Comment on Althouse

Althouse 

"If you have to assume man-made climate change is real in order to get to these issues, please do that. Otherwise this thread won't be new but just a repetition other comment threads."

Okay, for the sake of argument, lets pretend these things are true:

1. Climate change is real.

2. Climate change will have more bad consequences then good consequences.

3. The most effective solution will be in curbing Humanity's output of CO2.

As long as China, India and a burgeoning Africa are accelerating their build-out of coal fired plants, it really doesn't matter what we do:  CO2 emissions will not drop, they will increase.  There are two pathways, which I will call, "The way of peace" and "The way of violence"

The way of violence involves binding treaties, which include every nation on Earth. This will necessarily involve threats, sanctions and possibly warfare.  

The way of peace involves getting our heads out of our asses for a moment and designing safe, mass producible atomic power plants.  Our current regulatory structure makes this impossible.  If we can solve this, everything else falls into place:  If we don't have to burn things to make electricity, then we can already reduce emissions. If electricity becomes cheap enough then people will stop heating with carbon based fuels and electric vehicles will start to make sense. Long distance aircraft will be the last thing which runs directly off atomic generated electricity, though it could be done.

Individuals making little sacrifices will either make no significant difference, or will reduce the pressure to do things which would have an actual impact.

Wordle 214

 

Wordle 213

 

Wordle 212 Loss # 10

 When I started on Wordle, I went 65 wins in a row before I lost.  I've racked up three losses in the last 16 games.  I am either becoming stupid or they are choosing much harder words.

Same Post As Below, In Screen Shots

 

Other Than Costs Borne By The Smoker, Does Smoking Have A Social Cost?

Simon Kuestenmacher @simongerman600 · 3h Average price of a pack of Marlboro cigarettes in European capital cities. European smokers must love Turkey. Source: https://buff.ly/3QkPy3K 

David Pecchia @dpecchia · 3h Dear European smokers, every cent you pay above $1.35 is tax. 

Bona Dea @BonaDaDea · 3h So what? 

David Pecchia @dpecchia · 3h If I smoked, I would feel cheated by paying the tax man more for giving me nothing (that a non-smoker doesn't also get), than I was paying the company which actually produced the product I use. 

Lucas @Eeylop · 3h That is exactly the point. Discouragement through taxes. 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia · 2h So Europeans think it's okay to vote for people to discourage them from things? That seems absolutely idiotic. Why would I vote for someone who wants to discourage me from doing legal things that I enjoy? 

 Lucas @Eeylop · 2h Because it is a public health measure. Society saves a huge amout of money by needing to treat fewer people with lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, etc caused by smoking. 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia · 2h This isn't true. We will all become sick and die someday. A smoker will do this sooner and hence collect government pension for less time. But beside all of that, this is a great argument against socialized medicine: Now, everything is everyone's business. 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia · 2h How about making your income tax rate be tied to your BMI? A tax on not wearing a helmet at all times, or doing any risky sport, or on failure to exercise daily? You see the totalitarianism inherent in such a system. 

 Lucas @Eeylop · 2h You do realize that there is a difference between taxing unhealthy products, and taxing people for being overweight? Denmark (and others?) have tried taxing sugar extra, but it became too unpopular. 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia · 2h An obese person who only eats healthy things is a greater burden on the healthcare system than a fit person who indulges in junk-food every so often. So, it makes a lot more sense to tax on excess BMI than on so-called unhealthy foods. 

 Lucas @Eeylop · 1h But why is our hypothetical obese person obese in spite of only eating healthy foods? Maybe there is an eating disorder involved? Maybe the eating disorder is caused by childhood abuse? My hypothetical person will at least have access to universal health care to deal with that. 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia · 57m What I was going for, was that the obese person is fat because he eats too much. The fit person eats in moderation, even if some of what he eats is considered unhealthy.

 Maybe smokers smoke because of childhood abuse? Why punish them for this small comfort? 

