So why did south park decide to shill a Chinese conspiracy designed to cripple the US economy when they themselves...

>thinking that climate change is real

Attached: 1539788453334.jpg (800x450, 42K)

>climate refugee crisis

Attached: 1556302797491.png (1217x1015, 708K)

See you in a few years my friend. I sympathize though, I live in a more northern state and I am seeing a lot of people already moving in from the south and from the coasts.

You sure there's not another reason they're moving?

What evidence? There's no fucking evidence. Can you tell me why sea ice coverage has only increased over the years or why it was snowing recently near the place I live?

Attached: monthly_ice_NH_09.png (3300x2550, 327K)

Where is the source where the total world ice coverage has gone down

>I'm going to ignore a global threat every scientist agrees is happening because my political party told me its fake
At least this guy is baiting

up not down i mean

But the line for 2019 Arctic ice extent is the lowest one.

Attached: CSIC_figure1.png (653x845, 269K)

Attached: 1539315297161s.jpg (239x249, 6K)

>every scientist agrees
Every paper that says Humans can influence the atmosphere versus apocalipse scaremongering made by politicians.

Nice fucking job drawing that line nigger, without it you can clearly see that there are peaks and pits, just because we're going into a pit right now doesn't mean shit. We just got done with an ice age a few thounsand years ago, if you retards were alive back then you would have claimed that cavemen were responsible for it

pay the carbon tax now goy or you will be OVERRUN with brown and black climate refugees

Sometimes I just stare at the Americans. Most countries try to see how far they can push things, agreeing that yeah there's a serious problem but reluctant to do much since, y'know... doing much is hard.

Then you've got the Americans, who can't even get to the point of agreeing that there's a problem.

Its called a trend line you degenerate. Notice that even with the peaks and troughs the overall trend of sea ice coverage is downward. All I did was respond to the idea that sea ice is rising, which is blatantly false if you consider more than 4 years of data,

>global warming is a chinese conspiracy bc HURSHURHUHUHGHH LIIBERALS????
fucking retarded conservacucks, as usual

I love how people use 'believe' in climate change, like it's an opinion.

Brilliant move on the shills part, but the data doesn't give a shit what you think. AGCC is real. It's just a matter of choosing the best way to combat it.

Wait why is the scientific consensus wrong
do you have any evidence to the contrary, or something that disproves their data and conclusions

>Yes, destroy your economy and drink more soi
>good goy
How about you actually come up with some actual evidence. It's not like the midwest just had one of their coldest winters in history... Oh wait...

Attached: 1551053436490.png (594x582, 41K)

>conservatives lost South Park
Does the right have the slightest trace of cultural representation?

Attached: maxresdefault-4.jpg (1280x720, 79K)

Look who our current president is sweetie

>or

How gentile of you.

>"You notice how the libtards have to call it 'climate change' now, and not 'global warming'? It's because they know not everywhere on the planet is warming up."

Attached: SleepWon'tFix-fourchan-v-437288081.jpg (250x180, 4K)

I hate how I have to use "believe" when talking to people. Same with saying I "believe" in evolution or I "believe" the Earth is more than a few thousand years old.

But the global temperature is going up
just climate change is more encompassing because there is more to it than just that

Attached: GlobalAverage_2018.png (1596x907, 264K)

But that's not cultural representation.
Hell, it's not even political representation, given that he's never reached the support of 50% of the population.

Yeah, ignore the Earth has had most of its recorded hottest years within the past decade, the fucking American Midwest dictates the trend of climate for the whole world. This is peak Americentrism and peak retardation.

Its still global warming, we had to change it because evangelical dumbass Americans could not understand that warming at a global level would cause severe weather events other than increased frequency of heat waves,

Yes, I know. I was having a laugh at a common climate change denier drivel

Take a shot every time you hear one of these 4/pol/ tards say 'that's not an argument' or 'provide some evidence' in a conversation, you'll be off your ass every time

>your economy DEPENDS on old inefficient energy!!!! or else you are a LIBERAL!L!!L!L!L
shut the fuck up coal shill i swear to god you cancerous retard fuck

As somebody who studies this shit in a very conservative and very evangelical area of the United States I can no longer tell the difference between satire and real life.

