Them: “Gee things are getting bad… The last time the poor were this bad off heads started rolling… How did we avoid that? Ohh yeah! Concessions! What if we SAY we want to give them concessions, and then tell the government not to? That should work!”
-The wealthy leeches, enemies of humanity
Maybe, it sounds familiar. But if past trends are any indication, once enough of the market is dominated by EVs, there will be a lot more money to be made by lowering quality to a bare minimum.
And the infrastructure argument still stands in that case.
They haven’t shied away, it is just more profitable to mine outside your borders using slave labour. The fact of it is, with planned obsolescence being the best way to ensure a steady demand of a product, and the environmental destruction required to support the manufacturing and use of EVs, they still are not a solution. They are a market solution which means it is profitable, and a lateral move at best, and a back step at worst.
If EVs help the environment that is secondary.
https://miningwatch.ca/publications/2023/9/6/contemporary-forms-slavery-and-canadian-mining-industry
The criticisms are also that companies use slavery to acquire the materials to make EVs. And they don’t work well in the cold (see current cold snap in Canada), the lifetime of the batteries aren’t great, and we still need to destroy huge swaths of land to create cars, park/store cars, and drive cars.
EVs are only going to save the car industry. To fix it requires a redesign of cities (see Strongtowns, not justbikes, city beautiful, etc.).
No need, the Soviets made a river of natzi blood in the 40’s.
A well thought out response. You got me lol. One day I hope to live up to your intellectual standards.
/s
And what are you going to do about it? Be upset? That sounds like a waste of your time, emotions, and intelligence.
Like I said in another response, I’m sure what happened is mostly true, but the framing is for political purposes. It’s important to be critical of the purpose of an article (to inform? Or to influence?) so you can focus your energy on the politics that you have influence over.
I remember the article. And I’m not saying that didn’t happen, in fact I’m sure the Russian Oligarchs are siphoning tons from the Russian people.
But the fact remains, the article you shared is American propaganda being used to drum up support for more sanctions, or war, or some other purpose, which will just result in American Oligarchs sending Americans and/or their money to places they should never be. There is truth to the article, but the framing is for political purposes.
You want to support oppressed people? Great! You want to denounce a tyrant? Great! You see folks across the Atlantic rising up in revolution against oligarchs? Also great!
But being critical of how the media is presented can go a long way towards supporting the right causes, being upset about things that are worth being upset about, and making sure you don’t waste your energy pushing the agenda of some government which should be minding its own business.
And the working people always suffer, and will always suffer, as long as our representatives don’t represent us.
Good point. North east US.
And you are right they didn’t mention a storm, but that’s not my point. The article title clearly exacerbates the problem, and points the blame in a way that suggests the Russians are either too stupid or too poor to fix the problem. Why should any of us care about such a small thing for one? And two, what is their intention? It’s well known that NYtimes toes the state line when it comes to propaganda against American “enemies” .
Really the only thing useful from the article is:
“20,000 without heat in Russia due to infrastructure failure. Crews working to fix it.”
But then why would anyone care about that?
Lol. I wasn’t showing any support for anyone, just pointing out the clear goal of the article, and especially it’s headline. It’s important to check sources, especially when there is a news article pertaining to your geo-political enemies.
Wow, infrastructure breakdown left 20,000 without heat for a few days? That’s not news. A good storm in the northeast can knock the power system out for days here. Just more mindless propaganda trying to make you think a certain way.
Violence is the only option, even if you don’t like it. Ask Nelson Mandela.
Alternatively, like in Canada, have your people become the majority and give them Independence, and forget about the destruction of the natives.
Liberation will never be given to you by your oppressor.
You might not, but the majority of people who know what neoliberalism is would.
A neat thing is no one actually needs to even die to meet the definition of a genocide
The problem with these counts is there is no way of making them look good, like lives saved due to “x”. How many people lived because the Soviets managed to eliminate all famines in their territory after that? A huge feat given their relative frequency beforehand.
And then you can blame countless deaths on capitalism, feudalism, slavery, but then do you normalize those numbers based on total world population?
What about blaming AK-47s? The police?
My point is that it’s a pointless metric that is only used to drum up support against some group of people, not a useful one for objectively understanding anything. It does away with all context, and replaces it with some inane number.
Yeah and then Israel can go back to their peaceful genocide right? I get it death is bad, but ignoring context (settler colonialism) to feel superior by saying both sides are bad is dumb. None of us can sit here and tell an oppressed people how to fight their oppressor.
It is one of the consequences of monopolies, but monopolies are a consequence of economic competition.
The “winner” gets the losers stuff and customers (mergers for example), making the winner bigger and more able to manipulate the market to their benefit.
When there are few enough companies profits can be chased without consideration for anything else (planned obsolescence, shipping jobs outside the country, lay-offs, etc.)
So, like you said except in a for profit market, monopolies are inevitable.
No one should have veto power, it makes any organization extremely undemocratic. And given the American arsenal, it’s already difficult to be democratic.
The current energy consumption of the planet is 113,000Twh (according to Wikipedia). Since every single Joule of renewable energy is some derivative of solar energy (solar, wind, tide, hydro, but not geo I suppose) the maximum energy we can derive from renewables is 765,000Twh.
The problem with that, is if we start to consume 10’s of percent of the total solar radiation through “renewables” that would otherwise go into generating weather and other natural events, well I’m sure you can see the potential problems.
So, we have to get away from carbon intensive electricity generation, but we can’t physically rely solely on renewables. Therefore we need fission/fusion.
There’s obviously the case of our current economic system causing us to overuse energy in the name of profit (oil is so important because it makes energy cheap and thus easier to make profits), and a change in production/consumption/distribution priorities would likely cause huge decreases in energy needs globally. But we can only really consider energy needs based on what we know.
Whoops, I forgot the “achtually”.
What I find interesting is it seems like we are again converging on the same service as cable. Which suggests that the best method of profiting off watching movies/tv at home is to have ad supported entertainment, with a monthly fee.
Once again, the profit motive ruins something good .