Well, if you know where some of our recyclables go and what happens to them, we might be suckers for thinking we are doing such a great thing. At least on plastics. Recycling aluminum is especially awesome, everything else has some layer of complication and difficulty.

Regarding Moore's piece, I'm not familiar with his positions on this. I do find it ironic that people go around patting themselves on the back for buying this green energy stuff that is made in China who is a gross polluter. Did he mention any of this? The fact that China continues to pollute the planet on a grand scale, but hey, they make our great green energy stuff...so who cares?

You lost me at "Recycling is for suckers":

A sucker would be someone who takes things - especially where there's a political angle involved - at face value without further examination. I'm sure I never made that or any similar statement without backing it up with evidence, conveniently forgotten now for snark's sake. But I do remember a number of reports from long ago when all the recycling, multi-bin craziness was peaking. Some communities were forcing three or more trash bins per household, with fines for not using them properly. So some investigated further, and found that all the expenses for new, divided trucks to manage the new multi-bin household trash were going to facilities that just dumped it right back into one big pile before taking it all to big trash mountain - just as they always did.

Who's the sucker in that scenario? Seems pretty obvious.

In a similar fashion, lots of our so-called "green" initiatives are a complete fraud. The only green improvements being made is transferring taxpayer's money into the pockets of charlatans. Moore's movie goes after that directly, hence the controversy. Not that I believe him at face value either, but it does dovetail with many other reports I've heard over the years.

Blindly believing that electric cars, or power from solar, wind, or biomass is "green" is an easily proven joke. Its up to the individual if they want to understand why or not. But when you're creating a political movement aimed at people who prefer to feel good rather than actually do something that's holds up to scrutiny, its pretty easy to lead the suckers where you want them.

You lost me at "Recycling is for suckers":

A sucker would be someone who takes things - especially where there's a political angle involved - at face value without further examination.

You mean like this?

Trump Pushes a Conspiracy Theory That Falsely Accuses a TV Host of Murder

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/26/us/politics/klausutis-letter-jack-dorsey.html

I'm sure I never made that or any similar statement without backing it up with evidence, conveniently forgotten now for snark's sake.

Nice try, but you know damn well I see exactly what you are trying to do . Call it snark, it doesn't matter, you feign environmental concern but your motives are anti-environmentalist.

Any half-conscious advocate of the environment has been aware of, cynical about, and against the criminal aspects of Green Capitalism since the 1980s. Despite this, great things are happening and progress is being made. To seize upon failings of environmentalism as an excuse to write off the entire movement is a cheap shot.

And more and more just like you are migrating to the Pacific Northwest every day, coming for the clean air and water. Then you just want to trash it.

Go ahead. Enjoy Orc life in Mordor; just don't bring it out here to the Shire - you want to live in a hellhole, stay in your damn hellhole please, thanks.

So many assumptions - so little reality.

I want a clean, sustainable, responsible environment to live in as much as anyone. I simply look past the claims of all the untrustworthy people who have aligned themselves with environmental causes to see if the actions match the words. Often they do not. Pardon me for uncomfortably pointing that out that so many have been mislead, often willfully because they accept claims at face-value.

If solar cells are made by strip mining quartz and burning massive amounts of coal. If wind towers have a maximum life of just 20 years before they fall apart, never produce enough energy to cover their investment, and have become a huge tax dodge for energy companies. If biomass is burning trees from all over the planet at an unsustainable rate (CO2 anyone?). If battery technology depends on destroying the land via strip mining for lithium. If electric cars are almost entirely powered by fossil fuels. If the search for rare earth elements leaves the environment littered with radioactive debris. If deserts are being raped for solar projects that aren't working. And if all the wind and solar power plants must be backed up with traditional fossil fuel plants that must be kept running to cover for the "intermittency" of so-called renewables - then what are the "great things" that are happening?

Gee, look at that. A cogent reply without once using accusatory characterizations of "you".

A sucker would be someone who takes things - especially where there's a political angle involved - at face value without further examination.

You mean like this?
Trump Pushes a Conspiracy Theory That Falsely Accuses a TV Host of Murder

Not quite sure why Twitter refuses to remove the posts at the request of the deceased's widower. An aide dying from a previously undetected heart condition (per the autopsy) at her desk in FL 20+ years ago while Scarborough was in DC doesn't skew left or right. It's a sad fact.