This is the part that fucking floors me every time. Even ignoring climate change, which we are anyways, there is still no reason to not progress to at the very least more efficient fossil fuel sources. The willingness of Americans to cripple themselves in order to spite the other political party is outstanding.

Maybe you retards should look at global average temperature on a longer time scale than 200 years.

Sure thing samefag

When we do we see that climate changes are often linked to CO2 and are naturally less severe and occur at a slower rate.

When have the US Democrats in recent years argued against alternative energy sources?

Nuclear. We base our fears of in on the failures of poor soviet engineering when there is essentially no risk from a modern nuclear plant

The problem is that coal has a massive trail of industries either directly or indirectly involved with it and unless you're able to replace the jobs that are lost when transitioning off coal, you're looking at recessions and economic blight in areas that are heavily involved with coal. It's part of the reason why "learn to code" was such a dismissive and tone-deaf thing to say, there aren't any coding jobs available in areas that would be predominantly effected.

I love how all the /pol/ cunts are just responding with generic right-wing ad hominem garbage instead of actual arguments and then acting like that somehow makes them look smart.

Any areal basing its whole economy off the extraction of a single resource is doomed to fail and I have extreme contempt for the absolute retards crippling the rest of the country to put off the inevitable for just a few more years of economic "stability." There is a very good reason why almost every ghost town in the US was a former mining town, coal is no different in the long run. However, there will always be a need for mining jobs, but if that is your profession then you can't tie yourself and your family down to one area.

They gotta get ready for the upcoming election

Maybe because they had the guts to admit they were not experts on the subject, something majority of Americans are not capable of doing.

I personally do not care, because I think that at this point humanity deserves to suffer.

Anyone still denying that Trump a slave to the Saudis and sucks their oil pipeline like a fat brown dick is an idiot

This seems like a question asked in good faith

Why did (((Matt Stone))) and Trey Parker popularize the meme of gingers having no souls, making it easier for people to laugh off the media systematically replacing them with blacks?

They're centrists you absolute dipshit

>muh gingercide

Attached: 1550934055309-fourchan-trash-21666834.png (293x364, 59K)

They lost South Park since the beginning. If the show now made an episode about Stan accepting his gay dog or Stan and Kyle being two daddies to an egg, people would be complaining about the degeneracy it’s promoting.

I assuming you are replying to and I'm going to say bullshit. Climate change deniers try to act like they understand the subject better than climate scientists after spending 10 min on google. They are the same breed of dumbass who watches a YouTube video then denies the effectiveness of vaccines,

How many conspiracy have been mentioned in this thread
I've counted four

so we should damage the planet because people don't want to move out of areas that have no industry besides coal? industries change and so do the people with it, its the reason we don't have mill towns anymore. its one thing to be a Luddite but when your ludditism cripples the country's environment and efficiency then its a problem.

Only because neither of those are controversial statements today. They'd just be reinforcing the zeitgeist.

They've always been centrist edgelords, it's just you who has become hyper sensitive to any softball critique of the right, they save their real vitriol for liberals, rightfully so

What are your thoughts on nuclear power?

Climate CHANGE

Exactly, you only care about being edgy and controversial for the sake of it. Surprisingly this wasn’t the only point of South Park, which is why Cartman couldn’t stand Family Guy.

Im pro nuclear. I recognize that requires the mining of resources, I think many people in the coal industry would be suited for it, I dont think it necessitates the establishment of permanent cities like coal towns.

Irrelevant because 90% of human infrastructure is designed to function in the climate of past 150-200 years

Side A:
>we need to fuck the planet to preserve jobs
Side B:
>we need to displace workers and fuck their retirements to preserve the planet

Who do you think Joe Average is going to listen to?
Is it in their immediate best interest, or even in their best interest over the course of their entire lifetimes to side with B?

You're only affiliated with the "smart choice" because the negative outcomes don't affect you.
There are politicians and CEOs with better developed empathy than you, user.

