ChatterBank1 min ago
Is There Anything (Apart From Himself) That Trump Doesn't Hate ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//Under current law, wildlife management decisions are only allowed to be based on science and "without reference to possible economic or other impacts of determination".//
Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, a former oil lobbyist, announced the change on Monday, saying the change allowed the law to "ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal - recovery of our rarest species," he said. //
Sounds reasonable. What a spiteful headline you've constructed, Canary. You wouldn't be spinning again by any chance, would you?
Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, a former oil lobbyist, announced the change on Monday, saying the change allowed the law to "ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal - recovery of our rarest species," he said. //
Sounds reasonable. What a spiteful headline you've constructed, Canary. You wouldn't be spinning again by any chance, would you?
https:/
Great improvement in the situation, as one might expect from this wonderful genius of a man - whom people greatly admire.
Great improvement in the situation, as one might expect from this wonderful genius of a man - whom people greatly admire.
-- answer removed --
Re conservation issues: we conserve [i]"without reference to possible economic or other impacts of determination"[i].
(God knows what "other impacts of determination" means.)
Therefore, if one consequence of saving the blue-tip butterfly, the water vole or the orang-utan is that we are all poorer, then we take that on the chin because these beautiful creatures we share the planet with enrich our lives in ways more important than pounds and pence. Have I got that right? And maybe we have a moral duty to our cousins in the animal world irrespective of the cost-benefit analysis. Have I got that right?
I'm posing these questions because this disregard of economic consequence in the pursuit of a moral good (one I share, by the way) seems inconsistent with the attitude of Trump's critics on other local policies.
(God knows what "other impacts of determination" means.)
Therefore, if one consequence of saving the blue-tip butterfly, the water vole or the orang-utan is that we are all poorer, then we take that on the chin because these beautiful creatures we share the planet with enrich our lives in ways more important than pounds and pence. Have I got that right? And maybe we have a moral duty to our cousins in the animal world irrespective of the cost-benefit analysis. Have I got that right?
I'm posing these questions because this disregard of economic consequence in the pursuit of a moral good (one I share, by the way) seems inconsistent with the attitude of Trump's critics on other local policies.
//... rare and endangered species new factory bringing jobs to an area.. sorry nature... economics (and more voters) will win.//
The trade-off may be the blue-tip butterfly for more votes, RowanWitch. In that scenario I think you'd find me on the side of the butterfly.
But possibly the trade-off is different: prosperity brought to a stricken town, but at the cost of the butterfly. What side does a decent person come down on in that scenario?
The trade-off may be the blue-tip butterfly for more votes, RowanWitch. In that scenario I think you'd find me on the side of the butterfly.
But possibly the trade-off is different: prosperity brought to a stricken town, but at the cost of the butterfly. What side does a decent person come down on in that scenario?
//We have enough people we need more butterflies//
I rather agree. Just inviting people to consider consequences. Rowanwitch is for the alleviation of human poverty in most cases, but for its perpetuation in the special case that the blue-tip butterfly would have its habitat destroyed by a new factory.
I rather agree. Just inviting people to consider consequences. Rowanwitch is for the alleviation of human poverty in most cases, but for its perpetuation in the special case that the blue-tip butterfly would have its habitat destroyed by a new factory.
These sort of clickbait headlines are so funny.
It’s the ‘I hate so let’s make it appear that xxx is hateful’ sort of thing.
Regardless of your opinion on environmental and animal extinction issues there is always two sides of the argument.
Local economic factors could be important for some people. Others it’s butterflies.
And if you think it is only the big bad businesses that stretch their truth to get their way then you have to accept that so do environmentalists. Like transporting some lesser known newt to be suddenly found in an area never known to have them in its entire history.
Trump doesn’t hate anything really. It’s all those that hate him are the hateful people. They see hate simply because it’s him. They cant look past their own hate and get caught in a cycle, like a gerbil wheel, constantly running to keep up with their own hate. Eventually it will spin them flat and they will have to come to a sudden stop and although they will have a dizzy head for a while they will get back to an equilibrium and see a more normal world again.
How far they have to go to get back to normality is anyone’s guess but hopefully it won’t be too long.
It’s the ‘I hate so let’s make it appear that xxx is hateful’ sort of thing.
Regardless of your opinion on environmental and animal extinction issues there is always two sides of the argument.
Local economic factors could be important for some people. Others it’s butterflies.
And if you think it is only the big bad businesses that stretch their truth to get their way then you have to accept that so do environmentalists. Like transporting some lesser known newt to be suddenly found in an area never known to have them in its entire history.
Trump doesn’t hate anything really. It’s all those that hate him are the hateful people. They see hate simply because it’s him. They cant look past their own hate and get caught in a cycle, like a gerbil wheel, constantly running to keep up with their own hate. Eventually it will spin them flat and they will have to come to a sudden stop and although they will have a dizzy head for a while they will get back to an equilibrium and see a more normal world again.
How far they have to go to get back to normality is anyone’s guess but hopefully it won’t be too long.
Making it about 'hate' one way or the other is a bit silly.
I agree with Cassa that Trump doesn't really hate anything. There are things he likes, things he doesn't like and things he doesn't give a rat's arris about (butterflies is probably one of those).
Similarly, no-one really hates Trump, but there are plenty of people that don't like him and think he's an awful President.
I agree with Cassa that Trump doesn't really hate anything. There are things he likes, things he doesn't like and things he doesn't give a rat's arris about (butterflies is probably one of those).
Similarly, no-one really hates Trump, but there are plenty of people that don't like him and think he's an awful President.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.