Stock Guru: A Few Pennies Don’t Matter if you’re Protecting the Earth

January 18, 2020

Dude, that’s kind of what environmentalists have been saying for oh, (checks watch) 50 years.

Jim Cramer on the Ultimate sustainable stock.

Posted by greenman3610
Filed in Crock of the Week
23 Comments »

23 Responses to “Stock Guru: A Few Pennies Don’t Matter if you’re Protecting the Earth”

  1. dumboldguy Says:

    January 18, 2020 at 5:16 pm

    “A Few Pennies Don’t Matter if you’re Protecting the Earth”

    ROTFLMAO! The very last comment in a string of BS from some financial wizards, all of whom pay minimal lip service to doing the right thing but keep saying “fossil fuels—we need to get away from them but they’ll still be in use for 30 or 40 years”.

    Just more BAU (with some BS piled on top) as we kick the can down the road until it’s too late to avoid CAGW. Tesla doesn’t really interest these guys except as a stock whose price has gone up—-ergo, an “investment opportunity” for the greedy rich (who own most of the stocks) to use to get even richer.

    Reply
    • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

      January 18, 2020 at 6:54 pm

      Fossil fuels may be in use for 50 or 60 years, but will have long since lost their attraction for investors.

      Reply
        • dumboldguy Says:

          January 19, 2020 at 12:11 pm

          Here’s Sir Clucky, again posting the generic graphs without comment.

          In case you were wondering why he does this so often, it’s an attempt to show what a “concerned environmentalist” he is and restore some credibility after his last whipping when his Russian troll job got out of hand and he embarrassed himself.

          Watch for the pattern—-he has repeated it at least three times now:
          1) Clucky overdoes the anti-Americanism and Russian troll business, and
          2) Gets taken to task for that
          3) Responds with vicious personal attacks—-name-calling and childishness
          4) Gets himself torn a new “arsehole”
          5) After either sobering up or being told by his Russian trollmasters to knock it off,
          6) Clucky goes silent for a while in hopes that we will forget
          7) Clucky then comes back with an avalanche of “good” stuff to drown out the trolling and show what a wonderful asset he is to Crock

          He thinks we will forget what a waste he is and accept him back into the fold here—he would be better off spending his time trolling some other site, although I guess it IS food that we who get his “game” keep him occupied here rather than have him working on dumber people.

          Reply
        • ecoquant Says:

          January 19, 2020 at 12:20 pm

          So @Sir Charles, are you simply posting a video without comment because you are short on time, or because you don’t understand the rationale one way or the other, and are thus incapable of describing or defending it?

          If you are short on time, can you commit to saying something within a couple of days? If not, are you really being as trollish as you seem?

          Reply
          • dumboldguy Says:

            January 19, 2020 at 5:06 pm

            YOU are the waste of time, Clucky. Posting a couple of links that AGAIN give us some science that WE are all familiar with and YOU don’t understand is exactly what I was talking about in my 12:11 PM comment.

            (And when are you going to find the balls to admit that YOU are the one that keeps down-thumbing EVERY comment I make on ANY topic here on Crock? It’s actually quite obvious).

          • Sir Charles Says:

            January 19, 2020 at 5:14 pm

            Paranoid as usual. I don’t even know where the “down-thumbing” is, moron.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            January 19, 2020 at 5:29 pm

            “I don’t even know where the “down-thumbing” is”, says Clucky.

            Does he think we’re stupid? Or is HE too stupid to see the “Rate this” and the colorful little little thumbs below the time/date stamp on every comment? Fittingly, the “up” one has a blue cuff, the “down” has a red.

            Nah, he knows about thumbs—-he’s just a shameless LIAR!

          • Sir Charles Says:

            January 19, 2020 at 6:05 pm

            My screen his high contrast and colours swapped. I don’t see any thumbs with that setup. The only place I can like is the WP site, and there I see only a like star.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            January 19, 2020 at 6:53 pm

            You can’t see this on WordPress? At the top of every comment? With a thumb up before the first 0 and a thumb down before the second 0 where I’ve placed @’s?
            doesn’t WP transmit properly to and from St. Petersburg?

            Sir Charles Says:
            January 19, 2020 at 6:05 pm
            @ 0 @ 0 Rate This

            My screen his high contrast…..

          • Sir Charles Says:

            January 19, 2020 at 10:16 pm

            Not on my WP. And I’m in Ireland, paranoid crank.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            January 19, 2020 at 10:55 pm

            It’s ~4 AM in Ireland, Clucky—-shouldn’t you be in bed and asleep? It’s ~ 7 AM in St, Petersburg, where you would be beginning work just a bit early. hmmmmm

          • Sir Charles Says:

            January 20, 2020 at 8:26 am

            Sure. I also “work” in St, Petersburg at 2am. Round the clock, you know. Go w@nking yourself, paranoid moron.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            January 20, 2020 at 8:46 am

            Keep proving my point, Clucky. You have hardly any feathers left on your Demented Rooster suit and no toes left, having shot them all off—-you are a strange looking and “wobbly” bird indeed.

