• fartington@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Regarding climate, Oliver said, if businesses are left to their own devices, they will “develop the technologies that will power us into the future, not using carbon-based fuels,” though he did not offer any concrete examples of how that would work.

    Yes, I totally believe that.

    • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      he did not offer any concrete examples of how that would work.

      Libertarian “thinking” in a nutshell, really

      • Wrench@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        And yet, there are so many counter examples to pull from. Like, the basis of most regulations start with companies, who had been left to their own devices, completely screwing their customers, workers, and the environment.

        But sure. It would work this time if we take off the guardrails.

        Yep.

        • fartington@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Exactly

          As of August 17, 2022, there were 1,329 Superfund sites in the National Priorities List in the United States.[2] Forty-three additional sites have been proposed for entry on the list, and 452 sites have been cleaned up and removed from the list.[2] New JerseyCalifornia, and Pennsylvaniahave the most sites.[3]

        • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Clearly the problem is too much regulation! If we stop regulating companies completely, they’ll ✨magically✨ just start doing the right thing.

          Shhhh don’t talk about historical precedent for that not working, libertarian brains can’t handle that sort of stuff. Just repeat after me: TAXATION IS THEFT, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, WAR IS PEACE

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      if businesses are left to their own devices, they will “develop the technologies that will power us into the future, not using carbon-based fuels,”

      glances at Communist Chinese EVs

      So… Um…

    • DMBFFF@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      😁

      Your cynicism is both understandable and warranted.

      That said, a few Libertarians speak of pollution being a violation of the NAP.

    • Neato@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Trust corporations to save us without any incentive to do so.”

      Fuck that, fuck Chase, fuck corporations.

    • testfactor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, I recall seeing a ton of press a while back that the percentage of the Texas power grid that was renewable keeps growing because it’s more economically viable than traditional power plants.

      So, like, he may not be wrong. Solar and wind just keep getting cheaper. It’s not like businesses will spend extra money to burn coal, just to spite the environment.

      • fartington@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        In 2015, investigative journalists uncovered internal company documents showing that Exxon scientists have been warning their executives about “potentially catastrophic” anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming since at least 1977 (12). Researchers and journalists have subsequently unearthed additional documents showing that the US oil and gas industry writ large—by way of its trade association, the American Petroleum Institute—has been aware of potential human-caused global warming since at least the 1950s (3); the coal industry since at least the 1960s (4); electric utilities, Total oil company, and General Motors and Ford motor companies since at least the 1970s (58); and Shell oil company since at least the 1980s (9).

        • testfactor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, I think that’s what the majority of people are advocating for in green circles too, no? “No New Coal” and all that?

          I don’t hear much advocacy for tearing down working power plants.

          Power plants don’t exactly have an infinite shelf life. They get run down and need to be replaced. Eventually only building green leads to only having green.

          Combine that with the ever increasing cost of actually running a coal fire plant. Shipping in hundreds of tons of coal is eventually gonna get way more expensive than operating a solar or wind farm. At that point the business owners will likely tear the plant down of their own volition to replace it with the cheaper option. (Though that will be admittedly a little slower, as you have to amortize in the construction and downtime costs.)

      • Hazzia@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Absolutely agree that, at this point, he’s probably right, especially if he were to go all-in on the free market aspect and cut 100% of fossil fuel subsidies. However, it does bug me that he’s clearly ignoring how that “free market economy” produces those oil/gas/coal company vultures to begin with. The primary issue I have against vanilla libertarianism is their insistance that deregulation is a solution to everything when we’re living in a time that’s obviously worse off because of companies and individuals who weren’t being properly regulated.