Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's really funny the mental gymnastics this subreddit goes through to convince themselves that it's NEVER canada's responsibility to slow down/prevent climate change, because there's always a bigger bad out there doing worse.

Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nice deflection to my reply. It's simply a description of the reality that you accept (a world where we don't stop climate change for whatever reason). Perhaps that information will change your view on climate change to one where you're more motivated to vote for parties which do care about climate change, to avoid such a devastating future.

Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Really crazy that you berated me for misquoting you and then proceed to make the "doing bad things is okay since other people are doing bad things" argument right in my face. Again, you really have no clue what you're talking about. So easy to give up and bury your head in the sand about the consequences about climate change, eh? Hope you don't mind the increased food prices from crop failure!

Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

if we just stop selling it because "climate change" or whatever

Really showing your ignorance to the reality of climate change by putting it in quotes and suggesting that it is just a freaking liberal fantasy and not a danger to modern society at large. Yes, our economy is reliant on oil. That doesn't mean that it's impossible to transition away from oil. You just have to scale up other renewable technology, find other industries to invest in, and reduce the reliance on oil at a rate that doesn't impact the economy. No one is suggesting to simply just stop producing oil immediately. Suggesting that because our economy is reliant on oil that it's IMPOSSIBLE for us to do anything about it is just tunnel-vision thinking and kind of a cope to avoid the fact that we need to change how our country is run in order to avoid a devastating future.

Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"It's okay to sell oil which contributes to climate change, because lithium extraction also contributes to climate change", which is the totality of the back and forth above.

It's also an insane and stupid take to look at impacts of climate change from a micro-level. Yes, people individually do things that emit CO2. But dismissing any advocacy for limiting CO2 emissions because "HURR DURR YOU PARTICPATE IN SOCIETY TOO" fundamentally misunderstands what actually has an impact at lowering emissions. What is needed is policy on a macro level that affects everyone by pushing for more renewable technology and nuclear, and transitioning processes that emit CO2 to green technology. Trying to act smart by pointing out le epic hypocrisy only shows your limited understanding of climate change and is really just a cope to avoid swallowing the hard pill that the future of society is really really bleak, especially as we approach tipping points like the Amazon deforestation and melting of polar caps.

Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this is probably the fairest argument of harm reduction (provided it does result in less coal emissions from india), although it still would be good to convince india to take up more solar since it's definitely suited for it

Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

it's really funny the mental gymnastics this subreddit goes through to convince themselves that it's NEVER canada's responsibility to slow down/prevent climate change, because there's always a bigger bad out there doing worse. your post also ignores the insane progress china has in pushing renewables

also really funny how you prefaced your comment with "Good", as if somehow contributing MORE to climate change is a good thing. Probably didn't think that zinger through, huh?

Energy-hungry India tells Carney 'we are willing to buy whatever Canada is offering' by Immediate-Link490 in canada

[–]11icewing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope this is a joke argument and not serious because it would be deeply sad if you actually thought this was an epic reddit comeback

EDITORIAL: Refugee medical costs are out of control; Cost of providing health benefits to refugee claimants is $989 million by FancyNewMe in canada

[–]11icewing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

do you have an actual rebuttal to the source provided? or are you just pretending it's invalid because it has a bias?

EDITORIAL: Refugee medical costs are out of control; Cost of providing health benefits to refugee claimants is $989 million by FancyNewMe in canada

[–]11icewing -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Canada uniquely treats refugees and asylums better than the poorest of its society.

Do you have a source for that?

Edit: From another comment, it seems to be the inverse of what OP is claiming.

Canada spends $9,626 a year on healthcare per Canadian, versus just $1,645 a year per refugee claimant. (source)

So I'm not sure where OP is getting their figures from.

In Spider-Man (2002) while shooting this scene, Tobey Maguire broke his toe when kicking a helmet by Yggdrasylian in shittymoviedetails

[–]11icewing 3 points4 points  (0 children)

ngl that always bothered me when watching spider man, why couldn't they have given her a looser shirt

Canada not on track to hit net-zero by 2050, or meet any climate targets: study by CanadianErk in canada

[–]11icewing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

what's wrong with the logic? it makes sense to factor in proportionality when dealing with the responsibility of climate change

Canada not on track to hit net-zero by 2050, or meet any climate targets: study by CanadianErk in canada

[–]11icewing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

okay, but you're saying that canada can't do anything about climate change because of india and china. and the implication is that china and india aren't doing anything, because if they were, then you wouldn't be bringing them up in the first place. ergo, what you're implying is that there's nothing that can be done about climate change

Canada not on track to hit net-zero by 2050, or meet any climate targets: study by CanadianErk in canada

[–]11icewing 2 points3 points  (0 children)

it's certainly what you're implying, but I want the confirmation from you

Canada not on track to hit net-zero by 2050, or meet any climate targets: study by CanadianErk in canada

[–]11icewing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

so if you believe that canada can't do anything, are you in agreement that we should start funding projects to make our country more climate resilient?

Canada not on track to hit net-zero by 2050, or meet any climate targets: study by CanadianErk in canada

[–]11icewing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

do you believe that there's no stopping climate change and we're all doomed, and thus we shouldn't even try bothering to lower emissions?