Just turn Yellowstone into a geothermal plant. It'd power most of the country.

Well, if your going to focus your show entirely around politcs/current events. The only way to make the show interesting would be to say something though-provoking or profound, and not just parrot the same talking points you'd find on CNN.

Believe it or not I'm more empathetic to the billions of people living in future generations and I would like to preserve the natural world for them. I think that is a higher priority than saving a few thousand people in careers that will be fucked within a decade anyways.

>why are scientific articles disproving climate change being suppressed?
>it's a mystery

Attached: dont question us goyim.jpg (653x1024, 258K)

>You're only affiliated with the "smart choice" because the negative outcomes don't affect you.
>There are politicians and CEOs with better developed empathy than you, user.
Odd, I don't recall this empathy when half of the Southern black population had to leave and move to the coasts.
Weren't conservatives supposed to be the party of tough choices, of letting the free market decide, and forbidding the government from picking winners and losers?

>who do you think the average joe is going to listen to

Most lower middle class and even middle class people pick side B, no one gives a shit about a few miners who get fucked over if we aren't being slowly poisoned to death

you would deprive them of the joy of knowing Black Lung?!

You monster!

the working class is a much higher percentage of the population than you realize, user

The comparison of Trump voters and DV couple was spot-on. You still have /pol/ defending their bad decision, which propbably seemed good at the time, even though he has been exactly the globalist shill they thought he's going to fight against.

> why do my shits on my neighbor's lawns get removed?

I don't see anything asshole. What's posting a white image gonna fucking do?

and we're the ones who're anti-science

There's a third option, develop new industries that are reliable sources of jobs. Your false dichotomy doesn't even apply to the current political climate; the third option was touted by many Democrats, including Hillary Clinton.

>I'm more empathetic to people who will theoretically exist in the future than those who live now.
Is that you or the university brainwashing talking?
Sorry you don't have any friends.

>A population was displaced because a different population wasn't displaced.
Which one matters more? Do you have the power to judge that?

The people plugging their ears and repeating climate change denial rhetoric are responsibility dodgers. If they pretend it's not there, they don't have to fix anything because they're lazy, selfish assholes. The same 'Look out for JUST ME!' mentality that makes me loathe /pol/ think the most.

If global warming isn't real why was it 92 degrees in my house a few days ago.

Don't defend circumcision to be honest, the /pol/drones are actually right on that one

Attached: 1559708286426.jpg (400x400, 34K)

Attached: Head-in-the-sand.jpg (800x800, 46K)

There's no conspiracy to hide anti-circumcision research, I see such articles all the time. Stop trusting random screenshots. And the whole topic is irrelevant to global warming, it doesn't prove any anti-gw research is being hidden either.

>the timeline that shifts 1 year forward every year it doesn't come true

"preserve jobs" lol. None of those jobs are going to exist in the future precisely because of climate change. We (and by we I mean the human race as a whole) had our chance to transition the economy away from those kinds of jobs gradually decades ago but Oil companies suppressed climate research and bought the government so now we're past the point where incremental reforms can help.

Well what can you do? If humans don't want things to change then that is their will. It's not like Earth will be destroyed, it will always survive through everything, humanity will just go through a slow and painful death and that is the circle of life.

Okay, the 'hiding research' bit is maybe bullshit, but circumcision as a whole is genital mutilation and should really be stopped.

>conspiracy

Gotta tag the mean word to anything you don't like

The idea of the fuck, and oops is planned to be past the point of no return about 12 years from now
it's at that point where positive feedback loops that are naturally in the earth will start doing the fuck up the atmosphere thing for us
Some time shortly after that things are expected to get pretty bad

Just because a few assholes shout that the sky is falling does not mean the whole scientific community agrees with them and just because the most reasonable impacts of climate change are not as bad as the worst-case scenario does not mean we should ignore it.

Yeah, no one would ever hide research, or prevent from things from being researched in the first place.

