one way or another.

Separately from that, I am also, *inter alia* an egalitarian, and favour using the funds raised from a price on CO2 emissions in part to ensure that the cost of not emitting is not shifted substantially onto those who can ill-afford to reduce emissions while those of means go on as per normal.

This would involve having cheap efficient public transport, more energy efficient housing closer to the transport and to work, low carbon footprint energy options to which poorer people would get concessional access, possibly through non-transferable shares in trusts that they would acquire through cheap loans. It may even be that Gore might support some of these measures or something similar. But whether he does or doesn't, as far as I can tell, nothing he is doing is at odds with what he is proposing be done.

You should be clear about your motives. Al Gore is your target not because you are bothered that he is richer than you and will not suffer greatly if there is a substantial price on CO2 emissions or that he is a hypocrite. I doubt you are stupid. He is your target because you want to defame the cause with which he is associated, in the service of the big polluters, or perhaps out of some ignorant overestimation of the creature comforts that a carbon emissions reduction regime would put in jeopardy.

Fran

Metro buses? Now there is safe travel... been robbed lately?

Yep and they might kill or injure you over your hair style.

ride with friends a lot?

Safe but real expensive, have you ever looked into law suits against any kind of public transportation? Someone must be getting hurt, right.

People die in cars, more die in SMALL cars.

Bicycles accidents are what I see roped off the most.

Read my previous posts. I have been very clear about my motives. FWIW, I like to breath clean air and drink pure water as much as anybody. But Al makes his living (a very good one I'm sure, but that's not my point) by talking about how "green" we have to be and then has an electricity bill that is 20 times higher than the national average household bill. Oh, wait. He claims that all of his electricity comes from "non carbon" sources. Sure it does......how do you track it to prove otherwise? He jet-sets all over the world to talk how we need to stop using fossil fuels. How many electric powered jets have you seen? He's burning fossil fuel to tell other people to STOP burning fossil fuel! And my posts about his idling limo is just more facts that prove his motto should be "DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO!" But he can't make a living by being quiet, can he? Of course, he's got a lot of sheep that follow him and they can't think for themselves. Now who do you think I'm referring to?...... You've wasted my time enough. Of course you'll post with some long drivel that has no facts, just a lot of fluff.

Let's separate two essentially separate issues.

Al Gore is a representative of a section of the US ruling class. He is committed to capitalism and all that goes with it. Inequality is an intrinsic part of capitalism -- one can scarcely imagine capitalism with out it. Please correct me if I'm mistaken on this matter, but I suspect that you too are a supporter of capitalism, and if so, whether Al Gore or any other capitalist can better bear the consequences of a high price on carbon than your average person is not something you have any business bothering about.

For Al Gore, doing something about carbon emissions amounts to ensuring that everyone who emits pays a suitable price. Contrary to the hysterical squealing of some in here, this is an approach that is utterly consonant with capitalism. Instead of the state saying who can emit and how much a price is attached and people can make their own choices. So what Gore's limo is doing or how he heats his pool is really none of your business. If we who support carbon dioxide emission mitigation were to start advocating rations and government permits and CO2 inspectors at every household and business the "it's all a socialist/big government conspiracy to rob us of our freedom to pollute" crowd would have a field day. So unless you're about to say you want CO2 emissions regulated so everyone including Gore does their bit, it is you who are being hypocritical.

As it happens, I agree that the most practicable and effcient way of reducing emissions is to put a suitable price on CO2 emissions, one way or another.

Separately from that, I am also, *inter alia* an egalitarian, and favour using the funds raised from a price on CO2 emissions in part to ensure that the cost of not emitting is not shifted substantially onto those who can ill-afford to reduce emissions while those of means go on as per normal.

This would involve having cheap efficient public transport, more energy efficient housing closer to the transport and to work, low carbon footprint energy options to which poorer people would get concessional access, possibly through non-transferable shares in trusts that they would acquire through cheap loans. It may even be that Gore might support some of these measures or something similar. But whether he does or doesn't, as far as I can tell, nothing he is doing is at odds with what he is proposing be done.

You should be clear about your motives. Al Gore is your target not because you are bothered that he is richer than you and will not suffer greatly if there is a substantial price on CO2 emissions or that he is a hypocrite. I doubt you are stupid. He is your target because you want to defame the cause with which he is associated, in the service of the big polluters, or perhaps out of some ignorant overestimation of the creature comforts that a carbon emissions reduction regime would put in jeopardy.

Fran

Well said, Fran...

It's an intrinsic part of the world. Very few things are equal in real life Fran.

Unlike communism where everyone is equally poor and powerless, but in this case it's not a measure of their talent and ability, but a political system that enslaves them.

There's an implied comparison seems to me, but no actual comparison is made.

The issue is his hypocrisy however. I don't imagine that you shall ever address that issue.

Say what?

Is it? How is this?

Hobson's choice is not much of a choice at all.

Great, then how I use energy is none of *his* business. Problem solved, he a gold-plated hypocrite and no one should pay attention to him.

So it'll be done through the backdoor, as riders on unrelated bills or international treaties.

Just how dense are you Fran?

The issue is HYPOCRISY.

That is, you want to put a high price on the ability to live. Genocide to save the earth.

That is, steal from the west to pay the east. They are worse polluters than Americans and they did this long after pollution controls were available and workable.

Works well in small places like Europe. But not too well here.

Scrap everything.

But that's the equality you preach Fran, everyone will be equally poor, except for insiders like Al Gore.

