MovieChat Forums > Greta Thunberg Discussion > Why not take a vote then tax all climate...

Why not take a vote then tax all climate deniers?

posted 5 years ago by Rorikon (17874)
35 replies | jump to latest

By that I mean by the time it's nearly too late to do something and we do it because it's become so bad, why not tax all climate deniers that now admit they're wrong? Because after all, they'll deny saying so until the very end. When that time comes, they should be the ones funding for the drastic changes needed to thwart it or escape it. Mind you they'll be still stupid and say it isn't their problem and that you shouldn't have believed them or whatever excuse after the fact. I'm speaking based on if everything is true at the end and that drastic change WILL be a must when the conditional extremes become really apparent that they can't deny it no more.

Update:
Lulz, so easy to trigger the right (most) with stuff said from the left.

[–] liscarkat (18429) 5 years ago

Your moronic adherence to your climate religion has rendered your brain useless. I've got a better idea: since you and the other climate bed-wetters are the ones who think we can save the planet with taxation, why don't you imbeciles pay the tax. Those of us who understand what science is and how it works will remain exempt.

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 5 years ago

I agree with liscarkat. You and those like you can be taxed.
You guys can also pay for all of the illegals (in fact, you all should take in an illegal family) and you can pay for all of the abortions because I don't believe in those either.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

What about the abortions you do believe in?

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 5 years ago

I could have worded it better. I don't believe in abortion--period.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Oh you edited! It was much funnier the other way. I was going to say something about not believing in periods either but something tells me you won’t see the funny side.

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 5 years ago

I see the funny side.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Pretty silly thing to say, Rorikon.

Very silly, in fact.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I agree. Doesn’t he know this is NOT the place for a variety of opinions? Look how angry he made everyone! Just inconsiderate really.

I for one am not in favour of additional taxes but then again I read the op as a sarcastic jab rather than a serious proposal.

I thought everyone here was in favour of sarcastic jabs. Certainly seems that way. Oh well Rorokin, better luck next time. Target someone with pigtails, trust me they’ll go APE!

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I didn't think he was being sarcastic. Or satirical. I'm so accustomed to the silly tripe that climate fanatics continuously spout that I really thought he was making a genuine proposal.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Perhaps I give the person too much credit.

You have to give it to him though, a nonsensical proposal like this is clearly enough to make the usual suspects jump on him like Oprah on a baked ham. Competent pot-stirring, if nothing else.

"OH HELL NO HOW ABOUT WE TAX YOU CLIMATE WEIRDOS FOR IMMIGRATION COSTS"

You have to laugh.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

It'll be interesting to see his response to the reactions he's provoked.

[–] elcamino (15540) 5 years ago

She is going to trademark her name so people can't get by using it and not paying her.

[–] Juschill (808) 5 years ago

Or you could tax the people that don’t know there is a difference between “their” and “they’re”.

Tax the spelling deniers. Tax the torturers of the English language.
(“Mind you they’ll be still stupid”. Haha, what a moron.)

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 5 years ago

Juschill, I thought about saying something similar but changed my mind on going there. 😅...or should I say "going their" 😂😂🤣

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Actually, fairness compels me to point out that, "Mind you they'll be still stupid" is a legitimate sentence with no errors. Maybe an apostrophe after "you" would have been good, but otherwise it's fine.

But yes, "Their" for "They are" is a goof.

[–] Juschill (808) 5 years ago

Fair enough. I can’t imagine the OP meant to use the English language that way but ... point taken.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

I just read and researched about a guy from 1847 who was saying humans are increasing the temp by burning camp fires. According to him the temp had risen by about 2 degrees which is a figure I heard now.

People have always been saying something about climate change my whole life and I've been alive for a good bit now. It's okay to deny it because there is no hard evidence, or it wouldn't be a debate, and if you research it, it's a claim that's been going on a long time. In the case of 1847 that was before we had manufacturing and wood was the main fuel.

There's is something else going on here. It's psychology based. We may be having changes in temp and that may be triggering some kind of reaction in people is fear based.

Also, I used to watch the show "Doomsday Preppers" for laughs. The typical person there was someone who had a loss. Their spouse died, they lost their job, etc but something ended for them. Then, instead of just embracing that personal downfall, they generalized it to the world and now the world will be ending.

I believe that is caused by narcissism where the person can't admit that THERE LIFE ENDED and that they had BAD LUCK and so they must see it all equal for everyone. In the case of climate, people are saying the world will end and civilization will end, and it won't. Even if the climate is getting much hotter, life will still go on. You will die but life will go on. Even if there's just a handful of Africans, life will go on.

I believe the climate fad is a giant version of the Doomsday Preppers mentality.

[–] Gary O. (1009) 5 years ago

I believe the climate fad is a giant version of the Doomsday Preppers mentality.

You could be on to something here. AGW has been blamed for everything, and everything is proof of it. Unusually hot summers? Proof of AGW. Excessively cold winters? Proof of AGW. Likewise with unusually wet or dry weather. It all proves AGW. Too many or too few hurricanes prove it as well. Even a high crime rate finds itself laid at the feet of climate change.

It has grown beyond any and all logic.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

Doomsday people were even behind many religions.

Christianity proposes that no one have sex and end the human race so that we can go to heaven. There was a group called The Shakers that actually did this.

