Is it Really People vs. the Planet?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 вер 2024
- Support Out of Frame on Patreon: / outofframeshow
Watch our newest video, "How Can You POSSIBLY Not Be Red-Pilled By Now??": • How Can You POSSIBLY N...
Check out our podcast, Out of Frame: Behind the Scenes: / @outofframebts
Previously on Common Sense Soapbox, Seamus told Bob that tons of the most commonly proposed solutions to environmental problems were going to cost trillions and lower everyone's standard of living, so Bob isn't as keen on making the sacrifices climate activists are demanding.
That means he doesn't want to save the planet, right?
Actually...
______________________________
CREDITS:
Written by Jennifer Maffessanti & Seamus Coughlin
Animated by Seamus Coughlin
Produced by Sean W. Malone
______________________________
For more information on effective solutions to environmental problems that won't increase global poverty, check out some of these LINKS:
www.scienceale...
www.technology...
www.perc.org/2...
cei.org/studie...
www.nanowerk.c...
www.forbes.com...
www.ecowatch.c...
fee.org/articl...
fee.org/articl...
fee.org/articl...
fee.org/articl...
fee.org/articl...
Bob is developing as a character... it's strange
Its beautiful
Yes, Bob is developing character... the leftest lose another drone.
One day he might be the one correcting Seamus. It could be really meta breaking about how people who always insist that they are right even with facts and evidence tend to only concern themselves with a certain amount of topics and do not often extend into a wide variety of ideas, or something like that. They could pick something totally different. I just think that it would be interesting to see the roles flipped just once.
He's always been so shallow and one dimensional before, like a cardboard cut out.
lmao bob has no character he's just a poorly made strawman "I AM SILLY" caricature for Seamus to easily "debunk" and look smart and stroke his ego.
and you idiots slurp it up because it parrots your preferred politics.
“All the government has to do is say they have good intentions and whoever disagrees with them is lumped into the category of people who supposedly don’t want the problem solved.”
Wow. That hits hard.
Truth is hard. especially for leftists.
Anyone else thought Bob finally snapped and finally went crazy?
Anyone notice that Bob was holding what looked like the old CSA flag at the end there?
@@davegreenlaw5654 probably a low detail US flag
See, I've been saying for years that private ownership of elephants for farming would ensure the survival and safety of the species. I used the example of the American Bison, but didn't realize it had been successful with rhinos as well.
cows and chickens aint goin nowhere
It is a mixed bag with bison, since most of the bison are in farms and are developing some domestication traits. This may prevent them from surviving in the wild.
@@momentomalum1037 I dont think thats a problem since we lack the wide swaths of land that large bison heards need to live in the wild at this point.
@@jacobhargiss3839 Fair enough
*HOLY CRAP* your content is getting funnier and funnier. xD
1. Singing Rhinos
2. Continuity
3. Derpy birds.
4. Panning to Binoculars too close to bird.
5. Hand Puppets
6. Making dead Rhinos in graves, kinda cute. :|
7. Self aware animation, by having a character fold another, because they're paper.
*AMAZING!*
We the people and not politicians can make America Clean Again
Then whybdo u want to take power away from the people by getting rid of elected politicians and replacing them with unelected ceos?
Unless you're one of those people that argues thatargue argue that having elections every four years is somehow still harder to replace a politician than a giant multinational corporation!
@@mikekasich836 Considering that typically 90-98% of incumbents in Congress and the Senate get reelected that disproves your assertion. Of course a politician generally doesn't have to prove his competence or even honesty in most cases, which is why buying votes with other peoples money has always been more popular. So am I supposed to believe this hogwash that the collective wisdom of "the people" makes them such great arbiters in elections?
Funny story: a conservative activist recently collected 200 volunteers to clean up a portion of Los Angeles, and they were able to remove something like 50 tons of trash. Government spends millions on cleanup and they never get it done.
@@rayr5950 do you think they re elect themselves? Do you think they go against the will of the people in real life themselves? No. The people voted for them to be re-elected. That's the people choosing them to be re-elected. Maybe you don't like that but you are not the people. You're one person
@@mikekasich836Another joker with that "the will of the people" nonsense. Don't you know the average voter is too strikingly ignorant to have a will of their own? Which works most favorably for incumbents, especially the worst of the worst.