 Simon Kuestenmacher @simongerman600 No punishment but paying for the social cost of smoking. In Australia the Cancer Council published the below figures. Same argument is used when people talk about a sugar tax (obesity). Source: https://cancer.org.au/media-releases/2019/new-report-highlights-the-137-billion-cost-of-smoking#:~:text=Tangible%20costs%20of%20smoking%20identified,to%20treat%20smoking%2Drelated%20conditions 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia · 28m Replying to @simongerman600 and @Eeylop The accounting in the source is flawed. They count the cost of medical care caused by smoking but don't subtract the cost which would have been spent later, if people didn't smoke and lived long enough to become ill with something not caused by smoking. 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia Replying to @dpecchia @simongerman600 and @Eeylop

 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22449823/#:~:text=Results%3A%20The%20results%20showed%20that,from%20a%20higher%20mortality%20rate. Translate Tweet pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov [Lifetime medical expenditures of smokers and nonsmokers] - PubMed In conclusion, although smoking may not result in an increase in lifetime medical expenditures, it is associated with diseases, decreased life expectancy, lower quality of life (QOL), and generally... 5:35 PM · Aug 8, 2022·Twitter Web App 

 David Pecchia @dpecchia · 26m Replying to @dpecchia @simongerman600 and @Eeylop

 Results: The results showed that although smokers had generally higher annual medical expenditures than nonsmokers, the former's lifetime medical expenditure was slightly lower than the latter's because of a shorter life expectancy that resulted from a higher mortality rate.

Wordle 211

 

Wordle 210

 

Wordle 209

 

Wordle 208

 Loss # 9

Wordle 207

 

Wordle 206

 

Every Tree, A Saga

 

It took most of the total time just to get to this point.  You need to cut on opposite sides of the trunk in order to have the tree fall where you want, but the ash was right up against the pine until about 15 feet up.

I made the cut you see with a manual saw and then climbed up the pine, another 20-30 feet and tried to push the ash over.  The problem was that all of the torque was at the base of the tree.  So I tied the two trees together--just below the cut and tried again.  This time, I just wasn't strong enough to cause the cut to snap, but I brought a rope with me and tied it about 30 feet above the cut.  I tried to use the truck but it was dead, so I pulled over the tree with the Subaru.

The bricks were already fallen, before the tree came down--though I was prepared to let the tree do this, if the wall had still been up.  The bricks are from the front sidewalk, which I moved because I thought they might be destroyed by the eventual front porch project.  Even it they weren't destroyed, they would need to be moved, so I stored them along this rotten picket fence.

The rope which pulled down the tree was removed before this picture, but was attached about where the trunk hit the bricks.

The large oak which you see in the direction of the fallen ash was used to direct the rope to the left, which is where I could get the car into.  Also, it's not a great idea, unless you have plenty of length, to pull a tree down upon yourself.

Wordle 205

 

Wordle 204

 

Wordle 203

 

Wordle 202

 

3 Situations:

 Let's say I have a mountain cabin which is very remote.

Situation 1.  I come there in the winter to stay for a week and find the place occupied by trespassers.  I force them to leave, even though they claim that they will perish without shelter.

Situation 2.  I am staying there for a week in the winter and one night I hear a knock on the door.  Some backpackers have gotten lost and are seeking shelter.  Am I obliged to give them shelter?

Situation 3.  I invite some friends to stay with me in my cabin for a week in the wintertime.  Sometime in the middle of the week I tire of their company.  It is ethical to turn them out into the wilderness?

Of all of these, 3. is the most straightforward:  I caused them to be in this inaccessible place and if they perished due to me kicking them out, I should rightfully be charged with some degree of murder.

For 2.  If they died from not being given shelter, I might be charged and if I didn't fear for my safety, I at the very least would be considered a massive asshole.

For 1.  They were criminals, so I rightly have reason not to trust them, but I think most people would feel as if I should have done something to keep them alive.

Wordle 201

 

Wordle 200