Your mantra.
“I can’t deny that Bidenomics has improved every single measure of our economy significantly after the record setting abject disaster of Trumps last year in office and the lingering effects of its apocalyptic mismanagement, but it will get worse someday, so Bidenomics is a failure.”
You can’t point to a single metric of economics that hasn’t significantly improved under Biden. NOT ONE. “It will get worse.” is not related to reality, it’s just your own wishful thinking, hoping for America to fail.

Such idiotic nonsense. Nothing has been worse for the economy than Republican leadership. Every recession in recent history was under Republicans because of republican policies, every economic recovery was under Democrats thanks to democratic policies. The vast majority of inflation was due to Trump spending like a drunken sailor with mommy’s credit card and increasing the debt by 8 trillion and deficit by trillions or tens of trillions more before his policies expire. Biden’s policies, Bidenomics, averted a recession/depression you (and many economists) insisted was coming by 2022 and reversed inflation faster than the most optimistic economist predicted.

Bidenomics has saved American pocketbooks from the results of 4 years of federal financial malfeasance.
Trump ended his term with a negative gdp, huge exploded deficit, rapidly growing debt, worst unemployment in living memory, a historically easy to defraud never repay ppp loan program every Republican congressperson scammed, tens of millions of disabled taxpayers and a million dead taxpayers. Trumpenomics had us on the fast road to unavoidable recession/depression in Jan 2021….Bidenomics avoided it and created a boom. 🤦‍♂️

Republican bickering has already led to our national credit rating being downgraded once, costing the nation billions in increased loan interest alone with nothing gained besides the degradation of our congress and the national union. You would happily have that continue until it bankrupted the nation irreparably then blame Biden.

What’s he mean “young people”? I’m 50, I’ve felt that way since 1990 because I pay attention. We are addicts, addicts use until they die, they don’t quit because their health suffers.

At 3 degrees some developing countries won’t be able to feed their population!?! WTF?! That was the case before any climate changes, dummy. It’s bad now. It will be apocalyptic relatively soon…like decades, not centuries.

WILL cause trillions in damage!?….guess again, already happened. It WILL cause tens of trillions in damage per year, eventually outpacing global gdp.

What scientists are he counting when he says “most agree” we won’t see this kind of future? Certainly not climate scientists, they agree it’s happening, and none see it even slowing, much less getting better. From what I saw, they just went on strike because they’re sick of being ignored.

Leveled off, eh? Look at your own graph to see that China’s coal consumption went up by 5000 twh equivalents since 2010, and is insanely massive…it went up by more than the US used at its highest levels (in his timeline). But he calls that “leveled off”. Who is this guy? He’s insane or lying through his teeth.

Solar and wind have been better than coal economically for decades, but we haven’t switched over, have we?

Where does he get his statistics, because every time I see real numbers we’ve only slowed our increased emissions by 4%, we have not actually reduced them….like saying Obama reduced the military budget because he didn’t increase it as much as previous administrations. It’s asinine.

India isn’t building trillions in solar, they’re building fossil fuel power plants and hydro electric, also disastrous for the environment….and useless after their glaciers fail.

The CO2 in the atmosphere will be there for 300-1000 years, carbon capture is a ridiculous pipe dream that completely ignores the scope of the problem. Methalhydrate is already destabilized, and it’s 25 times as potent as CO2. The total global amount of methane carbon bound up in these hydrate deposits is in the order of 1000 to 5000 gigatonnes – i.e. about 100 to 500 times more carbon than is released annually into the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas). It’s melting now faster every day, and will surpass human carbon emissions.

None of his “requirements” are happening. What we need is less people….like 90% less.

Progress is being made, minor progress in small amounts on tiny scales…so are increases in emissions but on massive scales and unfathomable amounts….emissions that needed to be at zero decades ago to save civilization as we know it. Climate refugees exist today in huge numbers, think how difficult 1 million Syrians were for Europe to absorb, now multiply by 2000 or more when all equatorial nations become uninhabitable. Where will we grow food with refugees covering every bit of land? Get real.

He admits that stopping warming below 1.5 degrees is impossible, and 3 degrees before 2021 likely (many say by 2050). Did he forget that 1.5 degrees warming is where we lose control and feedback loops make our emissions moot?

Do you even science, dude?

