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

Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 317 posts

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#301

Post by squabble »

fdschoeneman wrote: post #101

There are lots of reasons to oppose this bill; why assume climate change is the only reason? And if it's fair to assume the opposition is to the portion of these taxes and regulations meant to address climate change, why assume the opposition is to efforts to remediate climate change writ large when the opposition might just be to these specific measures? Also, why is explicitly political stuff, let alone badly writt…

Why do they put many unrelated things in the same bill? Smaller, independent pull requests seems like a better way.

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#302

Post by cscurmudgeon »

reillyse wrote: post #82
throwawaysea wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those countries offer birthright citizenship: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-who-offer-birt... That changes the political and migration dynamics significantly.

Actually they do, just in combination with other ways of granting citizenship. To pick Italy off your list, if a child is born in Italy and it’s parents are unknown or unable to transfer their citizenship(stateless, unknown citizenship etc) the child becomes an Italian citizen. Most modern first world states provide pretty solid protections for children born on their soil.

> (stateless, unknown citizenship etc)

How often does that happen? HN often becomes a mental gymnastics competition in these matters.

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#303

Post by manigandham »

tialaramex wrote: post #261
manigandham wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US government has a problem with wasteful spending, not collecting enough money. Higher taxes will just mean more waste.

> Higher taxes will just mean more waste. Nope. Even if 50% of US taxes are "wasted" on things manigandham doesn't care about, it doesn't follow that increasing taxes would simply all be diverted to things manigandham doesn't care about and thus "wasted".

That's not how ratios work. If 50% is wasted then 50% of new funds would still increase the overall amount.

And waste is defined as money spent that doesn't reach any goals, or even make any progress towards them. It's a very common topic on HN about startups spending capital poorly, and likewise profligate spending can be found everywhere in (US) government. $2T in a decades-long war is a recent example, including the hundreds of billions in equipment and resources left behind.

But surely, you knew what I meant. I wonder how much climate change progress could've been made with all that money. Feel free to donate more with your next tax payment if you want.

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#304

Post by thomasahle »

flurben wrote: post #38
thomasahle wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Revenue neutral doesn't mean you can't increase taxes. It just means the funding isn't based on borrowing.

"Revenue neutral" just means a bill will not increase government revenues. edit : You can downvote me all you want, it isn't going to change the definition of the term. https://definitions.uslegal.com/r/revenue-neutral/

I suppose you may be right that revenue-neutral is not the right word, or at least people are starting to use it in a new way focusing more on debt than tax.

It is pretty clear that what Biden tweets about is the impact on debt, not taxes: https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/sep/29/can-joe-biden...

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#305

Post by jumpei163 »

berkes wrote: post #128
jay_kyburz wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's a given for people alive today. Climate change happens on a global scale, not a human scale. People wont "feel" it's change. I'm happy to make sacrifices, but a lot of vocal people are not. We need to stop talking about "making sacrifices". We need to get people excited about the amazing opportunities all this work provides us. It's exciting to me that we need to replant our forests. We have new…

> People wont "feel" it's change. Oh, but 'people' feel its change. You feel it. But it is all secondary, or even further away. Coffee is more expensive. Gas (CNG) prices is already costing many households more in these summer months. Gasoline prices are at record hights. Water is increasing in price. Electricity prices are at record heights (which, is increasing my IT infrastructure bills). In many regions we cannot…

It is happening – China has been imposing power curb throughout the whole country. Since I work in manufacturing, I can see the cost of everything is rising, i.e. metals, chemicals, and even shipping fee. Now the consumers won't feel these because the whole supply chain is still absorbing the cost. But the effects will eventually it will get to individuals in various forms.

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#306

Post by refurb »

the-dude wrote: post #145
refurb wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you’re saying unions don’t represent labor?

No I said : > This is the first time I have seen the word labor used in the context of US politics.

Right, you’re saying unions don’t represent labor because if they did, the constant talk about unions who the equivalent of taking about labor.

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#308

Post by garrickvanburen »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #294
perfunctory wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We've made massive progress on environmental issues Care to elaborate? Afaic, global CO2 emissions keep going up year after year.

Not GP, but in other areas (chemical pollution, CFCs, recycling, sustainable forestry) we've definitely made improvements since then. Global warming seems to be a particularly tough nut to crack.

Additionally, we’re dramatically more energy efficient across the board; food, transport, goods.

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#309

Post by rkuykendall-com »

squabble wrote: post #301
fdschoeneman wrote: post #101

There are lots of reasons to oppose this bill; why assume climate change is the only reason? And if it's fair to assume the opposition is to the portion of these taxes and regulations meant to address climate change, why assume the opposition is to efforts to remediate climate change writ large when the opposition might just be to these specific measures? Also, why is explicitly political stuff, let alone badly writt…

Why do they put many unrelated things in the same bill? Smaller, independent pull requests seems like a better way.

Actual answer: Because the code management system is built with certain merge restrictions:

- A PR can be merged with 50 or more code reviews and approvals if it has 0 rejections

- If there are any rejections, the requirement is a little more intense, at 60 or more code reviews and approvals

- Once per year, one PR can be merged per year with 50 code-review approvals and any number of rejections.

- The company has 100 developers and at least 41 will reject every single PR summited for review

- It takes agreement of 50 developers to change the merge rules, and there are 48 or fewer who want to do so

This is why there are so many unrelated changes in one PR. It's probably the only one they will be able to merge this year.

Re: Apple and Disney among companies backing groups against US climate bill

#310

Post by sysihyk »

asaddhamani wrote: post #11

We need “unprecedented measures” to stop and reverse the “unprecedented” damage we have caused to the planet and its climate. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and if the past year of climate catastrophes has shown us anything, it’s high time we act. Yes, the proposed changes might be inconvenient but it’s time we suck it up and do the needful. Small steps are not good enough. We need drastic measures.

> it’s high time we act

> it’s time we suck it up

Who are those "we" exactly? And why the other people have to pay for that desperate stuff?

Hint: you could go out and plant a tree instead.

Post reply on HN