  2. redskylite Says:

    January 18, 2020 at 6:20 pm

    A world apart from reality in the “global south”, where a few pennies are the difference between life and death.

    https://www.wits.ac.za/news/latest-news/research-news/2020/2020-01/the-burning-issue-of-population-control.html

    Reply
  3. renewableguy Says:

    January 18, 2020 at 6:42 pm

    Fossil fuels is a massive investment and its hard to let go of the past. But the up side is that they are in the process of seeing the change is growing larger.

    Reply
  4. grindupbaker Says:

    January 18, 2020 at 9:08 pm

    @”Sir Charles” The trivial bit of science that you posted a link to for me with no explanation whatsoever other than “What The Fuck” contains nothing whatsoever that contradicts my correct science nor even speaks to it at all. You are an idiot and whoever gave you a thumbuppy for your piece of lazy crap is an imbecile.

    Reply
  5. ecoquant Says:

    January 19, 2020 at 10:47 am

    I don’t like the tepid pace discussed either, but I don’t see anyone else talking about doing the things that need to be done at any pace, certainly not governments. Facts are, the changes needed to address climate disruption are going to be unpopular, especially among residents of OECD countries with all their comforts.

    Worse, taking the “limit to +1.5C” target for a moment, we are so damn late doing anything, even knowing about the problem for 30 years, that at present the path to meeting that target means reducing global emissions 8% and more per annum year over year. (See below.)

    That will cause a global recession even if it does not require one to achieve it. I really think the circumstances we are in are a problem representative democracies, not only have a difficult time solving, I’m not sure they can solve the problems.

    (This is from Stocker’s “Closing door of climate targets” paper from 2013. Stocker, et al wrote a pessimistic update in 2016.)

    Do we give up? Of course not. We refocus upon the “limit to +2C” target. But, note, it’s possible to delay action long enough per the above that we’re faced with the same situation with respect to +2C as we presently are for +1.5C. But, remember, there’s nothing magical about that +2C target. To quote from their Abstract:

    This 2 °C warming target is perceived by the public as a universally accepted goal, identified by scientists as a safe limit that avoids dangerous climate change. This perception is incorrect: no scientific assessment has clearly justified or defended the 2 °C target as a safe level of warming, and indeed, this is not a problem that science alone can address. We argue that global temperature is the best climate target quantity, but it is unclear what level can be considered safe. The 2 °C target is useful for anchoring discussions, but has been ineffective in triggering the required emission reductions; debates on considering a lower target are strongly at odds with the current real-world level of action. These debates are moot, however, as the decisions that need to be taken now to limit warming to 1.5 or 2 °C are very similar. We need to agree how to start, not where to end mitigation.

    Reply
    • dumboldguy Says:

      January 19, 2020 at 12:19 pm

      More navel-gazing. The accelerating pace of warming and the many ways in which climate change appears to be charging towards irreversible tipping points makes it clear that the 1.5 we will not reach is already too much.

      Maybe when the SHTF we will finally act—-by then it will be too late for many humans and much of the life on the planet. So be it, those who survive will begin the long process of evolution and “civilization” that got us to today, and hopefully without the mistakes that brought us to ruin this time.

      Reply
  6. ecoquant Says:

    January 19, 2020 at 12:30 pm

    @dumboldguy,

    “Tipping points” are an illusion. We’ve already got irreversible change here, and more in the pipeline. There are no cliff edges we’ll fall over. It gets steadily worse and, yes, there is over time more permafrost melt, etc, but in a sense it is never too late.

    Then again I’m not sure what the SHTF threshold is. There are beaches washing away in Florida, North Carolina, Massachusetts, threatening expensive homes, and all people want is for government to keep rolling out $200 million a pop to keep their properties whole. We are literally running out of sand as a result.

    For example, it’s already too late for the WAIS (West Antarctic Ice Sheet; see Rignot), but if we keep goin’ on the present path the destabilization won’t happen in 200 years, it’ll be a lot sooner.

    So apart from claiming this is “navel gazing”, what concrete measures do you have in mind? People can protest in the streets, but that’s not a plan. The measures described by the financiers are unbelievably slow, but they are measures.

    As Dr Glen Peters observed, sure, zero Carbon energy and EVs and energy storage are coming along, but they are being outpaced by global economic growth which is driving emissions higher.

    Sure, there is and I wholly support the decarbonization plans of Prof Mark Z Jacobson, et al, but who is going to see that implemented?

    Reply

Leave a Reply to dumboldguy Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: