Donald Trump Says 'We Need Global Warming' as Extreme Cold Weather Approaches the Midwest

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

What is Trump's motivation for these kind of statements?

  • Trump is ignorant when it comes to climate science

    Votes: 39 81.3%
  • Trump is trying to keep his base ignorant

    Votes: 9 18.8%

  • Total voters
    48

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Do either Rush or Trump actually believe this horseshit? I doubt it but I also doubt they ever spent any serious effort to research the subject either.

They don't even care. It's a "you" problem. They'll be dead before it matters. Narcissists are like that.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
You failed to answer the question. Part of the reason Trump people are so resistant is they don't believe it. So I'm asking is Trump himself ignorant or is he intentionally keeping his people ignorant?

No indication the "I don't support plans that cost $10" was solely polling of Trump voters. Unsure why it's hard for folks to grasp that acknowledging climate change doesn't carry an obligation to support spending to mitigate climate change. The left seems to think that once they convince enough folks "climate change is for real" that they'll suddenly demand carbon taxes and such and that's emphatically and repeatedly been shown false. It's just like how folks generally agree that "the working poor aren't paid enough" but won't actually take money out of their own pockets to hire one of them at $15/hour or whatever they think the "fair" rate is. Climate change is something that folks would want addressed but only if some other unspecified person pays for it and not them.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
They don't even care. It's a "you" problem. They'll be dead before it matters. Narcissists are like that.

Every place where a "solution" to climate change was passed led inevitably to riots shortly thereafter and the efforts being scrapped. And yet the left keeps tilting at this same windmill time and again. Voters will not voluntarily pay to mitigate climate change, period full stop and will revolt and vote out those who try to force it upon them. Putting a bottle in a recycle bin is about as far as the vast majority of voters are willing to go, not handing over significant money to the government for a fix. Once technology advances to the point where a particular product is better than a carbon fuel alternative they'll switch, not before.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4728184/france-carbon-tax-riots-canada/

https://www.atr.org/canadians-revolt-against-trudeau-s-carbon-tax
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
14,939
7,456
136
He's taking the Big Business anti-climate change agenda that the Repub base has been told was the gosh darn honest truth (and the base bought it because well, it's their team that's against it and the team comes first and foremost) and spit shined the shit out of it.

The truth and facts of any matter that gets in the way of the Repub leadership's servitude to the wealthy will always be portrayed as a lie, fake news or a conspiracy by the deep state and that is what the Repub's base, or rather Trump's base has to support and act on, never ever mind that the base would immensely benefit from (as they are at this very minute) the Dem agenda that fights for keeping the Repub base's reliance on essential social services and benefits of which in an incredulous kind of way, their base through supporting their leadership and as we have kept repeating over and over again to no avail, are fighting against their own best interests willingly or worse still, of self-imposed ignorance.

If the Dems could find a way to break down this wall-o-denial and have the truth and facts get to Trump's base in full, it would be the end of Trump's Repub Party as we know it.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
No indication the "I don't support plans that cost $10" was solely polling of Trump voters. Unsure why it's hard for folks to grasp that acknowledging climate change doesn't carry an obligation to support spending to mitigate climate change. The left seems to think that once they convince enough folks "climate change is for real" that they'll suddenly demand carbon taxes and such and that's emphatically and repeatedly been shown false. It's just like how folks generally agree that "the working poor aren't paid enough" but won't actually take money out of their own pockets to hire one of them at $15/hour or whatever they think the "fair" rate is. Climate change is something that folks would want addressed but only if some other unspecified person pays for it and not them.

The general person sees it as them having to spend more to save the planet. The problem is that the average person does not realize they are not fully paying for what they are doing. Its like buying a car and as a surprise getting a free can of soda in the glove box every day. Then, when you find out your son has been stealing coke and putting it in your car, you don't want to give it up because you like it.

We need to shift the perception from what it is now, to the realization that people are offloading costs (climate change) to others. That expense needs to be a factor, or, to stop doing it.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
No indication the "I don't support plans that cost $10" was solely polling of Trump voters. Unsure why it's hard for folks to grasp that acknowledging climate change doesn't carry an obligation to support spending to mitigate climate change. The left seems to think that once they convince enough folks "climate change is for real" that they'll suddenly demand carbon taxes and such and that's emphatically and repeatedly been shown false. It's just like how folks generally agree that "the working poor aren't paid enough" but won't actually take money out of their own pockets to hire one of them at $15/hour or whatever they think the "fair" rate is. Climate change is something that folks would want addressed but only if some other unspecified person pays for it and not them.

