The left denies science/biology or man can't influence climate change

[Jack V Savage]

Pretty sure even people like Krugman would disagree with this.

Here he is on it:

https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/tax-cuts-growth-and-leprechauns/?_r=0

And my thinking, which he doesn't even mention, is that if it was leading to growth, the Fed would just raise rates, as their estimates show that we're at potential now.

I just watched the segment. It's not the first part of her answer that you should have referenced. It's the last part. Todd actually brings up a screen with the various estimates of the effect on the deficit. That's the point where Collins pretty much throws up her hands and ignores the evidence.

Collins has Parkinson's, and I think you could have come up with a better example to make your point.

I surely could, but that was recent and involved the one Republican politician you might think would know better. My favorite, just because of how punchable he was when saying it, was Guiliani laughingly addressing the question of how to pay for huge, regressive tax cuts. "With more tax cuts."

 

[DoomPatrol]

It's been an ongoing meme from the right that liberals deny science "because there's only two genders". At the same time many on the right, especially the alt-right, deny that man-made climate change is happening. These two beliefs are antithetical to one another. Either you accept the scientific method and accept data and evidence, or you don't. So for that reason you are given one choice in this poll. You can claim that the far-left campus marxists are science denialists by saying there's more than two genders, OR you can claim that man-made climate change is a myth. You don't get both.

What?

It's science that says there's more than two specific genders. Anyone who says science claims there's only male and female gender clearly hasn't spoken to biologists and medical professionals who specialize in genitalia. It's not black and white.

It's also science that says climate change is partially driven by human action.

 

[Fawlty]

Maybe a picture would help you

When I google sections of this quote, it sources only to reddit.

You seem to be spreading a fake quote.

 

[djacobox372]

I 100% agree that science denial is not strictly a right-wing thing. But psychology, and how it relates to gender, is hardly hard science, so you aren't really a denier no matter what side you are on with the gender issue.

 

[waiguoren]

Here he is on it:

https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/tax-cuts-growth-and-leprechauns/?_r=0

Right, so you made my point for me. Krugman accepts that the cuts will lead to economic growth.

Here he is on it:
My favorite, just because of how punchable he was when saying it, was Guiliani laughingly addressing the question of how to pay for huge, regressive tax cuts. "With more tax cuts."

[/QUOTE]
Giuliani...yeah, you aren't going to get any pushback from me on that.

 

[Toothless King]

meh, both lefties and righties are nutties.

climate change exists and there is no such thing as a third gender. we need a third option on the poll

 

[hillelslovak87]

"The leftist libtards are denying science can you believe how stupid they are? There are only two genders!!"

Meanwhile

>GMOs ARE UNSAFE
>VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM
>CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX

totally wrong.

You forgot the whole world being created in 6 days, and man being fashioned from dust.

Also, vaccines causing autism and gmos being unsafe are more left leaning ideals. The GMO thing is probably a warranted wariness, and the vaccine stupidity was caused in large part by Jenny Mccarthy and her license stripped hollywood pediatrician.

 

[HIMBOB]

Leftists also deny human evolution. They believe that evolution only affects the exterior of the human body (skin color, nose, etc.), but that there's a magical hand from a flying sky wizard that protects the human brain from evolving differently from one another via completely different environments and completely different diets and that everyone around the globe has the exact same average intelligence levels.

It seems you truly believe every "leftist" has the same view on everything.

Does the same apply to all "righists"?

What would you think if I assumed you agree with the craziest most whacked out neo nazi simply because you arent leftist and therefore are a rightist.

I'd bet you think i was a complete fucking idiot. Now guess my opinion of you?

 

[Der Eisbär]

What?

It's science that says there's more than two specific genders. Anyone who says science claims there's only male and female gender clearly hasn't spoken to biologists and medical professionals who specialize in genitalia. It's not black and white.

It's also science that says climate change is partially driven by human action.

Gender =/= sex/science. I think you're confused by the terms.

 

[HIMBOB]

Just because there are mines in colder environments doesn't mean there is an optimal amount. I don't think you refuted anything.