Attached: 01SCI-WATSON1-articleLarge.jpg (600x499, 22K)

>Let's invent jobs from nothing to meet a demand that doesn't exist.
The problem of "how do we stop climate change" isn't about shutting down polluting industries. It's about how you replace those industries and avoid displacing jobs as a result.

Who the fuck is going to fund that?

So what parts of the scientific communities understanding of climate change are wrong and why

You can take the billions already being used in coal industry bailouts.

When has progress every stopped us from giving a fuck about outdated industries and why should a few thousand jobs factor into preserving the stability of the entire biosphere?

>There are politicians and CEOs with better developed empathy than you, user.
empathy? no the CEO's are serving in their own self interest and lobby and fund the politicians. they don't give a fuck about coal miners, look at how they fuck them over if one gets black lung.

>When has progress every stopped us from giving a fuck about outdated industries
When those outdated industries form the base of an unpopular major party.

>about 12 years from now

Gee, at least wait, when the elites decide to actually fuck the climate when they need a global crisis and clowns like you screech about how they were right about parroting their perfect alibi.

Many jobs will be gone anyway and that's just how things roll. Since the population is aging there's employment in nursery and elderly care. I know some men will refuse to take the role that is practically becoming a woman but if you didn't study STEM then that's too bad.

Saying CEOs give a shit about coal miners is like saying they cared about asbestos miners.

>Which one matters more? Do you have the power to judge that?
If you believe in the free market, like conservatives have been telling us for 5 decades, then none of them do.

TIL the entire working class is made up of coal miners

Depending on your relationship with the empirical data, you're taking all these statements at faith. Now, epistemology is somewhat greater than observable stimuli, so good on ya, but still, these are faith based positions for most of us.

Which industries? Are they going to be located in the areas where people are losing their jobs? Will the new industries offering enough jobs to fill the jobs that were lost? Will the new jobs be accessible to the people who need them? Will the people who lost their jobs need extensive retraining or go back to school? Won't the labor supply glut depress wages through increased competition? Will these new industries be sustainable in the long-term? Are these new industries going to pay comparable wages so people won't experience a drop in their quality of life? The problem with the third option as touted was that it was entirely hypothetical, and even if it wasn't it would need to be in place before you start laying off workers for a smooth transition.

>None of those jobs are going to exist in the future
How far into the future? 80 years? 40?
You've got your eyes on a mirage at the horizon.
All you have are vague terms and estimates built on hypotheses, so you'd feel right at home on Wall Street.
Try proving something first. We live in reality, not your fantasy.

>Will the new industries offering enough jobs to fill the jobs that were lost?
There are plenty of jobs for people who are willing to do any kind of job. That's what boomers have always said to me so now they have to follow their own advice.

Sorry i don't know much about the conspiracy theory
why are elites trying to lower industry
how would industry not be good for those who have power over industry

It would be wonderful if we could redirect local economies hammered by industry changes, but we don't do that anywhere, with anything. The fact we talk pretty about doing so with coal et al. is mere political wankery.

You should really shut your mouth, maybe your oxygen circulation could be cut off.

A political party is not trying to get rich by scaring idiots into paying money for bullshit like a carbon footprint or canvas handbags.Neither would do a single fucking thing about the climate in the first place which anyone who is not retarded could tell you

They do so because it's required of their discourse community. Within this community, their rhetorical choices are the superior ones. We're free to comment on how poor we view these choices to be, but we'll only ever comment as outsiders.

Why it is the job of the government to ensure they retain their actual standards of living?

Why do most environmentalists say that individual choice is mostly pointless, because it's mostly a few large powerful groups who are doing all the damage

It would, however, require people who grew up and coal towns (and are not going to leave them) to move elsewhere, since nuclear materials aren't necessarily anywhere near coal deposits.

Are you willing to make this far-left argument about every other group left behind, or is this something you only afford to the conservative working class?

>you chose the wrong industry at the wrong time? oh well, too bad
Those people pointing the finger at dirty industry are the same who promote all that crying about student loan debt, begging for bail-outs for ignorant mistakes.

