Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#71

Post by eli_gottlieb »

croon wrote: post #29
Loic wrote: post #15

I am surprised by the very negative ton of the first 10+ comments. These kids are not kids any more. They are between 15 and 20. As a reminder, Lafayette was 16. They see an issue and act on it with the tools they have. When you have an issue with a piece of software, you look at the alternatives and possibly you act on the issue, you fix it. They do what you do as designer/software developer, just in another field.…

> We need more people doing and less people complaining. Some may consider it stupid to sue, but if this is the only solution, why not? Some may consider it stupid to elect Trump, but obviously tens of millions of people felt it was the only solution. I actually agree with you. Whatever you think of this suit or this election, I think we can agree that there are some situations in which you have no "good" recourse, a…

>Some may consider it stupid to elect Trump, but obviously tens of millions of people felt it was the only solution.

But most people thought that was stupid, and legitimacy rests with the majority.

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#72

Post by eli_gottlieb »

lostcolony wrote: post #53
cauterized wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the government were not enforcing existing laws against rape and murder, damn right there would be lawsuits.

Or if the government was allowing the laws to prevent rape and murder to be written by lobbyists for rapists and murderers.

Speak of the devil...

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#73

Post by mc32 »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #71
croon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need more people doing and less people complaining. Some may consider it stupid to sue, but if this is the only solution, why not? Some may consider it stupid to elect Trump, but obviously tens of millions of people felt it was the only solution. I actually agree with you. Whatever you think of this suit or this election, I think we can agree that there are some situations in which you have no "good" recourse, a…

>Some may consider it stupid to elect Trump, but obviously tens of millions of people felt it was the only solution. But most people thought that was stupid, and legitimacy rests with the majority.

Both major candidates optimized for the electoral college. If the election were on popularity they would have optimized for such --what the result would have been is unknown, it may have been the same or it might have changed the outcome, but we do know that the campaigns would have been vastly different.

Also, one candidate spent twice the amount on advertising. If the winner had outspent the loser by 2x, I'm sure there'd be an outcry about the amount of money used in the campaign.

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#74

Post by couchand »

privong wrote: post #66
couchand wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a mischaracterization of the way government operates. congressional representatives are not "abdictating" any role. They provide guidance that is all too specific in many cases, because the legal standard requires it. The folks in Congress are right to set the national budget and priorities, but it is a good thing that the details of implementation are left to agencies, because they're the ones with t…

> The folks in Congress are right to set the national budget and priorities, but it is a good thing that the details of implementation are left to agencies, because they're the ones with the experience and technical knowledge to know how to achieve the objectives. This is true, but only if the laws are passed with enough specificity that the interpretation is reasonably unambiguous. Otherwise it effectively allows ag…

"only if the laws are passed with enough specificity that the interpretation is reasonably unambiguous"

If this isn't the case a court can strike down the law as ambiguous.

"if people vote based on single-issues and/or if surveillance is one of their top few issues"

... but can't the same thing be said of any particular policy? if this policy isn't as important as other policies, that's the public deciding that we're fine with it. you and I as individuals may disagree, but this is the reality we face. it's simply not going to get fixed through legislative action, until and unless we are able to reframe the national conversation sufficiently.

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#75

Post by privong »

couchand wrote: post #74
privong wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The folks in Congress are right to set the national budget and priorities, but it is a good thing that the details of implementation are left to agencies, because they're the ones with the experience and technical knowledge to know how to achieve the objectives. This is true, but only if the laws are passed with enough specificity that the interpretation is reasonably unambiguous. Otherwise it effectively allows ag…

"only if the laws are passed with enough specificity that the interpretation is reasonably unambiguous" If this isn't the case a court can strike down the law as ambiguous. "if people vote based on single-issues and/or if surveillance is one of their top few issues" ... but can't the same thing be said of any particular policy? if this policy isn't as important as other policies, that's the public deciding that we're…

> If this isn't the case a court can strike down the law as ambiguous.

Yea, that's why I was arguing that being able to sue the government is a Good Thing. I think we're basically in agreement...

