[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
You present a half-truth. How nice that you note that Gore personally invests in all of these projects on his time to suit his own priorities, none of which anyone has a problem with.
But what you fail to acknowledge - either intentionally or because you don’t know different (given your performances of late, I am inclined to go with the latter) - is that Gore wants wholesale policy change at great costs to the national and global economy, all because such trade-offs must be mowed down in the name of averting a moral crisis (his words).
Gore doesn’t just “live green” - he wants to visit on millions a tough policy change that he himself can whistle past due to his lofty resources. If Gore was this “do it your selfer” and nothing more, why not just let private citizens do what he does when their financial means allow them to live greener? Nope, not good enough - he wants others to absorb the difficult trade-offs while he heats his outside pool.
Oh, and should you ever be bothered to do anything original, you’d learn that carbon offsets are at best “feelgood” vehicles that do little to offset much of anything and at worst are a sham.
Merely “buying indulgences” doesn’t do much except dupe myopic idiots into worshiping their antics while completely ignoring the rank hypocrisy. Gore and the rest laugh all the way to the bank knowing his legions of lemmings will provide him philosophical cover.
That said, we have genuine environmental issues to deal with, and Gore does some good things, in my view - but what hurts practical reform are Pharisees like Gore, and mindless dupes like you that believe anything you read.
[/quote]
My point, clearly, based on his message, he is the opposite of a hypocrite.
On your other point, I just totally disagree. If a part of that policy was legislating tougher CAFE standards on automakers say 10 years ago, they’d be better off, we’d be better off. Instead Toyota is better off, and Detroit is, well starting over.