31–40 of 173 posts
> detailed how extreme weather has hurt her family’s ranch. Animal agriculture is also a big contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, dead zones, and habitat loss. Her family's ranch my not align with her fight against climate change.
very complicated issue as animal grazing also has tremendous environmental benefits
AFAICT without being an expert: 1. The state constitution says it's got to provide a clean environment https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/Constitution/IX/1.htm (so short I won't provide a quote) 2. The Montana Environmental Policy Act in Montana has some exceptions written into it and in subsequent revisions https://leg.mt.gov/content/Publications/Environmental/2021-m... 3. One of these exceptions is that it limits the sco…
>> things that's used to stop windmills Why do you hate whales and birds? The environmental impact if windmills are pretty large >The article is that it's over fossil fuels, which sounds like the right target, MT has the largest coal reserves. Pretty sure that is target. The problem here like most of these things is the unintended consequences of these policies. Often they are only concerned with stopping the thing t…
> detailed how extreme weather has hurt her family’s ranch. Animal agriculture is also a big contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, dead zones, and habitat loss. Her family's ranch my not align with her fight against climate change.
very complicated issue as animal grazing also has tremendous environmental benefits
>Small numbers of grazers may be consistent with healthy ecosystems and have minimal greenhouse gas impact, but only if their populations stay within ecologically defined limits.
https://newrepublic.com/article/163735/myth-regenerative-ran...
This is the kind of thing that is inspiring to young people. Not watching a couple of billionaires experience weightlessness for a few minutes.
Why would future price increases for all your goods be inspiring for young people? That's what you're going to end up with when you increase costs. People don't choose fossil fuels just because, they're chosen largely for economic reasons.
You know prices would be even lower if we let all our rivers and groundwater be polluted, right? Led piping was cheaper than alternatives too.
Perhaps lower prices is not the all-important end you assume it to be?
This is the kind of thing that is inspiring to young people. Not watching a couple of billionaires experience weightlessness for a few minutes.
Why would future price increases for all your goods be inspiring for young people? That's what you're going to end up with when you increase costs. People don't choose fossil fuels just because, they're chosen largely for economic reasons.
I didn't realize how explicit the Montana state constitution was on this [1], which was rewritten in 1972: Part IX. ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES Section 1. Protection and improvement. (1) The state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations. (2) The legislature shall provide for the administration and enforcement of this duty. (3) Th…
Unpopular opinion, really strong judicial review like this (1 judge is able to strike down whatever law the legislature of Congress passes based on vague criteria) is basically incompatible with democracy. At a minimum it should take a supermajority of a panel of judges to find a law 'unconstitutional'. It grants absolutely vast, arbitrary power to 1 single official because they happened to have attended law school.…
Legal or moral correctness, is not usually limited to a single judicial decision. When it is, it's remarkable enough that we learn about it early in schooling. Just because a Judge ruled to strike down a law, does not impact democracy in any way. It's a legal maneuver that will be challenged both in another legal arena and in the court of public opinion. These are the social frameworks that exist to protect against arbitrary bad actors and they matter, regardless if you think it's "OK" in isolation or not.
Everyone can agree that judges need some leeway in making decisions that are in the best public interest, regardless of the letter of the law...re: misspellings, grammar issues, ill-intent, etc. I happen to be a statist and think that the mere challenge to Federal Policy should not be discounted, because of futility. It's important to challenge governance from a distance, even today.