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#76

Post by greeneggs »

eggy wrote: post #21

I am glad kids are taking action rather than just complaining, however, people can take personal action. The money for any pay out from a suit will most likely come from their future social benefits rather than the industries they are suing. Some personal choices to take action on: Buy local produce, and let your local supermarket or grocer know this. Educate others. It saves on all of the transport emissions from ai…

> Buy local produce, and let your local supermarket or grocer know this. Educate others. It saves on all of the transport emissions from air or truck freight of goods.

This doesn't make much sense intuitively, and a quick Google search seems to confirm that most of the environment impact of produce comes from the growing efficiency and production methods, not from its transportation.

Feel-good measures that do very little are bad enough, since they encourage complacency, but feel-good measures that actually make the environment worse are terrible!

In terms of one's diet, I think the best one can do is to stop eating beef. It is terrible compared to other meats. In terms of one's overall impact, getting involved politically is probably the easiest way to make a change. Switching from Mexican tomatoes to greenhouse-grown Canadian tomatoes is not going to make much of a difference in either direction.

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#77

Post by simonh »

akerro wrote: post #27
simonh wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US government has committed to meeting environmental targets such as emissions limits, and can be held accountable for meeting them. It also licenses and regulates industrial activity, and therefore can reasonably be held accountable for the results of that activity. Or are you arguing that the government should have no accountability, oversight, responsibility or say in any of the activity of it's citizens? It's…

Agreed, I'm not saying government is not responsible for it, they provide grants for renewable energy, create power plants, give tax cuts for people with own solar panels etc. But it's up to people how that energy and material is used, is it wasted or used efficiently. So far, we're great at wasting everything.

Absolutely, our current way of life in the western world may not be completely sustainable. We're competing for a share of a shrinking pie with growing and advancing economies across the world, economies that we are also heavily and inextricably dependent on. I think to some extent we need to accept this and figure out ways to manage the painful transition to a long-term sustainable civilization.

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#78

Post by jasonjei »

jschwartzi wrote: post #61
jasonjei wrote: post #12

These sorts of lawsuits are going to be necessary with the rise of Trump's EPA--or what should be called Coal Protection Agency. We're about to enter a brave new world of environmental governance, one that is led by a climate change denier and one that believes "global warming" is a Chinese plot to weaken our economy.

It's possible that he believes that global warming is a real phenomenon but that our treaties with the rest of the world place us at a major disadvantage.

If he does believe global warming is real, why is he picking Myron Ebell, a Coal lobbyist, to lead the EPA? [0] He was quoted to say: "The whole case for global warming is silly, and I believe the vast majority of scientists thinks it's silly, and therefore I'm a little bit embarrassed that I waste my time on this silly issue." [1]

[0] http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/meet-myron-ebell-t...

[1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=-rSDUsMwakI (at 9:13)

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#79

Post by couchand »

privong wrote: post #75
couchand wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"only if the laws are passed with enough specificity that the interpretation is reasonably unambiguous" If this isn't the case a court can strike down the law as ambiguous. "if people vote based on single-issues and/or if surveillance is one of their top few issues" ... but can't the same thing be said of any particular policy? if this policy isn't as important as other policies, that's the public deciding that we're…

> If this isn't the case a court can strike down the law as ambiguous. Yea, that's why I was arguing that being able to sue the government is a Good Thing. I think we're basically in agreement...

ah yes, so you were. cheers!

Re: Kids Win the Right to Sue the US Government Over Climate Change

#80

Post by bzbarsky »

joegosse wrote: post #64
WalterBright wrote: post #34

A carbon tax initiative was on the ballot in (very blue) Washington State, but sadly went down in flames. Which is strange considering how blue the state is. A carbon tax is one of the best ways to address CO2 pollution.

The initiative wasn't so simple. In addition to the carbon tax, it included a reduction in the state sales tax, with the net result being an overall reduction in tax revenue for the state. With social services and education already underfunded (at least in people's minds), this was a difficult tradeoff to make. My sense was that the initiative was formulated to appeal to two different groups of voters but in doing so…

As I understand it, the carbon tax proposal in Washington was supposed to be revenue-neutral. Do you have a pointer showing it would come out revenue-negative?
Post reply on HN