Your argument is fallacious to begin with. Addressing global warming does not require additional costs from the consumer. Your average consumer is not going to pay any carbon taxes. It's stupid.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Your argument is fallacious to begin with. Addressing global warming does not require additional costs from the consumer. Your average consumer is not going to pay any carbon taxes. It's stupid.

Most of the solutions do indeed call for things that would increase the costs to consumers.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,907
136
No indication the "I don't support plans that cost $10" was solely polling of Trump voters. Unsure why it's hard for folks to grasp that acknowledging climate change doesn't carry an obligation to support spending to mitigate climate change. The left seems to think that once they convince enough folks "climate change is for real" that they'll suddenly demand carbon taxes and such and that's emphatically and repeatedly been shown false. It's just like how folks generally agree that "the working poor aren't paid enough" but won't actually take money out of their own pockets to hire one of them at $15/hour or whatever they think the "fair" rate is. Climate change is something that folks would want addressed but only if some other unspecified person pays for it and not them.
Still failing to answer. Trump was conflating climate and weather and it isn't the first time.

Ignorance or evil intent??
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
Every place where a "solution" to climate change was passed led inevitably to riots shortly thereafter and the efforts being scrapped. And yet the left keeps tilting at this same windmill time and again. Voters will not voluntarily pay to mitigate climate change, period full stop and will revolt and vote out those who try to force it upon them. Putting a bottle in a recycle bin is about as far as the vast majority of voters are willing to go, not handing over significant money to the government for a fix. Once technology advances to the point where a particular product is better than a carbon fuel alternative they'll switch, not before.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4728184/france-carbon-tax-riots-canada/

https://www.atr.org/canadians-revolt-against-trudeau-s-carbon-tax

It seems that public opinions on this matter, especially generationally are shifting. I cannot say that is because of political efforts, but I think they contribute.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
59,239
13,839
136
Problem is that you can't roll coal in an electric truck.
Sure you can, you just need a fog machine and some dark fog juice. Of course, that won't piss off the hippies/liberals/reasonable people, so then it's no longer fun.
 

Stokely

Platinum Member
Jun 5, 2017
2,224
2,994
136
The phrase "average over historical period" sounds like Charlie Brown's teacher to most Trump voters. Wah wah wah WAH wah waahhh.... Trump may sound like a moron but he knows his base well.
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,859
4,976
126
51129843_2274828422839103_1282501458201149440_n.jpg
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,336
136
Most of the solutions do indeed call for things that would increase the costs to consumers.
In the short term perhaps. But in the long run, it decreases consumer costs while improving standard of living.

Case in point: Tesla.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Still failing to answer. Trump was conflating climate and weather and it isn't the first time.

Ignorance or evil intent??

Trump is an idiot so it could be both. Still doesn’t change the fact that people are not willing to pay any significant amount to mitigate the problem. It will be resolved the same way that disease vectors from horse crap was resolved when a better Technology (cars) came along that better served peoples actual needs. Like wise use of fossil fuels will be rapidly replaced by newer technology When and only when the technology better meets their needs then fossil fuels do. Cost is one component parts so is usability (e.g. Electric cars with sufficient range, etc.)
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
27,648
26,746
136
That’s irrelevant though - either climate change is a threat or it is not. All the science points to the fact that it is a dire threat.

So if people aren’t willing to do what it takes to combat it then that’s a reason to double down and go after it twice as much, not to ignore it. After all, reality doesn’t care what people think.

So we need to build a wall to keep out the Bad Hombre cold?

Maybe a wall made out of the most beautiful fire? The bigliest fire wall ever?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chocu1a and dank69

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
In the short term perhaps. But in the long run, it decreases consumer costs while improving standard of living.

Case in point: Tesla.

Well, kinda. Right now many are not having to pay for the costs of what they are doing because those costs are not captured in the price of the products/services. We are trying to include those costs, and once we do, the price must go up.

We may very well innovate beyond and get to a point where those costs are not relevant, but, that is a long way off.

Tesla is very much getting hit with the costs of the environment. They would be able to do things much cheaper if not for environmental regulations.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,907
136
Trump is an idiot so it could be both. Still doesn’t change the fact that people are not willing to pay any significant amount to mitigate the problem. It will be resolved the same way that disease vectors from horse crap was resolved when a better Technology (cars) came along that better served peoples actual needs. Like wise use of fossil fuels will be rapidly replaced by newer technology When and only when the technology better meets their needs then fossil fuels do. Cost is one component parts so is usability (e.g. Electric cars with sufficient range, etc.)
Let me ask you a question, do you subsist solely on high fat high salt, highly preserved fast foods? It's the cheapest way to eat.

