What percentage of the total current carbon in the atmosphere would GM and GM products historical total aggregate account for? A huge chunk no doubt. I'd like to see Tesla compared to GM on this year by year scaled per dollar of revenue and on units of production and on emissions from products and the totals.
Fossil fuels have such incredibly low aggregate thermodynamic return on energy/material inputs that they should have been extinct by 1950. They are not getting better, they cannot get better, and are at a ceiling and have been for decades. You'd need efficient conversion of energy into matter or that level of tech to fix the inefficiency of the fossil fuel production and use stack which would obviate its need. But when you look at it you will surely see its not just bad as in inefficient it has to be parasitic, catabolic to the degree that it is a scarcity inducing net negative. It would be like claiming economic gain from continually building and burning down a city. From a physical and economic standpoint fossil fuels are absolute garbage and compared to the efficiency in the ever improving green stack they worse they garbage but absolute humanity compromising criminality and this is before any consideration of their externalities. You have to think that bankers are printing money and giving it to their friends because that is the only thing that could support fossil fuel garbage.
GM and its investors need to be straddled with a retro active carbon surcharge going into the future a span a long as GM has been around until it has fully paid off its debt to humanity. And this would supplement a proper prospective forward facing carbon tax. This does not dissuade innovation or investment it just discourages the stupid- look before you abuse the power of money. Some are going to try to point the finger at citizens and consumers but the proper finger is pointed at the stupid business and its lead in the gas politics, that is the proper proximate cause line. Like to see a similar policy applied to the banks that financed and finance fossil fuel garbage since 1950. For GM let it go back to its founding. This is more than fair.
Fossil fuels have such incredibly low aggregate thermodynamic return on energy/material inputs that they should have been extinct by 1950. They are not getting better, they cannot get better, and are at a ceiling and have been for decades. You'd need efficient conversion of energy into matter or that level of tech to fix the inefficiency of the fossil fuel production and use stack which would obviate its need. But when you look at it you will surely see its not just bad as in inefficient it has to be parasitic, catabolic to the degree that it is a scarcity inducing net negative. It would be like claiming economic gain from continually building and burning down a city. From a physical and economic standpoint fossil fuels are absolute garbage and compared to the efficiency in the ever improving green stack they worse they garbage but absolute humanity compromising criminality and this is before any consideration of their externalities. You have to think that bankers are printing money and giving it to their friends because that is the only thing that could support fossil fuel garbage.
GM and its investors need to be straddled with a retro active carbon surcharge going into the future a span a long as GM has been around until it has fully paid off its debt to humanity. And this would supplement a proper prospective forward facing carbon tax. This does not dissuade innovation or investment it just discourages the stupid- look before you abuse the power of money. Some are going to try to point the finger at citizens and consumers but the proper finger is pointed at the stupid business and its lead in the gas politics, that is the proper proximate cause line. Like to see a similar policy applied to the banks that financed and finance fossil fuel garbage since 1950. For GM let it go back to its founding. This is more than fair.