The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth. - H.L. Mencken
I think FEE is getting rid of Seamus, because Bob threw him away.
Never ;)
Not kidding! I actually got a “Foundation for Economic education” ad on a “Foundation for Economic education” video😂😂😂
Bob is slowly getting more passive aggressive and I am all for it
The 12 downvotes are greta thuman and her 11 other personalities.
KingRandor82 they do little to make their case compelling because that is very hard to do. To make the case for unrestricted emissions of CO2 requires debunking an enormous amount of good climate science.
I have no grievances towards Greta herself. She seems like a nice kid that genuinely cares. She's been conditioned to be the way she is now. She's being used as a pawn. That's all her parents and all the people propping her up see her as. I find that very depressing.
@@jpe1 they do little to make their case compelling because they barely understand why what they're doing is the genuine good, theirselves. They don't question or think to understand why what they're doing is morally correct. They just "accept that it is, maybe".
@@KingRandor82
But she _doesn't_ think the people she is speaking to honestly want to make a difference. In her latest speech she straight up roasted, belittled and insulted the politicians of the world. She talked about how they're not honest, they're not doing enough, and that they haven't, don't and likely won't listen.
@@pseudonymousbeing987 Of course she doesn't think they do.....and to be fair, she's not wrong! Again, the Autistic thing: when we're focused on something, we're *laser-focused* on that objective, and we fail to understand why those who half-ass those objectives are put forth the minimum in the process of undermining do so from the get-go. Here's the big thing to understand above all, ok: Autistic people are basically blown off by most people, unless they see us do something really, really exceptional. Well, when we're pushed in a certain direction, we want to do something exceptional, and then we see that those around us do very little to further that cause; the reason for that is because those pushing us are usually just pandering and virtue-signaling...regardless of which "side of the aisle" of any given issue we're referring to. Understand that that last part I just told you....I'm only now fully coming to terms with that understanding. 'Know how old I am? 37. So I'm over 20 years older than she is, and am only now fully wrapping my mind around that. Let that sink in.
This is the thing that always bothered me about Dr Susses the Lorax, if the The Once-le had just planted a tree every once in a while then his business wouldn't of had to stop abruptly. Now obviously the trees weren't the only issue and to make the issue as easy to understand for children they pretty much made him a captain planet villain, but for me at least I thought this was stupid.
also the lorax got super upset after he cut down one tree
He should've taken a page out of paper companies, who plant trees when they cut them down. If they didn't, we not only wouldn't have trees, the paper companies would fail
Yup. It's not like practices like Pollarding were devised by past generations *specifically* to prevent depletion of tree stock, while producing a healthy supply of wood for various purposes.
You could say: we can Farm wood, surprisingly well.
@@offandsphere6788In the original book, the lorax appeared after the Onceler made his first thneed.
Significance being that the thneed represented unnecessary consumerism.
That is actually kind of the point of the lorax. Two: being able to vote with your dollar, if you think about it, the people bought the sneeds, they funded the lorax. In the movie song there's a line that even says this "the customers are buying, the profits are multiplying". They could have just not bought the sneeds, or boycotted it until they planted as many trees as they took down, which most paper factories do now, however they didn't in Seuss' time
When I click on this video, I get an ad for the common sense soapbox
That's good to know :)
Exactly.
I got a video about cleaning up trash in the oceans. Now *that* I think we can *all* get behind.
Bob is a lot more relatable now. Some people just can't stand the truth because nothing in this universe is simple. And when you start to understand everything, you start to feeling annoyed because it feels overwhelming at times.
Bob is taking over the SHOW!!!!
1:23 wow, this will change my geography classes, if it goes on, as it will not only diminish carbon emissions into the atmosphere (the biggest "flaw" of coal and oil) but it also could change the status of coal and oil from non-renewable to RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES! That is astounding!
So basically... Coal and Oil might be the solution to any future energy crisis.
