Sometimes i wonder if the actions of ICE, are a reaction to try and stop immigration because of climate change. Naturally the administration will never say this, but the American west in particular is suffering a water crisis today and recent times seem to indicate today is the new normal. I think its reasonable to guess that the land cant support more people.
No. The actions of ICE are a reaction to how much Trump and his base hate brown people. This administration doesn't even believe climate change is real, Trump infamously called it a "Chinese hoax."
A big problem is these political spectrums are not really coherent moral philosophies yet fulfill an individual’s need for that kind of structure. I think anyone would find that “a person in America has a larger carbon footprint than a person almost anywhere else; therefore it’s an ecological imperative to expel whomever we can“ is odious. So we just don’t think about it.
The current administration doesn't believe in climate change / global warming, so no. It's just the typical "blame foreigners for your problems" thing that every authoritarian regime all over the world indulges in, and uses to justify nasty stuff. In the last 20 years, for example, it's also been how China justifies stealing stuff from other countries to further their local industries and technological growth (not that there aren't fantastic engineers and scientists in China already).
The current administration doesn't believe in climate change / global warming
Sure they do. None of the Greenland stuff (or most of the Canada stuff) makes sense unless they believe in these things.
We assume that if they believed they would try to slow these things down, but they chose a different path, profiting off the accelerationism.
The claims of not believing are just fodder for the FOX News/OANN watchers and what they say publicly is not what they believe.
In much the same way that David Miscavige doesn't believe in Xenu, I'm pretty positive Donald Trump does believe in global warming, he just doesn't care... or rather only cares insomuch as it is a profit opportunity.
I’ve been puzzled why climate change messaging seems to ignore the emissions of other large countries like China and India. If USA reduces emissions but others don’t, well we all share the same atmosphere so…
But similar to your angle, I’ve wondered if the climate change messaging is secretly targeted towards resource depletion. If USA switches off oil and oil runs out, who cares if others didn’t switch? But people have a hard time processing “going to run out in 50 years” as a crisis, so instead we get an apocalypse angle, I suppose because humans love the apocalypse (see: various religions).
The USA is far wealthier, uses more carbon per-person, and is responsible for more historical emissions than China or India. We have an obligation to reduce our gluttony before asking others to go without.
I’ve been puzzled why climate change messaging seems to ignore the emissions of other large countries like China and India.
It doesn't. The issue is likely more that you don't see or read widely enough.
Even here on HN you'll see mention of China and India's emissions and use of coal on a regular basis.
The US is a significant mention for two main reasons:-
* of all the human lofted additional CO2 of the past century plus (that sourced from formerly deep underground) the US is the single largest sole country contributor (although China is catching up (but may or may not equal the US)), ...
* the US is still a large per capita contributor today (ignoring tiny tiny outlier countries with small populations and near single export fossil fuel extraction countries) - it has an energy intensive economy.
My personal beef isn't so much with the US but specifically with US based fossil fuel and resource companies of the 1970s onwards (eg: Koch brothers) who were well aware of the problem with increasing the insulation factor of the atmosphere and doubled down anyway - spending large on "think tanks" to promote confusion via media, over sell the appeal of large cars, destroy any and all grass roots campaigns for public transport, etc. (CO2MaXXing ?).
The US has had influence across the planet post WWII, these campaigns just promoted a bad example for profit and deferred early and timely addressing of the issues.
...the Secretary of Homeland Security shall take into account in any labor condition application... whether the employer sponsor directly or indirectly engaged in layoffs within the previous year or plans future layoffs...
Unfortunately, as a 2nd order effect, I wonder if we'll see fewer layoffs and more outright firing to balance it out.
This is long overdue. The fact that a large tech company lays 10,000 people off and then immediately turns around and petitions for thousands of H-1B employees is criminal.
Sometimes i wonder if the actions of ICE, are a reaction to try and stop immigration because of climate change. Naturally the administration will never say this, but the American west in particular is suffering a water crisis today and recent times seem to indicate today is the new normal. I think its reasonable to guess that the land cant support more people.