If your answer is no what convinced you to pay more for for fresh food?

If your answer is yes, I understand.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
I don't know if those people like Trump actually believe in what they believe or....
if they say this just to save a buck and kick the can of climate disaster down the road to another generation.
I mean... maybe this whole reality of climate change i.e. true term global warming is simply too much for their little brains to process.
Either THAT, or they think WELL, I'LL BE DEAD BY THEN SO WHY BOTHER?
Like with smoking cigarettes, we know smoking takes 10 years off ones life, but they say those are the crappy years of old age so why care?

Climate change IS NOT cooling or warming or anything to do with daily temperature.
Climate change is the ENTIRE CLIMATE going thru a change. A BIG change.
Like 100 year floods happening every year, and hurricanes one after another, and Summers hot as hell itself, and last but not least Winters colder than Siberia.
Rising tides, tornadoes one after another, fires, floods, then more fires and floods again.
Once that kind of climate change sets in, there is little humanity can do to stop it other than RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!

So I believe they know. Trump knows. They all know the truth those climate deniers.
Yes, they know.
They rather deny because they simply can't be bothered.
Plus, they are all cheap asses. They don't want to spend the money.
Let another generation worry about it.
Let me trash the environment today and have someone else deal with the mess, after I'm dead and gone....
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Let me ask you a question, do you subsist solely on high fat high salt, highly preserved fast foods? It's the cheapest way to eat.

If your answer is no what convinced you to pay more for for fresh food?

If your answer is yes, I understand.

In a free society I have the right to make free choices for myself about what I eat. That doesn’t apply when you scale up this to be a national policy question. You want to propose not allowing people to decide what they want to eat In favor of what’s “better for them.”

In a democracy where voters supposedly get to choose these things, do you feel they have the right to reject fresh food? Or do you as the enlightened technocrat have the right to force them to buy fresh food when they are unwilling to do so on their own?

Basically if you’re not going to respect the voters rights to reject paying for climate change mitigation then we no longer live in democracy. If you feel that climate change is such a major issue that it requires us to live under authoritarianism to fix it then so be it but then own that position.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,852
136
In a free society I have the right to make free choices for myself about what I eat. That doesn’t apply when you scale up this to be a national policy question. You want to propose not allowing people to decide what they want to eat In favor of what’s “better for them.”

In a democracy where voters supposedly get to choose these things, do you feel they have the right to reject fresh food? Or do you as the enlightened technocrat have the right to force them to buy fresh food when they are unwilling to do so on their own?

Basically if you’re not going to respect the voters rights to reject paying for climate change mitigation then we no longer live in democracy. If you feel that climate change is such a major issue that it requires us to live under authoritarianism to fix it then so be it but then own that position.

1) There is little to no evidence that voters make their choices based on climate change mitigation positions of politicians. I’m being generous with the ‘little’ part too.

2) If your standard for authoritarianism is that politicians passing unpopular measures equals authoritarianism then we already live in it, just look at the most recent tax cut as it was extremely unpopular.

Our system of government is obviously set up so that enlightened technocrats can do just that sort of regulation forming. It happens every day.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
1) There is little to no evidence that voters make their choices based on climate change mitigation positions of politicians. I’m being generous with the ‘little’ part too.

2) If your standard for authoritarianism is that politicians passing unpopular measures equals authoritarianism then we already live in it, just look at the most recent tax cut as it was extremely unpopular.

Our system of government is obviously set up so that enlightened technocrats can do just that sort of regulation forming. It happens every day.

So how many riots need to happen before your side gets the memo that voters aren’t willing to pay for it?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,632
50,852
136
So how many riots need to happen before your side gets the memo that voters aren’t willing to pay for it?

Haha, you know as well as I do that there would be no riots. People didn’t want to pay for the recent tax cut for billionaires either yet here we are. Depending on what you account for the Iraq war cost between $1-3 trillion. Sure there were protests against Iraq but not because of the money.

So it looks to me like we have at least around $4 trillion in public, debt financed subsidies for addressing climate change before we need to even think twice. How fun!
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Haha, you know as well as I do that there would be no riots. People didn’t want to pay for the recent tax cut for billionaires either yet here we are. Depending on what you account for the Iraq war cost between $1-3 trillion. Sure there were protests against Iraq but not because of the money.

So it looks to me like we have at least around $4 trillion in public, debt financed subsidies for addressing climate change before we need to even think twice. How fun!

So the riots over fuel taxes in France just a couple weeks ago didn’t happen?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-46437904