Depends a lot on how efficient these methods are and how efficient they can/will become in the future.
i want renewable coal
@@LordTyph yeah... I mean, they HAVE to be efficient, these processes demand energy to make energy. If it's not a higher enough quantity of energy it is not worth it. Also in the case of oil, it has to compete with the old process of extraction, which means it needs to be more viable financially. Worth remembering that after all these years we found more and more oil, so worrying about it growing scarse isn't the problem...
The problem is oil growing more and more EXPENSIVE.
@@leonardocouto3109 in part because it's being MADE to be more expensive.
@@LordTyph it's what you get when 80%of all oil in te world is being held by a cartel.
The WEIRDEST fact I've heard of is... Hunting grounds where they breed animals to hunt... Is so far the most effective form of animal conservation in Africa (Not that there aren't REAL serious issues involved even if you ignore the hunting moral implications. Such as them leeching off of volunteers). If you are in a conservation in Africa, chances are it was paid for by one of these areas.
They really had non lethal ways of using rhino horns? Did the horns grow back? Why on earth did they ban it? That’s genius!
In my life there's just three things:
Man vs. Nature
Man vs Woman
And Man vs The Empire Brain Building.
Man vs ME
Ya companies have ALWAYS had our best interests at heart and have never used money and influence to continue doing questionable to outright criminal things circumventing market influence.
They dared to mock Andrew Ryan’s Rapture, yet every day we are in need of one.
This video’s emphasis on personal action totally misses the fact that carbon emissions are a tragedy of the commons situation. We cannot just cross our fingers and hope we meet our reductions. The market will not do that on its own.
The western world *is* reducing carbon emissions and has done so significantly for years.
www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2017/10/24/yes-the-u-s-leads-all-countries-in-reducing-carbon-emissions/
Foundation for Economic Education it’s not even remotely close to what is necessary to avoid 2C of warning. The United States is currently “critically insufficient”. There is tons of data regarding this. We are not in line for staying below 2C of increased warming.
climateactiontracker.org/countries/usa/
Oh and we are not evenly consistently reducing emissions, let alone reducing them enough to keep temperatures below the 2C increase. It increased again in 2018. Sorry, but the data is pretty overwhelming on this.
www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-spiked-in-2018--and-it-couldnt-happen-at-a-worse-time/2019/01/07/68cff792-12d6-11e9-803c-4ef28312c8b9_story.html%3foutputType=amp
@@2g00dt0btru think that isn't pretty? www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/aug/21/big-irrigators-take-86-of-water-from-barwon-darling-report-finds
We privatized water. Result?
A few companies thanks to capital accumulation managed to monopolize/form a cartel or whatever you call it, hoard most of the water by draining it from the rivers and we suffer for their greed. Of course because we have a center right party leading Australia that is unwilling to intervene in the market well...it doesn't bode well for us.
There was also the fire that happened here en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuyahoga_River
I could bring up Newfoundland's fishing industry but tbh I think the point is, you are right. Markets may be able to move goods but they do not have the ability to make the advances a state can that are needed for society. We need action on climate change.
We just cannot rely on a system designed to move goods to actually solve a problem that does ultimately require a more coordinated and organized force called the state to address the problems we face from climate change.
And to of course say nothing about the fact that most breakthrough technology came from the state. The smartphone and pressurised aircraft are an example of this of many. Private companies whether they are socialist or capitalist simply well pick up these technologies and refine them more. Without the state, capitalism just could not of made these advances because more often than not, private actors do not have the capital needed to create these breakthroughs. I highly recommend the book, The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzacuto. Also en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirigisme France post war had economic polices like this and they boomed.
@@FEEonline Well good that it is doing that because it needs to do. The western world is also the cause for increased carbon emissions in the first place so there's no point in including the point ' the western world is reducing'. You can only blame the eastern countries to a certain extent. Historically, there is no comparison between the emissions of the west and east.
@@2g00dt0btru Well said Mike
Markets only protect the enviroment if there is a direct profit to be made.
That's a good thing.
@@snow4summer515 and political parties try to gain power through voters. If enough people vote for green then the goverment will be inclined to do something about it.
I'm not saying goverment is the answer but a part of it. Both goverment and the market need to play to their strong points to solve the problem
@@JeroenDoes Government can help solve the "tragedy of the commons", which is what a market needs.