Like I've said, there seems to be people who want the world to end because THEY will end.

I don't know what to call that.

I guess it makes them feel less small and insignificant but it's more than that.

[–] Gary O. (1009) 5 years ago

You're painting with a very broad brush there aren't you, Adlerian? The Shakers (a very small and now -nearly-extinct group) hardly represent Christianity as a whole. Saying that some people calling themselves Christian proposed no sex means that Christiandom as a whole does the same thing is like saying that all Jews keep kosher.

Christianity does NOT propose no sex.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

Dude, I HATE PEOPLE WHO ACT LIKE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT and clearly don't. If you read Paul, it says what I've said.

That's where the fucking Shakers got it from.

Jesus says you should not have sex, but if you must, get married.

[–] Gary O. (1009) 5 years ago

You hate yourself then.

This is 1st Corinthians 7: 1-9 NIV

1
Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. [1]
2
But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.
3
The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband.
4
The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife.
5
Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
6
I say this as a concession, not as a command.
7
I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
8
Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am.
9
But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

So, it is clear that Paul is not saying 'no sex' at all, but if you have the gift of celibacy then that is the state for you to live in. If you don't have the gift, then it is perfectly acceptable to marry and have sex and reproduce.

I stand by what I said.

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

Are you fucking retarded?

[–] Gary O. (1009) 5 years ago

You have no answer except a profanity-laced personal attack? Clearly, you don't know what you are talking about.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Jesus says you should not have sex, but if you must, get married.

Are you SURE this is what Jesus said? I'm no religious theologian but I hardly think the big guy intended people NOT to have sex, it would make for a very short lived civilization, right?

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

It's actually THE FIRST LINE IN CORINTHIANS, lol.

"It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”

It is why celibacy is such a big thing is Christianity.

Jews and Muslims (same religion) can fuck infidels, rape them, get them pregnant, etc and it's all cool. That's because infidels are scum to them so you can do whatever you want. You aren't responsible for any babies born from an infidel, even.

I've known jewish porn dudes who will bring home girls to fuck, in the house, and their wife doesn't even mind. That's because those aren't "human" girls because they are infidels. Having adult male sex with boys and little girls is a mideast thing and still is.

For one, it's done because women are "off limits" so having sex with a boy is better, lol. That how the taliban got started! They were heroes in the 90s for killing these dudes.

All of that is mideast behavior from way back then. Jesus goes on to talk about all the sexual morality and says if you can't avoid sex then get married.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Good take, Adlerian.

It probably applies to every hugely-popular "social cause" in recent centuries. People, and their quirks.

I think such causes as the abolition of slavery; universal franchise; freedom of speech and similar causes, are the only legitimate ones. but these other silly fads, usually embraced by callow immature youths, are merely manifestations of young peoples' need to feel important. It turns up in every generation. It's tiresome to mature people, but fortunately it's also self-limiting. This fiasco will end, when its devotees grow up.

Of course, like 60s hippies, many of them will continue to discuss it furtively with other aged devotees, while vaping marijauana. But in effect it will be gone, replaced by the urgent message that the Earth's curve is straightening alarmingly...

[–] TheAdlerian (2092) 5 years ago

Yes!

I agree completely.

The REAL causes are things you can do something about now and when people do, they get results. Then, the cause ends and you go on with life. Meanwhile, these endless causes are very self-serving and naive, while being arrogant. Like we have talked about, they're about making people uncomfortable, not solving a problem to make life better.

It's really crazy how popular they become.

On a similar note, I saw and article about the guy who plays Joker. He went to a slaughter house and said it was terrible, so eat Vegan!!

I went to one when I was like six and still remember it.

We wouldn't be shocked by killing animals if it wasn't for our advanced technological society. People have been killing animals since the beginning of time!! On a cooking show I saw an Eskimo girl eating a seal---raw---on a modern kitchen floor. She was covered with blood and looked very happy, like a kid eating a bag of chips. She is used to eating a raw dead animal. People in our society aren't and FREAK OUT like we just started killing animals yesterday and they can't believe that a hamburger is a cute eyed cow.

This is another cause I hate---eating.

I used to be a vegetarian because in my 20s I was dating one. I don't like that animals have to die because I love animals, so I was okay with it. However, I started meeting a lot of vegetarians. Nearly all of them came from dysfunctional divorced families. I started getting annoyed with them and when I'd meet a new one and they're start preaching, I would ask "Are your parent's divorced" and they would almost fall over.

I started to think that vegetarianism was a mental illness symptom. There was even a book about Hitler regarding that topic, and I would enjoy bringing that up.

Years later, I discovered the Millon theory about the type of Borderline behind causes and could clearly see vegetarians there. They try to punish people for eating habits that are as natural as the wind.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

How about taxing the hell out of Asia and Africa who contribute more to polluting the environment than any other area of the world? Tell them to get off their asses and clean up the rivers and oceans and the air.

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 5 years ago

That's pretty obvious, captain! 😁

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 5 years ago

... and then vote to tax someone else you don't agree with and then vote to tax someone else you don't agree with and then vote to tax someone else you don't agree with and then vote to tax someone else you don't agree with.

This is a time honored tradition. Democrats are not who I used to think they were.