No. The actions of ICE are a reaction to how much Trump and his base hate brown people. This administration doesn't even believe climate change is real, Trump infamously called it a "Chinese hoax."
In the face of such incredulous hate, one must try to find some meaning to try and rationalize it.
A big problem is these political spectrums are not really coherent moral philosophies yet fulfill an individual’s need for that kind of structure. I think anyone would find that “a person in America has a larger carbon footprint than a person almost anywhere else; therefore it’s an ecological imperative to expel whomever we can“ is odious. So we just don’t think about it.
The current administration doesn't believe in climate change / global warming, so no. It's just the typical "blame foreigners for your problems" thing that every authoritarian regime all over the world indulges in, and uses to justify nasty stuff. In the last 20 years, for example, it's also been how China justifies stealing stuff from other countries to further their local industries and technological growth (not that there aren't fantastic engineers and scientists in China already).
Sure they do. None of the Greenland stuff (or most of the Canada stuff) makes sense unless they believe in these things.
We assume that if they believed they would try to slow these things down, but they chose a different path, profiting off the accelerationism.
The claims of not believing are just fodder for the FOX News/OANN watchers and what they say publicly is not what they believe.
In much the same way that David Miscavige doesn't believe in Xenu, I'm pretty positive Donald Trump does believe in global warming, he just doesn't care... or rather only cares insomuch as it is a profit opportunity.
Lol, the Golf courses, Almond plantages and Datacenters would beg to differ. It can't support more peasants maybe
I’ve been puzzled why climate change messaging seems to ignore the emissions of other large countries like China and India. If USA reduces emissions but others don’t, well we all share the same atmosphere so…
But similar to your angle, I’ve wondered if the climate change messaging is secretly targeted towards resource depletion. If USA switches off oil and oil runs out, who cares if others didn’t switch? But people have a hard time processing “going to run out in 50 years” as a crisis, so instead we get an apocalypse angle, I suppose because humans love the apocalypse (see: various religions).
The USA is far wealthier, uses more carbon per-person, and is responsible for more historical emissions than China or India. We have an obligation to reduce our gluttony before asking others to go without.
China and India have very, very low per capita emissions. They are also the countries working the hardest and fastest at installing renewable energy.
It doesn't. The issue is likely more that you don't see or read widely enough.
Even here on HN you'll see mention of China and India's emissions and use of coal on a regular basis.
The US is a significant mention for two main reasons:-
* of all the human lofted additional CO2 of the past century plus (that sourced from formerly deep underground) the US is the single largest sole country contributor (although China is catching up (but may or may not equal the US)), ...
* the US is still a large per capita contributor today (ignoring tiny tiny outlier countries with small populations and near single export fossil fuel extraction countries) - it has an energy intensive economy.
My personal beef isn't so much with the US but specifically with US based fossil fuel and resource companies of the 1970s onwards (eg: Koch brothers) who were well aware of the problem with increasing the insulation factor of the atmosphere and doubled down anyway - spending large on "think tanks" to promote confusion via media, over sell the appeal of large cars, destroy any and all grass roots campaigns for public transport, etc. (CO2MaXXing ?).
The US has had influence across the planet post WWII, these campaigns just promoted a bad example for profit and deferred early and timely addressing of the issues.
I wonder how the Big Tech co's who kissed the ring are feeling about this.
It's amazing how much of a hypocrite he can be
https://thehill.com/business/5603478-trump-organization-fore...
(Trump org requests record level foreign worker permits, 2025)
Americans had more than 10 years of exposure and still finds him "amazing".
1. did not call him "amazing"
2. we are "amazed" on a nearly daily basis, better not to desensitize, that's what he wants, overton window and such
This is not necessarily a personal thing with Trump. If anything I think this might likely be more of a JD Vance thing.
Unfortunately, as a 2nd order effect, I wonder if we'll see fewer layoffs and more outright firing to balance it out.
This is long overdue. The fact that a large tech company lays 10,000 people off and then immediately turns around and petitions for thousands of H-1B employees is criminal.
Must apply to existing H1-B holders who got it in the last 5 years or so.