@@JeroenDoes We need more people like this!
Yes, but there is usually a profit to be made from protecting the environment. If it were up to the market, the Amazon wouldn't be burning right now, we would be using nuclear energy much more than inefficient or harmful sources, and many endangered animal species would be much better off (ex. Rhinos from this video).
I clicked this video and the ad at the start was another commons sense soapbox vid. Lol
My god while I am a new student in the field of geology and atmospheric science the sheer amount of people who keep pushing for government control are those that build bullet trains to hell.
Corporations: created pollution. Deforestation. Burning Amazon. Dumped chemicals in water. Poisoned food (Monsanto). Name one govt that dumped its chemical waist in the waters.
Govt: created the epa and cleaned up the water
@@mikekasich836 Well the U.S Government dumped Agent Orange all over Vietnam and then dumped the remains on a coral reef at Johnston Atoll. Area 51 is a chemical superfund site, and many other bases are contaminated. The U.S government also knowingly experimented with Strontium 90 on children and pregnant women during the Cold War... so yah. Uncle Sam's environmental record kinda sucks.
@@josephmccarthy4307 incorporations dump toxic sludge into our waterways for 50 years. Corporations lied about the side effects of dangerous drugs. Corporation called Monsanto dumped agent orange on to our crops until the govt made them stop
So don't give me that bullshit. The government can make mistakes. But corporations never do good
"Now with thirty percent more sense " SEAMUS GOT FILED INTO AN AIRPLANE
I feel like someone is living vicariously thru Bob.
Mom leaves home
Older brother to me:
2:15
Great stuff!
Excellent video, this subject has been ruining American political discussions(despite us cutting more carbon emissions than any country in the Paris Climate Agreement because we get 20% of our energy from nuclear)
We could still use some more and from thorium, of course.
@@abrahemsamander3967sure, plenty more to do and expand upon. There's no endgame for an economy. If an economy is your endgame, well...
Wait... Character development!? WHAT IS THIS WITCHCRAFT!?!?!?
Finally my dream come true. I asked on another video for this and you delivered guys. Bob actually explained something to all of us and Seamus. Now they needed to marry lol 🤣
GAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY!!!!
Ive noticed seamus is at his most dishonest when hes making videos for special interests like fee. "But markets do such a good job! Look at all these charities-" nope. A few companies giving the the bare minimum to charity for tax loopholes isn't the same. the only reason those charities even exist is thanks to government. Thanks to government loopholes and Shia tax deductions companies are motivated to create charities and give the bare minimum to them in order to get tax deductions and brakes. Those would not exist without government and regulation. In a truly free market they would have no motivation to do those things. in fact the primary reason they would do it in a free-market would be for public image. They would give no more money than is required for a PR campaign. the government would do both a better job and a more efficient job and regularly does. You only have to look at the quality of the water before the government created the EPA vs. After. Small government conservativism is nice. But ideological religious libertarian fundamentalism is stupid
Now, Sheamus that was classic funny.
I like the way you had Bob use the sarcasm to not only create his epiphany but blame you for it while subtlety praising you as well.
Great job
It's evolution baby!
2:15 The smartest thing Bob has done yet.
Nice that you guys mentioned carbon capture, and nuclear(at least in the back ground.)
One of the few people that make sense with this issue, thank you. Now we just need more nuclear and get that co2 out of the atmosphere.
THORIUM FOR THE WIN!
AND HYDROGEN FUEL CELL CARS
Actually....... there’s evidence that plant life is actually starving for CO2. By pumping loads of CO2 into the atmosphere we’ve actually doubled the growth rate of plants.
@@WideMouth During the age of the dinosaurs the Co2 level was 4000% higher than it is now Nuclear submarines also run with such high Co2 levels for the crew's air supply.
no, not really. he would have made much more sense tho if he would have said what really happened in south africa, zimbabwe and zambia. do you want to know what happened ? and why they had a famine in the late 90's and the 2000's ?
I need that "I love oil" shirt
I got the same ad about the climate crisis and how it's a civil rights issue 3 times on this video. Before watching it for the first time, after watching it for the first time, and then coming back to make this comment.