If you need loans to stay alive, you are doomed.

If he could profit from it, maybe.

Nothing he does is as he preaches everyone else should do.

What are your motives Fran?

And your crystal ball told you this?

That's what makes being an AGW believer so much fun, you can just make up shit as you go along and think you are the harbinger of truth. Nothing could be funnier.

Cheers,

Rich

Got a source for this 'understanding'?

It seems rather dissonant with your other post where you say that as a member of the ruling class, he need not do what he demands others do.

Cheers,

Rich

On the subway and the buses, you mean? Sometimes, yes. Meet new friends that way sometimes, too -- although not so much as I'm getting older.

I also do get rides sometimes from friends with cars. Again, though, not so much as when I was younger. Here in Washington DC, it's not usually necessary. Visiting my sister in a Midwestern suburb, it usually is.

Whenever possible, my girlfriend and I WALK - for all the obvious health reasons: weight, cholesterol, muscle tone, etc.

Recently, my best buddy and I are making a point to take long walks together, too. Again, we're doing this largely for health reasons -- both need to lose weight, add muscle tone. But since we live in a beautiful part of Washington DC, we also walk for enjoyment. Some great residential neighborhoods & public parks in this town.

Try walking more yourself, Poetic Puppy - for your heart and your stamina, even if you don't care at all about CO2 and climate.

You'll feel a lot better after a two-hour walk than you will after a two-hour drive. Ditto for a half-hour walk vs a half-hour drive.

Buses and subways aren't that expensive -- not compared to making monthly payments on a car, paying for gas and repairs, and paying for parking and auto insurance. I can't imagine how I'd make my paycheck stretch if I had to make payments on a car and insurance for it.

Taxis, though, really are expensive -- bad in terms of their contributions to CO2, also.

Here in DC, for me, taking a cab is a good way to talk to Nigerians, Pakistanis, Ethiopians and other foreign-born drivers. It's costly and bad for the climate, since the cab drivers keep cruising the streets emitting CO2 even when they're not carrying passengers. But I learn things about other countries from the Washington taxi drivers that I don't get from the US media.

Maybe. That's a good reason to stay away from cars in general.

In terms of vehicle size -- when I'm riding in a DC metro bus, I'm safer than if I were riding in an SUV or Hummer. Got more visibility, too. Ditto if I take the Chinatown bus from DC up to New York City - it may be a bit crowded, but it's a lot safer than a car would be on the highways.

You could be on the bicycles. The NHTSA web site on bicycle accidents indicates there are more than 500,000 Americans injured in bicycle accidents a year, plus a few hundred killed. Personally, I know of only 1 close acquaintance who's been seriously injured on a bicycle, and more who have been hurt in car accidents - but maybe that's just because so many more people drive.

I think you're being a big hypocrite here, aren't you?

If you're part of the AGW Denier lobby, committed to defending fossil fuels, you should HATE clean air and pure water. You're not living up to your ideals.

If Al Gore is a big hypocrite on personal contributions to CO2 emissions and climate change -- SCREW HIM. Or at least - screw his example.

He's not the only prominent figure who's concerned about climate change -- just the most famous right now. Let's thank him for the message and find someone else as a role model.

"Don't follow leaders" -- Bob Dylan, "Subterranean Homesick Blues"

I'm healthy and I'm usually tired enough from my work that not only is exercise not necessary but I'm too damn tired. I'm what you may call an athletic build, Not some fat ass.

Why don't you get a real job and then ride in a car? Get paid for exercising.

I guess that socialist one size fits all doesn't fit, unless we "all" sit in a chair all day?

na, you are just lazy.....

Since I was 15 I've worked, deal is... if you could keep up with me just one day I'd start leaving your posts alone and not point out just how stupid they are.

How was school today, you learn anything?

laughing, of course people like you need to think so, but reality is a little different from your delusional statements as you are quite lazy, your weaknesses obvious and easily exploitable which makes your replies quite predictable and easy to rebut, so any time you want to debate lets go, but chances are you understand your limited capacities cannot back your words, and you will either run or use the same crutches of rhetoric and illogic as usual. (laughing even more)

A good reason not to "ride in a car" -- actually four good reasons -- are

(A) it's EXPENSIVE;

(B) it's DANGEROUS;

(C) It helps keep the US dependent on FOREIGN OIL, and the wars and threats of terrorism that go with that dependency;

(D) it's bad for the climate, and bad for Washington DC where I live and work, because we already have enough traffic congestion and lack of parking.

I confess that I'm paid to sit in a chair all day. Not paid a lot, as it happens. But it is a "real job" that takes a fair amount out of me by the end of the day. Which time varies, depending on what the clients want and when they want it.

But Poetic -- Congratulations on doing physical work and being in good shape.

Many Americans aren't, though. You just look around you at the really obese people you meet, and it's obvious. Most of the middle-aged and older Americans that I meet would be a lot healthier if they rode around in automobiles less and walked more.

John, have you ever been certified insane? Or of reduced mental capacity?

If not the sheer idiocy of your post is hard to explain.

Perhaps you've seen too many episodes of Captain Planet?

Cheers,

Rich

We former had had a green way of living, until the Greens thought that was not enough and decided they have the duty to intercept nature and impose nature their own will. From that time on, the Green killed the green way of life, and with that millions of human lifes. Anything they touch goes worse and causes a lot of economic damage. IOW they get nothing done.

Hmm. Fascinating. When did you formerly have this green way of living, and where?