He gave me zero hope, because I know most of his pie in the sky “hope” is utterly ridiculous and runs contrary to reality and human nature. I wanted some good news, I got pablum.
Booo Kurzgesagt. Try being honest and not ignoring the facts, please. BOOOOO!

DOHC! You get that in a civic now. Lol.
600 hp! I remember when that sounded insane, now it's only half a hoonitruck.

It always seemed odd to me that, in the post apocalyptic gas station free wasteland, he would want a car that doesn't sip but instead shotguns guzzeline. Sure it goes fast, but not that far.

No....with a "but".

I was disturbed in the 70's about how people were changing the planet, but didn't yet understand the climate portion of that issue would be the most disastrous. (In my defense I was under 10).

I became concerned in the 90's-2000's when the scientific conclusions became overwhelmingly certain that CO² and other greenhouse gasses were destroying the atmosphere we relied on.

My concern quickly turned to anger at the realisation that people as a group were more inclined to argue over minutiae and ignorant theories and money rather than tackle the apocalyptic problem.

Soon that was mixed with depression at the realisation that it was too late even if we gave up CO² and methane today because the climate is slow to react and we had passed the point of no return and were actually still accelerating towards the cliff and arguing over the correct radio station for flying.

Today I'm at acceptance that humans will destroy the biosphere and likely themselves in the process, and have to be content with the knowledge that I didn't make it much worse (or at least made an educated effort to not make it worse), I likely won't live to see mass famine and water wars where I live, and didn't put anyone else in the horrific position of having to live through the worst. (No kids).

Feel better? ;-)

I had a realization....at some point, the Trump chumps are going to claim letting the pandemic hit us worse than anywhere else was intentional and goading police into intolerable racist violence daily was intentional...Both super smart ideas by a genius. They're both campaign promises being kept, because with America a dumpster fire, Mexico is far more likely to build that wall and pay for it.
Remember when a $70 billion dollar useless and ecologically apocalyptic "wall" that he insisted America wouldn't pay for but did was an unthinkable waste of taxpayer money? Too bad we won't have an accounting of his last year in office on election day, I bet he's added at least $7-8 trillion to the debt this year so far, and we're only 1/2 way through the year. Of course, he'll lie and claim it only went up $1.5 trillion (keeping most off the books like the Iraq war under Bush) and only that much because of the depression he caused, the one he blames on Barak like he's still the active president....oh, how we all wish that were true.

Jan. 22: “We have it totally under control."
Feb. 24: “The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA.
Feb. 27: “It’s going to disappear."
March 7: “No, I’m not concerned at all."
March 10: “And we’re prepared, and we’re doing a great job with it. And it will go away. Just stay calm. It will go away.”

The states that are opening are doing so against the guidelines Trump himself put forward as the minimum standards for safety....two weeks of decline in New cases.

What a moronic statement....states are crashing their own economies to make Trump look bad?! That's so insane and asinine that if I thought you meant it I would call for a welfare check because you're probably a danger to yourself.

Trump signed off on the biggest socialist handout ever, but 7/8 of that cash doesn't go to citizens, it goes to corporations and their owners like Monty Bennett, including Trump and family. I'm certain they'll go to the supreme court trying to hide the actual amount Trump's family receives. He will likely actually be a billionaire when he leaves office....they all will.

Oh...So when you post videos of old crumbling abandoned buildings in Cuba it's an honest depiction of the entire country, when someone else shows some in America it's out of line and lies....hypocrite. There are way more empty buildings in America today than 3 years ago with unemployment at historic highs.

Making Everywhere Get Apocalyptic 2020

Worst "president" (lost the vote) in 243 years, erratic and inconsistent, frantically rambling incoherently or sleepily mumbling and slurring, daughter- friend's wives- employees- acquaintance- and porn star finger banging and raping Con.....I mean Don.

I know it's impolite to laugh at the mentally ill, but I just spit my coffee out at your absurdity. Lol.

90% of covid 19 deaths in America are directly attributable to Trump moronically dragging his feet for weeks on taking it seriously and issuing federal guidelines according to an analysis done by epidemiologists. That's 63000 Americans Trump's inaction and lackadaisical attitude killed....remember Benghazzi? That was over 4 unforeseeable deaths. By election time Trump will have over 100000 American deaths on his hands and the crumbled economy and bankrupt treasury that go along with them, and there's the direct comparison of S Korea to prove intelligent leadership could have avoided all of that.