That hand puppet is hilarious
Yes, but what isn't mentioned here is that as cars and planes have become more fuel efficient, people travel more miles on average because they can afford to now at the same price (this is how markets work). If we as a society desire to preserve natural resources, it is the role of an outside entity (the government) to internalize the externalities caused by economic actions by putting a price on the usage of these resources (like putting a tax on gasoline usage). Whether or not we believe decreasing the usage of these resources is important in the short term is a different question entirely. But just some food for thought
The best thing for a government to do to help the environment is incentivize companies to it for them. The market always out performs the government in all sectors, but the government can still influence the private sector with minor tax reductions for greener implementations. Make electric cars instead of gas, maybe knock a few percent off of one of their taxes, like say the payroll tax. With the incentive to go greener, the companies will begin trying their hardest to do so.
Wow!
Bob really manhandled that dude!😅
Though there might be companies actively attempting to preserve the environment and even create the products that improve our way of life through means which are environmentally frindly, the idea of just letting the market has a huge gap in it: Environmental preservation is a hidden cost for most businesses. It doesn't tend to factor in a resource being spent, the well-being of the planet, much the way companies don't have to factor in the cost of breathing air. It's a cost that never means anything to a company, until they run out of it, and then the damage is too great.
You will see environmentally friendly companies, and in fact you do see, when a "good environment" is something they can legitimately sell which goes over the marginal cost of making those changes. Sometimes it happens, but there's no way a few companies with technology still in development can keep up with the pace at which we can damage the environment in a market where this type of things isn't regulated. You don't need massive government regulations, but some standards are needed to try to keep things at a manageable level.
I came here for the thumbnail.
Ahh, why did I just see this video now! It's hilarious, factual, entertaining! Kudos to FEE.org for partnering with Seamus! Great video
Ah yes I remember as a kid I always went to the Audubon zoo and Aquarium, they were the best. I’m glad the society is doing well.
The thing is, if a business pollutes the environment, other people takes negative consequences. So government intervention is nececerry, but it should be placed as taxes not bans or mandates.
lesson here is that we need a balance to be happy
The wiki-context link. Woomph.
The government forgot the appositive commas.
ngl i was super hoping seamus would pull out an elephant gun and poach the rhino in the end out of annoyance
Hey Bob gets it
And surely some highly polluted places are full of valuable heavy metals that are already partially converted from ore. What if someone took over a Superfund site to mine those metals?
Yes it is, and we're winning. Go team human!
I feel like “Liberal Liam” would have been a better name for Bob
Didn't know Bob had a wife beater lol.
BOB is awesome.
u should make a greta character
I think tomorrow, when a new freedom toons video will be released, will talk about Greta.
WE don't have time for this we need to give incentives.
Turning airborne CO2 back into coal?! What kind of dark magic is that! In all seriousness, that sounds pretty cool
These are absolutely great!
That Seamus puppet was really high quality
Turning CO2 back into coal? I'm no expert, but any method of taking CO2 and converting it into fuel requires energy. The most efficient way to do so, is with plants. Other methods require energy to be acquired from somewhere: solar, wind, nuclear, or fossil fuels. That sort of defeats the purpose of making coal, since all methods of transferring energy suffer from inefficiency. This all assumes the coal is intended as a fuel. If you're just looking to reduce greenhouse emissions, making artificial coal and storing it would work, but there's no economic incentive. You could make charcoal from trees, but that is a little worse than carbon neutral. Even if you replant, you still knock a bunch of trees out of the carbon cycle for several years, and it takes many fossil fuels to run the machinery for the business. Turning CO2 into coal is a weak point in your argument.
Do one on copyright next.
Hey, Seamus! The National Audobon Society is a 501c3 nonprofit advocacy and lobbying entity. To assert it is an example of “(free) market” environmentalism is a whee bit of a stretch. I mean, it’s hx is that of likeminded ppl putting their monies where their hearts were. That’s sound activism. I’m not picking up on how this is some great example of “the market for the win!”
Common Sense Soapbox is just Paper Mario FreedomToons confirmed!
You mean like how logging companies when no longer having a market for freshly clear cut land to build houses on (and sell the lumber to developers who bought said land) with only the slightest nudge started selective harvests and reforestation programs because blank land did not have a market but a tree planted in place of a cut one could be cut again in just a couple decades?
