Comment on Oil and Gas Billionaires Drum Up Dollars for Trump
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 months agoRunning a campaign is pretty miserable; always on the move, talking to skeptical audiences, dealing with really intrusive press, and very little time for ice cream.
Maybe 20-30 years ago…
Now it’s big money fundraisers with celebrities and ex presidents…
You might not enjoy that, but lots of people do. And they definitely enjoy the benefits and being the wheel that needs greased.
A lot of this is because Americans punish politicians when gas prices go up, because we’re still dependent on fossil fuels, and have only started getting off of them.
How is continuingly setting record breaking fossil fuels production levels “getting rid of them”?
Using more fossil fuels to ship it to the other side of the globe so it can be burned there?
Haven’t I explained this to you repeatedly for a long time now?
In fact, didn’t you ban me from you “climate change sub” for continuing proving you wrong about this?
Do you want the links again?
vox.com/…/biden-oil-production-climate-fossil-fue…
For the last six years, America has outstripped Russia, Saudi Arabia, and other OPEC countries in crude oil production. And it has picked up the pace under Biden, who had approved more permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands by last October than former President Donald Trump had by the same point in his presidency.
silence7@slrpnk.net 6 months ago
I’ve been around campaigns. It’s still a real slog.
What he’s been doing has been cutting US need to use fossil fuels. Here’s what we expect from the Inflation Reduction Act:
Image
The result is that the US is exporting a big chunk of oil, instead of burning it. Not all that we need, but a part of what it takes to end it extraction and use, and something Trump would never have gotten us to.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Again, were talking about production, you keeping being up emissions.
How do you still think those are the same things?
We’ve legitimately had this discussion a dozen times now…
And that’s not even what’s happening, the actual line of emissions goes up when Bident took office, starts predicting at 2021, and they were immediately wrong…
www.nytimes.com/…/us-carbon-emissions-2022.html
Look at your graph. It predicts a massive decrease. And instead we actually saw further increase…
It’s literally and factually wrong.
What do you think it proves?
silence7@slrpnk.net 6 months ago
The bill passed in late 2021. Less than 1/10 of the money it allocates for decarbonization has been spent yet.
So no, you can’t judge its impact by what happened in the months immediately after passage.