What makes brainwashed university students more valuable than oil rig workers and coal miners? Is it the programming that tells them to hate their nation, its laws, and themselves? Doesn't take much to guess who that benefits.

Why are you even asking, you know he'll change his opinion "the quality of life" once it's about some other group of people.

The hypocrisy of the right is absolutely outstanding. And I know in many areas the left is just as hypocritical but those are other topics, but the right always goes on about having a smaller government and allowing for the free market to have more power but when that stops benefiting them they need big brother to continuously bail them out.

You're changing the topic entirely! We're talking about global warming and circumscion research was ONLY brought up in relation to the idea that the research against global warming was being hidden.
No, "conspiracy" isn't the word you take issue with, it's "theory". You have an unproven concept based on a screenshot.
Irrelevant to the argument. Just because something CAN happen, doesn't serve as proof that it IS happening.

They are taxing and passing laws onto people. They are immune to scrunity on their hipocrisy and will only use it as a pretext to strenghen the boot on the people while changing nothing that hurts them.

So that's their shitty choice. If they are going to willfully harm themselves by staying in a failing town because of stubbornness then its nobodies obligation to care.

College students objectively produce more wealth than individual coal workers. Free market at work.

>What makes brainwashed university students more valuable than oil rig workers and coal miners?
Mostly because they have skills that are needed in today's society, such as technology and A.I. Same reason why white family living in Scandinavia has more value than some African family with 10 kids. I know you think that too.

The Foucauldian knowledge/power framework is a worthwhile lens to use when reading scientific literature. Hell, even a relatively pedestrian understanding of the role of money and political ideology is useful. But the reason articles arguing against climate change don't gain much purchase in academic discourse is because they've all, thus far, been terrible.

>be me
>be an asbestos miner in the late 1960s
>you chose the wrong industry at the wrong time? oh well, too bad

Yeah, they did chose the wrong industry. Its a bad situation for them. Doesn't mean the whole planet needs to suffer.

There is no conspiracy but circumcision advocates being dishonest
>You have an
Yea Forums is one person.

Coal is pretty much dead now. And if we take the worst predictions for climate change, we'll all be dead soon, as in, this century.

>Try proving something first.
"the race of our lives revisited" authored by Jeremy Grantham estimated that once the proper externalities are taken into account (the cost of energy, the long term damage to the environment, the cost of replacement for the resources that are extracted) then almost no actual profit has been generated in the western world over the past decade. In other words it is literally financially impossible to maintain capitalism as it exists today in the long term because of climate change.

>invent jobs from nothing
Are you retarded? How about you just read Hillary Clinton's plan for job replacement: funds to retrain coal miners in other industries, to help them develop their own businesses, infrastructure investment in coal mining towns so they don't just collapse with their already dying industry, and to safeguard their healthcare and pensions. Instead you're wasting money by bailing out the companies so the already rich people can keep their own extravagant income while the towns they're exploiting are dying under their own weight. Like honestly how dare the right pretend they care about workers when all their plans involve avoiding improving the lives and towns of the workers and instead piling money on their bosses.

Solar and wind energy is cheaper. In Texas we get 22 percent of our power from wind. We get more form wind than coal

>nuh uh nuh UH NUH UH
Ok but how about some actual evidence or a real argument? You only have an unproven theory based on your feelings and a screenshot.

Well, the US Constitution decrees that the government will provide for the general welfare of the citizenry, so arguably it's the job of the government to ensure standards of living because the Founders said so.

Raging socialists? In my Yea Forums?

Sounds like socialism to me user

It's a regular choice in political and societal rhetoric to suggest people move for work. Hell, I'm in my thirties, and I don't know many people who didn't move to find work.

Look I was a mailman for almost 10 years (starting from high school, and my first summer job) until I was fired simply because there were no paper mail anymore. I didn't cry and whine because the world is changing, I went to work as a personal assistant for disabled people and then I went to college, now I'm an engingeer and make more money than I ever dared to dream as a mailman. My mother quit her job she had for 20 years because she was burning out from it, and studied completely new career when she was 50. You can change things if you will, but then you need to stop playing th victim.

