Message from @leavethisbotnet
Discord ID: 559793134201077760
Oh I know that
Couldn't join, cus I'm old
**Sugar Beat#7632** was cleansed from the server.
<:pepe_eyes:378719408362881024>
<:sadgon:542112156716498955>
Can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen
British Police:
https://vid.pr0gramm.com/2019/03/25/cbac035e76282a89.mp4
Was that a ban or a leave
you never know <:pepe_smug:378719408341909506>
Hey, can EU meps only vote for something or present
I believe they can propose amendments, but they can not make a standalone proposal.
So basically, if you want some regulation canceled you're shit out of luck, because kommissars only ever want to further regulate shit.
they gonna move, guys, no problem
π π
based israeli shill
hang on are we allowed to name (((them))) here?
no
Venice is regularly under water and they can deal with it just fine.
big brained take
you can
You can't if the state bans you
Of course, corrupt shitholes like new Orleans will just waste the budget, get flooded and abandoned....
state bans you to build a dam?
(and nothing of value will be lost)
Trump is the wall builder in office
how can that be?
I'm pretty sure you need a loicense for a dam
your solution is building a dam?
not preventing it from happen as good as possible?
thats like the argument of Shapiro
free market gonna sort this shit out
people will move
who cares
<:shap:497652686603288576>
Really, I'm very skeptical about our ability to reduce CO2 emissions. If you look at gdp/person to CO2/person charts, you'll see that even if we do our best, it's largely a choice between leaving a lot of people in poverty and producing CO2
So the big question is, what is our goal? For the largest amount of people to suffer as little as possible, or "preserve nature".
USA is a heavy polluter in comparison to other Western countries
It's quite possible that it would be way cheaper to deal with the effects than to prevent it from happening.
Of course, many enviromentalists don't give a shit, because they don't actually care about people