MEGA....Making Everything Get Apocalyptic.

this is a great song with an absolute shit animation. I have seen rule 34 with better animation. Actual animation frames replaced with tweening looks hella awkward. Also the story of the video..

I dont get it. There have been MANY music videos that have replicated the exact same setting. A music performance in a mad max post apocalyptic world. But instead of actually showing a performance they throw a ton of scenes that make no sense, no reasoning. Why would a performance be held with so few people? Why would a performance be held near a riot situation where people are lobbing cocktails? Who the hell would do such a thing?

And yet here we are, another music video who thinks they can pull the same story board and creates yet another ridiculously believable video. Many videos feed off the energy of a live event and synergize with the crowd, and they rock. Then there are those videos who think they are a 4 minute movie and F_ it all up.

If they get bored and stop listening, they'll get confused, won't they? I think they often get bored because they can't follow along, it's incredibly boring to have someone drone on using statistics and measurements you don't grasp and won't remember on a subject you also don't grasp.

I agree, but so far, measurements have consistently been outpacing the estimates, almost never the reverse.

What they tend to do is come from that incomplete data and incomplete analysis to model the absolute best case scenario to dictate policy, not the worst. That's absolutely what the U.N. report does, and it's not clear to most how much is left out, like infinitely better melting models (the measured melting in Greenland is already at the rate not predicted to be reached until 2075 in the UN's published estimations) and feedback loops we already see in action like melting methalhydrates and permafrost, both outgassing massive amounts of methane. Sane policy makers DO assume the absolute worst modeled outcome, then suggests policies to avoid it, at all cost when that worst case is extinction. Since measurements are consistently as bad or worse than the worst case scenario modeled, the only rational thing to do is assume that will continue and plan for the worst....you know, like they taught in preschool, hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Your house burning down is an unlikely worst case scenario, but I bet you have smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, and support the fire department. Good planning is to assume you WILL have a fire and plan to minimize the damage.
Or, terrorist attacks. The likelihood you'll be killed in a terrorist attack is exceptionally low, but we spend untold billions and sacrifice liberties to combat a worst case but unlikely scenario.

Prudence is the better part of valor.

Edit: as to most problems society faces, I suggest they are likely ALL a function of overpopulation....no question imo when it comes to the apocalyptic problems. Pollution, resource mismanagement, ecological destruction, etc. None would be disastrous with 1/10 the population.

I think that, considering the long term massive if not apocalyptic damage done along with the temporary gains, it's undeniably a big negative for humanity and the rest of the planet. Groups like the Amish get along quite nicely without it.

Edit: Now will you please answer my question?

1) Because they didn't succeed in a vacuum, they benefit from civilization, so are obligated to support it to at least the same extent if not more because they are able while others aren't.

2) swap dumb with rich and Trump is the bazillionaire he claims to be. You can't just swap dissimilar unrelated concepts and say "see, proved it" without looking like a braying moron.

3) Yes it should without question, our best and brightest don't come from the privileged class as a higher percentage. Actually the opposite because they don't have to do their best to survive, poorer people do, and drive matters immensely. If we want to compete internationally, we must educate the uneducated and undereducated, even those who can't afford $500000 to fake a crew history or SAT score. That education needs to be better than the countries we compete with, and it is all too often simply not.
That is a conservative stance, not a liberal one.

4) equating wealth to gpa, like this moronic video does, means Trump, like everyone else, should start at 0 and not get a bonus from daddy. If that happened, he would be zero. He is not self made, he did not only get a small $14 million unrepaid interest free loan. He did squander the money, failing at venture after venture until only Russian gangsters will loan him money, loans he needs because he squandered the money....then he repeatedly lied about it immorally squandering billions from hundreds of duped investors too...THAT is evil, yes.

5) We make $30000 for two people and don't take a dime, even overpaid my taxes...not everyone has my opportunities, privileges, and abilities. You are just spouting nonsense straw man arguments. In a perfect world, we could all be self sustaining with equal opportunity to succeed, we don't live in that communist/socialist utopia.....no one ever has.
I believe we are better off when the least privileged don't have to resort to violent or immoral crime to survive. I believe we are better off as a nation when our best people have the opportunities to succeed that our worst but most privileged are afforded. I believe we are better off being protected from the irresponsibility of purely profit driven commerce that, by design, must walk the razors edge of acceptability to maximize profit and minimize obligations by any means necessary, usually leaving them for socialist programs to clean up/repair. I believe we do more good ensuring the starving among us are fed food humans would willingly eat before ensuring some unrepentant apocalyptic bankers get their multi million dollar bonuses and a free pass on their crimes, and before those making multi millions a year get to hoard more and pay even less of their share.