If you are stubborn and absolutely refuse to change with the rest of the world, then the restof the world shouldn't care.

The free market will take care of it.

>user gives legitimate argument
>but huhhuhuhhuh SOCIALIST?!?!?
again with the conservacuck non-argument, typical stupid child of a conservacuck. you let your own government cuck you out of your own tax dollars so that it goes into the president golf's trips instead of your healthcare. you'd rather die than stop being cucked.

Because things get ugly if a lot of people can't build a better future for themselves and their families by playing by the rules.

How would these taxes be more profitable than industry and the taxing you can do if it's thriving
also why would those in power need climate change to justify more laws the limit freedom
Most of the most gross governmental steps of power come from things like the war on terror, and even without that they can usually make due

Granted, though I think all developed countries should engage in a debate about the real (and stated) importance of a great many of these jobs. I can only speak to university bureaucracy, but I know a few provosts who don't do a fucking thing.

Because it is. The only way to make change is to get big companies to change, and the only way to do that is by putting the financial burden on everyone else but the big companies

Its laughable that conservatives cry about socialism while propping up an industry that is failing and will already have failed without government interference.

Disingenuous and stupid. Try to figure out not everybody that replies to you is the same person first before babbling here.

>user gives legitimate argument
You can't be serious. You know damn well the right would never make that argument about black factory workers in Detroit.

In Ohio they bailed out two coal plants because they aren’t economically competitive

The argument applies to every group, and isn't even about leaving people behind. It's that the touted "third option" didn't exist as anything other than a political promise.

Except in this case it wouldn't be the obsolescence of an industry due to naturally occurring changes as a result of the free market, it'd be the result of government policy. A free market argument is largely irrelevant anyways, as the USA does not and never has had a truly free market and the right has never been opposed to regulating the free market, just the extent of regulation.

That's a misleading statement. You have to specify based on average lifetime earnings within their field of study.

I think most people would agree, but I tend to think a sufficiently regulated capitalist market could be leveraged to provide for the general welfare.

It hasn't yet, and I'm not quite sure how it could, but I'm open to any arguments from true believers.

Those people can also be murdered by the state.

You're probably talking about something like women's studies which is very small fraction and doesn't really affect much no matter how much people tend to seethe about it. The biggest factors are STEM and medical which both are needed in developed countries. The biggest problem is the lack of qualified nurses, which doesn't require as much as university career.

>than industry
They will tax you under the pretext of climate change.
They will put laws and engineer culture under the pretext of climate change.
They won't do anything that hurts their own money and power under the pretext of climate change.

>College students objectively produce more wealth than individual coal workers.
Without laborers, those college students would have no employers or resources to play with.
Urban centers can only exist because of what the rural countryside and industrial mining operations funnel into it. A giant tree cannot live without its roots.

Are you aware of this myopia you're using to judge a select part of the society you rely upon?

Climate change isnt even a major reason why coal is dying. Obama era investments in fracking have flooded the US with cheap oil and natural gas and energy demand is flat in the US because of better power efficiency. Green regulation or not coal mines would be getting shut down either way because of the overproduction of energy. This is the same reason several NPPs have shut down and just been replaced with cheaper coal plants.

If they can't adjust we'll just import from abroad or bring immigrants to replace them.
Why do you socialists hate the free market?

>109013745
do you have any proof they are doing this, or why they are doing it this way
or what laws limit freedom in a meaningful way they have been passed in the name of climate change

Nursing degrees in my neck of the woods require a four year degree in a highly competitive field. If you have a mere 4.0, you're not getting in.

But no, STEM is the new hotness (if not a total meme), but tons of inefficiencies even there just due to the fact that people will pay for things they want, not really for things they need.

>don't ban asbestos, think of the poor asbestos miners!

Only Antifa snowflakes threaten political violence. Adult people use their free speech to argue politely.

In a globalism, a service economy can persist by offshoring its manufacturing and importing its labor. Sure, laborers are needed, but in terms of wages paid, they don't need to come anywhere near to approaching the locals.