Do you think that a warmer northern Canada/Russia/Northern Europe wouldn't yield more arable, livable or easier to scavenge land?

I thought it was clear in that the number of mine sites gained due to temperature rise was significantly smaller than the number lost due to rising sea levels.

As to the non mining aspects i dunno.

A very significant amount of useable land will lost to rising sea levels and i see no offsetting factor for that.
Its true that warmer weather will improve land uses in colder areas but that is i believe more than offset by decreased usability in existing locations due to hotter weather.

Then add in the increased ferocity of storms and higher variability in temperature both as a result of climate change and I believe its clear this will also result in a net loss.

 

[DoomPatrol]

Gender =/= sex/science. I think you're confused by the terms.

No, I'm actually clear on the terms.

Gender is a social construct.

Sex is what biology sits between your legs.

Science is a method of studying the world around us.


Science shows that gender isn't so black and white. It also shows that sex isn't so black and white.

 

[Der Eisbär]

No, I'm actually clear on the terms.

Gender is a social construct.

Sex is what biology sits between your legs.

Science is a method of studying the world around us.


Science shows that gender isn't so black and white. It also shows that sex isn't so black and white.

Sorry I read your initial post wrong. I thought you said science says there's two genders.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Which lefty is questioning the psychology of trannies? I never seen one confused as to the biology of one (they all agree you're born a specific sex) they just separate sex and gender.

I'd fully support neuroscience to flesh out the root causes in brain chemistry and gladly treat the social science interpretations as superficial liberal reasoning do goodisms to "feel free to be a bird or bee"

 

[Jack V Savage]

Right, so you made my point for me. Krugman accepts that the cuts will lead to economic growth.

I think you need to read more closely. He's deferring to the TPC analysis which has 10-year GDP growth attributable to the cuts at 0.3% (that is, over the 10 years as a whole) and then does his own rough analysis showing -0.2% related to factors the TPC doesn't take into account. And given the imprecision here and the extraordinarily small changes we're talking about, it is more accurate to say that the TPC finds no detectable change. Plus, as I said, a fiscal policy boost or drag would just be canceled out by monetary policy in most circumstances anyway.

 

[waiguoren]

I think you need to read more closely. He's deferring to the TPC analysis which has 10-year GDP growth attributable to the cuts at 0.3% (that is, over the 10 years as a whole) and then does his own rough analysis showing -0.2% related to factors the TPC doesn't take into account.

Fair point. I only read the first paragraph at first. Now after reading the while thing I see Krugman really does believe there will be no effect on growth. He's probably wrong but I'm too busy to dive in.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Giuliani...yeah, you aren't going to get any pushback from me on that.

Here's McConnell:

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-republican-tax-reform-bill-deficit-debt-claims-2017-12

"I not only don’t think it will increase the deficit, I think it will be beyond revenue neutral," McConnell said. "In other words, I think it will produce more than enough to fill that gap."

This is either an outright lie or delusion. There's no way to get to that conclusion from legitimate analysis, and no one does. That's one of the most influential members of the party. So you asked if anyone really believes regressive tax cuts pay for themselves. Don't know if Republicans are just lying when they say they do or they really do, but it is the standard party line.

 

[TehJesus]

There are retards on the left and retards on the right.

And this sort of point scoring bullshit is part of the reason the number of retards on either side is steadily growing.

 

[Loko3]

 

[waiguoren]

Here's McConnell:

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-republican-tax-reform-bill-deficit-debt-claims-2017-12

"I not only don’t think it will increase the deficit, I think it will be beyond revenue neutral," McConnell said. "In other words, I think it will produce more than enough to fill that gap."

This is either an outright lie or delusion. There's no way to get to that conclusion from legitimate analysis, and no one does. That's one of the most influential members of the party. So you asked if anyone really believes regressive tax cuts pay for themselves. Don't know if Republicans are just lying when they say they do or they really do, but it is the standard party line.

Don't think that proves it's the "standard party line", but it's a bit surprising to me. Looks like McConnell is living in fantasy land on that one.