6) What you are spouting is bat shit insane, not even AOC advocates pure socialism....not even Russia had pure socialism. Your ilk, however, calls any government program that doesn't directly benefit them or their Trumpian masters "socialist"....education, infrastructure, all regulatory agencies, social security, even the fbi have been labeled socialist by Trumpists in the zeal to discredit the report they assumed would expose criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States (ps, it found exactly that dozens of times over), while military welfare programs for equipment we don't want and won't use, bailouts for banks and agribusiness, public funds for private ventures like golf courses and troll roads, (edit:Freudian slip?) and don't forget the unmentioned elephant, the military itself...all that socialism is fine, you think it's not even socialism. *facepalm

I'll say it again.

Asinine.

Apocalyptic.

I think the argument could be made that it's a great ad. We get bombarded with so many ads on a daily basis that I'll bet most of them barely even register anymore.

So if you can get someone to sit down and actually watch and enjoy an ad, even an ad about an apocalyptic future where Skynet is built by an ice cream company, I'd call that a win. Granted, not everyone will like it, but it's better than being so bland that passes by completely unnoticed.

@bcglorf
i have no issue with disagreement.
i have read many of hedges books,and to see his evolution over the years really should not surprise anyone.

we all have an evolution of sorts when we continue to investigate,and challenge our own preconceptions.the intelligent man or woman,will accept this new information,and change their conclusions accordingly.the hyper-partisan and/or rigid fundamentalist,will dismiss this new information because it conflicts with their dearly held preconceptions.

some people struggle with a changing landscape,and prefer to reside in their own comfort zones.

i like hedges because he challenges and criticizes power,but he also tends to speak in apocalyptic verbiage.

i also respect hedges because he does back up his opinions with actual sources.now we can disagree with his conclusions,but how he came to those conclusions,he is quite clear.

on a side note:i cannot watch or read hedges for extended periods due to the fact that what he is pointing out is so damn depressing.

but he is incredibly consistent in regards to criticizing power.

which,in my opinion,is so very vital in these times,because we see the majority of corporate media revealing a reverence and fealty to corporate power.

chris hedges has earned my respect.
but i do not demand that everyone read or listen to him.

and speaking only for myself,i refuse to dismiss a viewpoint simply because it may be on a venue of questionable intent.
i read the american conservative,though this is a website funded by pat buchanon.i do so because the american conservative produces some damn fine content,with journalists who source their material.

i may disagree with their conclusions,but i cannot ignore the quality of their work.

this is the same reason why i no longer do work for crooks and liars and the young turks and good god..SLATE.does this mean that everything they produce is utter shit?

no..of course not,but they all have taken a book out of the FOX model, and became hyper-partisan,faux outrage machines.

now let us take this video,which so happens to be on RT.
what is it that hedges is saying that is WRONG? or false? or a lie?

i have no issue with disagreement,nor skepticism,but is anything he is saying really that controversial?
what is he saying that should be dismissed?
should his words simply be dismissed due to him being on RT?

if we refuse to accept the words,or conclusions from any public personality,simply because of the media that they happen to be on,then..in my opinion..we relegate ourselves to a handful of outlets,and it diminishes the conversation.

is it any wonder or surprise that those academics that are critical of power are NEVER seen on corporate media?
that those brave and courageous journalists and academics are forced to the fringes in order to get their messages out.

we can disagree with their messages and conclusions,but for us to even have the OPTION to disagree.they need a media outlet in order to even put the word out.

do you see what i am saying?

i am probably wording this wrong,and producing more confusion than clarity,but when the corporate media controls who and what gets to be discussed,debated and argued.then THEY are the ones who set the agenda.they are the ones who set the lines of discussion and the parameters of that discussion.

and people like hedges have not been invited to the table for decades.

it appears that any journalist,or academic that is critical of power are relegated to the fringes.

you will never see noam chomsky on FOX,or MSNBC,or CNN.

but you will see them on independent media.
such as democracy now,or the real news and yes...venues like RT and aljazeera english.

i probably totally messed my point up,but it is in there somewhere.
i am just gonna stop right here,because now i am just rambling.