Real men talk
and if they are ignored and their talk does nothing you know what real men do
they sit back and keep talking as they get walked over
its a sign of strength

Well, a truly free market with no redistribution efforts (even bog standard taxes) couldn't really be socialist. Honestly, capitalism is more purely expressed with fascist governments than democratic ones.

I'm talking about practical nurse, not a registered nurse, and I mean that it simply requires less (it's an equivalent of high school here). There's not enough people BECAUSE it's not "hot thing" and men don't want to do that in the first place except paramedic because it's a cool and masc thing.

Come on, all political ideologies commit violence against someone.

ITT: Conservatives start talking like socialists the moment their livelihoods are threatened.

How much does practical nursing pay? Here, being a paramedic would net you poverty wages, and I doubt anyone who wasn't an RN would even get a job, given how many RNs come out of the program every year.

And I meant that STEM, in general, was hot, which it is. Liberal arts (except economics, somehow) have mostly died.

They'd have to live nearby and speak the language of their superiors.
There are laws that make that difficult to accomplish and no one who could quality for legal immigration would want to do those kinds of jobs.

If I were running something in silicon valley, I'd be more interested in Russia and India.
The H1B program makes importing skilled workers very easy, meaning I don't have to overpay some poor kid who's up to his eyeballs in student loan debt for the same quality of work.

The only thing jeopardizing blue collar workers is government over-regulation. White collar are easily replaced as a matter of the free market, and if you're anything to go by, they know and resent it in many degrees.

If you count all the bonuses then LPN would be around 29k, RN around 34k and paramedic 43k a year

>and if they are ignored
No, trust me, we hear you.
We just decided that "destroy america, communism rules" isn't really a message we can get behind.

I mean, technically. I think when it comes to the U.S. though, antifa is a special kind of awful. Other political groups may cause violence, yes, but they tend to do stuff OTHER than that as well, whether it's holding rallies, lectures, etc. Antifa literally -only- exists to cause violence, in particular at other people's legal events.

Asbestos isn't banned in the USA, just heavily regulated with restrictions on how it can be used. Even if you account for the decline of asbestos use following the first lawsuits in the seventies, you're still looking at almost 20 years before the the 1989 Asbestos Ban and Phase Out Rule which saw a general downward trend in production that has mostly remained stable since the late 90s.

RNs make, on average, 60 to 70k here. Twenty-nine thousand for a LPN would see you sharing your rent or living in the next town over. Paramedics only make 30 to 35k, so they're pretty much out of luck too. It takes 80k to buy a median home here, and I live in a flyover state.

>You have to specify based on average lifetime earnings within their field of study.
Well, given the multiple billions in bailouts they've received, it's reasonable to assume that the amount of wealth produced by coal workers is negative.

Reminder that Republican shills of Exon are the ONLY conservative politicians on earth that deny climate change. Republicans suck their corporate master's dicks because they think they can live off a steady diet of semen while the rest of the world starves to death.

Because they knew it would trigger conservashits and that's always a good laugh

Dumbass, almost all political violence in the US has been caused by right wing extremists. Be a real man and stop lying

They certainly commit violence against fascists, that's true. That's sorta their whole thing. Personally, I think the biggest problem with antifa anywhere is that black bloc, "economic violence against the poor is fine if I can stick it to Starbucks" anarchists have appropriated antifa groups in major cities.

Rallies and lectures, being good or bad based on their content, can just be tools for espousing violence against the enemies of the political ideology. These aren't inherently good things. Plus, I'm not a fascist, so antifa ain't after me. I can't say that of other ideologies.

You've just described all the republicans.

>They certainly commit violence against fascists, that's true.
No, they don't.
>That's sorta their whole thing.
No, it isn't.
>Personally, I think the biggest problem with antifa anywhere is that black bloc, "economic violence against the poor is fine if I can stick it to Starbucks" anarchists have appropriated antifa groups in major cities.
Antifa faggots love corporations, especially faggot hangouts like Starbucks.
>Rallies and lectures, being good or bad based on their content, can just be tools for espousing violence against the enemies of the political ideology. These aren't inherently good things.
Yes, they are inherently good things. The freedom of assembly is an incredibly basic necessity in a democratic society.
>Plus, I'm not a fascist, so antifa ain't after me.
They regularly attack their own members all the time for doing stuff like "carrying an american flag".