Carbon nanotube? DOES THAT MEAN I CAN GET A DAMASTIC STEAL SWORD!?!?!
Damascus
Insightful
Please made a video about mining (helium6) on the moon, mars or any exterrestrial colonies, or what would happen if a ultrasolar megacoorporation met with exterrestrial life on alpha centauri, titan(gas moon, precious gas), or europa. They would go full Weyland-Yutani/RDA, or else?
Is this a mass effect reference
@@TainyaGaming RDA - Avatar
Weyland Yutani - *Chestbursters*
Enlsaving Alien Populations - Stellaris :)
I didn't know that about rhinos and elephants
dude is getting severely sick of Seamus's common sense crap lol
It's actually People vs People vs Planet vs Planet
If the market helps the planet then why do only 100 corporations give 71% of all emissions.
Guess wild Rhinos just don't exist anymore.
The best philosophy ever is: I don’t care, do what you want.
So these videos are like a two parter eh? Neat.
That ending was so funny
CARBON NANOTUBES FROM THE AIR???
So, did FEE put up the "Context" link?
Another good example of private sectors and entrepreneurs doing more to save the environment than government: Buffalo
Is this Freedom Toons?
Im waiting for him to pop out of the recycling bin and start talking about how recycling is actually a scam by the plastics industry.
Bob has fucking had it
Hey im wondering if we could get a video where it just pounds down on one of these ideas, like usually they list a few facts to support the evidence, but what if we just made a super long one every now and then that just pounded like 100 facts into our heads?
That would be good to us but the UA-cam algorithm supports creators that upload a lot so even if long videos would be fun that would be a career suicide.
Was I the only one who got a "save the environment" type ad before the video started?
Someone has been listening to words and numbers
I WANT A SEAMUS PUPPET
I think you broke Bob, but I know his reaction broke me XD
Bob Fired back
Why does Seamus keep getting the short end of the stick in recent episodes
As a green conservative who is sympathetic to cap and trade, I can nonetheless really support free market videos talking about limited government solutions and how most environmental change will be gradual and individual. I personally believe that, as climate change and carbon emissions have an impact on others without their consent, that externality justifies government intervention. Now, the reason I'm only sympathetic to cap and trade and not completely for it is because I'm still unsure of the pragmatic cost benefits of it (but I still believe that, unlike many other things, it is actually something the government should be able to consider). But despite my green leanings, nothing has turned me as far away from wanting to fix climate change as the Democratic Party.
Wait, we actually found a way to deal with CO2?
No we have not... and dont let some Utube video fool U... GW is a complex prob with many more issues other than simply sucking out and extracting a little CO2...
@@Proemed44G Yeah, you’re right, sometimes I forget about the “don’t believe everything you read” rule, I was shocked and heartbroken when I realized that Adam Conover lied about blm. I’m surprised that people besides me still call it global warming.
Paper recycling is actually really bad.
I still don't think the market is going to give companies any incentive not to dump toxic waste in the water supply of those people who could never afford to buy their products.
1) Property rights violations are and should be prosecuted. Free markets aren't an absence of rules, they're an absence of state planning and control over people's economic choices. That is - you get to decide what to produce, sell, buy, trade, give away, etc. and at what prices; but if that right is to be universal, you do *not* get to steal from, defraud, or generally hurt other people in the process.
2) Do you want to buy from companies who do all those things? It doesn't seem to me that most Americans do, and people pay more money for all sorts of products now just to try to reduce their environmental impact. This, though, is only something that can really happen once societies get wealthier.
So support both?
Actually.
Paper recycling is probably worse than harvested paper.
It requires paper farms which rely on crop rotation to not go out of business. If we all stop buying fresh paper, those farms go out of business and sell to Google to build another server site.
Moreover, the process in recycling paper is much more involved than harvesting, so requires more chemicals and additional factory space
Save the trees, waste paper
what about nestle then? are they a good company?
Nestle is a government crony of the scummiest order so no.
Free Market Environmentalism!
Tell that to the dodos
So now that Bob is getting it is the series over?