Twitter only brings more attention to Trump's claim that she was murdered by Scarborough by its new "fact-checking" tags. "This content is unavailable" seems more appropriate to me. Twitter is a platform not a news organization; it routinely removes copyrighted, sexual, and other content upon request or if it violates Twitter's terms & conditions.

Of course, there are those who will believe Scarborough is a murderer out to undermine Trump's re-election chances. I don't make the connection between those two things & I seriously doubt Scarborough fans are Trump voters.

Youtube has a vigilant copyright protection, I'm sure that's all it was. There is far more controversial content that is allowed to be posted to Youtube, so I doubt Moore is the issue. If it gets clicks, Youtube makes money.

Recycling is an attempt, especially with glass, but unfortunately plastics often end up as garbage somewhere regardless of what bin they are tossed into. Plastics are great for items that should last for a long time - knees, hips and replacement limbs, plumbing - but it would be nice if there were alternatives to using it in single use products.

Many of the attempts to find clean energy solutions are in earnest, however, if there is money to be made it will get twisted.

A sucker would be someone who takes things - especially where there's a political angle involved - at face value without further examination.

You mean like this?
Trump Pushes a Conspiracy Theory That Falsely Accuses a TV Host of Murder

Not quite sure why Twitter refuses to remove the posts at the request of the deceased's widower. An aide dying from a previously undetected heart condition (per the autopsy) at her desk in FL 20+ years ago while Scarborough was in DC doesn't skew left or right. It's a sad fact.

Twitter only brings more attention to Trump's claim that she was murdered by Scarborough by its new "fact-checking" tags. "This content is unavailable" seems more appropriate to me. Twitter is a platform not a news organization; it routinely removes copyrighted, sexual, and other content upon request or if it violates Twitter's terms & conditions.

Of course, there are those who will believe Scarborough is a murderer out to undermine Trump's re-election chances. I don't make the connection between those two things & I seriously doubt Scarborough fans are Trump voters.

This is just sad all around.

I read the detail of the husband's letter to Twitter. It was written exceptionally well, and was full of fact and compassion for his wife. It is so sad that this man has to go through this - years after the unfortunate death of his wife.

And it is pathetically sad that Trump is using this family's death to spar with Joe Scarbourough and as a political deflection for all of Trump's failures and to also deflect from 100,000 current Covid deaths on his watch in the last few months to post lies about the 2001 death of Lori Klausutis. This is right up there with Trump attacking a gold star family and mocking a disabled reporter; if not even worse. Is Trump so desparate to use the family of a dead woman to change the narrative? I think we all know the answer. And this type of human trait is what people will vote for in November?

Lastly it is sad that Twitter won't step up to deal with Trump on a stronger scale. I'm not a lawyer & don't know all the legal angles, but it makes one wonder. And it looks like Trump will continue to lie and campaign through Twitter. Great platform to help Trump perpetuate pain and suffering of an innocent family.

Many of the attempts to find clean energy solutions are in earnest, however, if there is money to be made it will get twisted.

Very true.

I think the problem is how it gets sold or pitched to the general public. Not the first or only time people who want to do things will make something sound all good and rosy to get it done.

Green energy I think is great. I think our energy portfolio should be comprised of all sources as virtually all are needed - some have a benefit in one area and some have a benefit in another area.

And the principle of recycling is good. I recycle a lot. Only thing I don't do is rinse food containers out, I just trash those most of the time. And I don't pollute the recycling with things like pastic bags, stryofoam and pizza boxes with food substances and grease on them. It makes me a little upset when I see how much straight up trash people put in the recycle bins.

I just wish that all these things could be looked at big picture and honestly for what they are and what is happening, what could happen and what should happen. But America is too busy for that...myself included sometimes.

My biggest point is always, we want to do something, let's do it. Let's not rely upon other countries to do it for us. Don't make energy efficient and renewable energy products and capabilities overseas. We can make that stuff here if we want. Don't send our recyclables overseas be it steel or plastics. We can recycle products here if we want. Don't rely upon foreign energy. Make our own energy and if we don't have enough shift to other sources we do have enough of. If one state wants to frack for natural gas, then that state needs to deal with the waste water, not ship it to another state. If we don't want to do everything it takes to do the things we want to do, then we simply shouldn't do them. The better answer is if it is that important, then we need to figure out ways to do it.