Granted RNs get the worst payment here which is why they move to other nearby countries. But if you don't want to be a code monkey or some marketing/lawyer Jew then it's pretty much the only thing you can do.

>I'm not a fascist
Then you're still a target.
Antifa are fascists. They're hoping you'll join them or die.

By that metric you're going to need to account for government bailouts, grants, subsidies, and any other sort of financial benefits across those fields too, also while subtracting government loans and grants to those students from lifetime earnings.

This is what happens when you're in an echochamber
you start seeing stuff like this
this is why it's important to look across the isle

>Antifa faggots love corporations, especially faggot hangouts like Starbucks.
wait isn't the other right wing talking point about antifa that they're bad because they cause property damage and break starbucks windows whenever they riot? How the fuck can they love corporations when they keep smashing corporate property

Attached: confused looking afro-american men.png (256x299, 64K)

>this is why it's important to look across the isle
Antifa isn't "across the isle". They're a fringe group of terrorists that are universally despised by every single other person on every part of the political landscape, including most other leftists.

They mostly seem to fuck up public property, and universities.

"A general group of people who use direct action against fascists are a fringe group of terrorists and not across the isle too i guess"

The bigger question is when Tegrify Weed will become real
youtube.com/watch?v=nQqBOz8bkBE

Attached: Randy.png (1170x658, 697K)

It occurs to me that you may not know what antifa is.

40% of the workforce has a college degree.
If 40% of the workforce received more from the government than they earned, we would have declared bankruptcy a long time ago.

>anti fascists are fascists
All righty.

Strictly speaking, the government can make money forever, and thus never need to declare bankruptcy.

By "across the isle", you were implying that there were two groups; right and left.
Antifa does not represent the left.
"looking across the isle" to understand the left better by using Antifa as an example would be just like trying to understand rightwingers by looking at the Aryan Brotherhood.

Is it so hard to believe that college graduates are worth more to society than coal miners?

They call themselves anti-fascists.
Do you know what they are, or are you just taking their word for it?

AISLE

He hasn't had such support. He's quite popular among republicans and quite unpopular otherwise. If we look at the total population, he bounces around mid thirties and mid forties. This is plenty of support (if managed properly) to win an election.

>Is it so hard to believe that college graduates are worth more to society than coal miners?
Not that guy, but few years ago I would have said "no". Since then, it's become disturbingly common for people to leave college more retarded than when they entered, with absolutely no useful skills or knowledge to show for it.

Call me when they make a move against the Aryan Brotherhood or try to storm a neo-Nazi gathering. Otherwise they're just playing in the streets with the right-wing LARPers.

Looks like we got a GRAMMER NAZI here
ANTIFA, ATTACK!!!

Manbearpig is a Chinese conspiracy designed to cripple the US economy?

>bounces

You are a foreigner paying only the barest of attention to anything in America.

It was made up by Al Gore, and he's that chink who invented the internet and great firewall.
So yes.

I'm quite familiar with the history of the usage of that term. I'm also fairly familiar with how political ideologies can name themselves whatever they want for whatever ends. I've previously stated that antifa have quite a lot of anarchists in their midst who are frivolous in their deployment of economic violence. Now, I'm not into that, but anarchists aren't fascists. Honestly, I'm not sure how antifa could be fascists, unless they're doing that whole socialist thing from back in the day, which doesn't jive with the movement's history or the recent (even shitty) activities in America. I mean, punching people (even non-fascists, even people you agree with) isn't fascism.

No, Manbearpig was them poking fun at An Inconvenient Truth, a highly sensationalist book written by Al Gore about climate change that was way off the mark about the effects of climate change. Al Gore himself would later participate in a joke about it on Futurama.