Please concentrate on writing. It’s why I signed up. And please employ people to collate, highlight and show our talents. I spent many years as a broadcaster to millions, but in modern times all of us on social media are essentially broadcasters. It’s saturation. Good writing, creative writing, informed writing. In a world of gurning and attention-seeking to camera (phones) that’s what can still make Substack special. 🙏🏼
I get why Substack wants to focus on video, because that’s where the whole internet is headed, as are the younger generations. But I agree with the sentiment that writing should be preserved on here, and highlighted as a primary feature.
85% of new households do not have cable tv for a reason. Furthermore, too many simply do not have the attention spans to listen to anything longer than a 2 min soundbite. It is very difficult to obtain complete information in this 2 minutes. Free speech was censored and people died. Lives changed forever because we were told to trust the science. Those spewing the deceit will not be trusted again. Substack should remain THE uncensored platform for those that do not wish to hear the noise and not become an escape door.
Another way to look at it is that cable “news“ also provides a short attention span. It seems that every two minutes it is interrupted by four minutes of erectile dysfunction and psoriasis advertisements among others. I commonly listen to 27 minute long videos on YouTube And I’m just fine with that. Everyone has their own go to source and none of them should be marginalized because someone doesn’t like it for some reason or another.
Your listening to 27-min vids on YT encourages me to do that kind of YT channel on mental health, mental fitness, creativity, writing and art. Thanks, Dan!
Thank you. Not only is Substack overlooking writers (their core audience), now they are throwing themselves at ‘journalists’ who were released from CNN. This is very worrisome for the future.
Do people really wish to hear live news on substack? I dont think so, people can still listen to CNN if they want to hear their version of news. Disappointed! Without the independent brilliant writers on Substack, too many would still be in the dark regarding covid and other topics telling truth and facts. This is a mistake! This different kind of audience does not wish to listen, we wish to read.
I haven't read ANY comments advocating against freedom of speech!
What I see is that most ppl who participate on Substack don't want to see "broadcast news" on their beloved Substack.
Nobody is wanting censorship. They'd just rather READ about it than have their senses offended by someone yelling or scolding. I know I feel that way. I can watch any kind of news on TV or social media. When I go to Substack it's because I want to read.
This “ breaking news“ began here for a reason, when people start the beginning of oppression, they gravitate to a “ safe“ enviroment to have a voice. Substack was the safe-haven for those people . If substack silences this, I will tell you now, you writer's will be silenced next. It's called freedom of Speech, whether it's vocal or written. I fought for the very freedom that gave you this platform to write your truth any way you desire to express it , I also fought for the freedom of those here who wish to speak their truth as well . I ask you to respect my brothers and sisters who died for that freedom you have today.
Hi Mack, You are welcome to subscribe and read' this very true raw musical story ''free of charge'' in fact anyone can.... https://jollyrroger.substack.com
I disagree. Legacy media is dead to me. Oligarch owned social media is dead to me. Substack and Bluesky is where I reside now. Evolve or die. There is a continued thirst for quality print publications on Substack and a growing appetite for video publications. They are not mutually exclusive and actually support and build upon each other.
Yes, the traditional media gatekeepers are not as relevant today as in the past. I'm also putting my time and effort into these two channels. And why shouldn't Substack provide video? This doesn't mean that every video posted is going to be news. This gives writers another avenue to share their content to others who prefer watching video. I think it's a brilliant idea!
I agree with Jeff Jackson - please don’t turn Substack into your local news station!!!
the live action broadcasts may provide interesting visuals, but the reason that I found Substack to be so informative is because of the different viewpoints, voices, and opinions that provide some background - some research information or insight that you’re not going to get with a short soundbite on Main Stream media -
I also see more and more podcasts showing up on Substack and I’m sure the younger generations may prefer seeing people perform but when those podcasts start getting more and more into their personalities or chatter about themselves, it loses interest for me - please do not turn Substack into an infotainment production
I fought for freedom of speech, vocal as well as written. My brothers and sisters died for that freedom. I ask that you not disrespect their sacrifice for these freedoms you enjoy still today . Because when your voice is silenced , you will not be writing freely as you are today . All voices are silenced.
Respectfully , I don’t think my original point has landed. It’s not about silencing voices. It’s about what this platform (Substack) is. Writers like myself were invited to create here on an understanding it was a writers and subscription community. But increasingly it’s been turned into something else. There’s a lot of noise. Audio, visual, now we’re talking ‘tv studios’. It felt like this was and should be a library. A respite from other platforms. But I wouldn’t wish to silence broadcasters. We are suggesting this doesn’t become primarily a broadcasting platform. Very best and genuine good wishes from UK, Lee
Most of the independent journalists have been silenced and/or censored on other platforms. Do you feel they ni longer have a right to use the platform they also find useful in exercising their freedoms as well? This is a public platform and many subscribe to read your articles . It was meant to ve a win win when we fought for freedom of speech. But I'll say this, when you silence voices, yours may be next and it's hard to believe im explaing this to anyone . We didn't divide it into groups when we fought for it.
I do think there’s a slight breakdown of communications between us here , I don’t disagree with what you’re saying. Nobody should be silenced. Broadcasting here ? Go for it and I wish them every success. What we’re talking about (me and those agreeing with me) is our concern Substack moves too far from being mainly a writer’s space. Which made this a point of difference to other areas/platforms. Best wishes, we’re really not in broad disagreement, just talking about different areas 🙏🏼👊🏼
If you silence a voice, written or vocal, you silence them all. Freedom of speech can't be divided here or anywhere in America. The comment I'm referring to is your statement of turning substack into a “ local news station.“ It's still posted above for reference
The main subject matter was Jim Acosta explaining his approach to being on Substack by being more of a podcaster (which means a visual presentation) and preferring a breaking news approach to get on a media outlet and comment on something as soon as it happens.
this approach in my opinion goes after being a performer and being someone who wants to grab the attention as news is happening.
if that’s what Jim Acosta wants to do that is fine, but I was expressing my opinion that I much prefer the writings on Substack that are the result of somebody doing research delving more in depth on a subject than an instantaneous reaction.
so I hope this clarifies my statement, which in no way was trying to limit free speech
This is pathetic coming from “so called writers“ silence this speech but not mine because my words more eloquent than a journalist. Listin to you-selves piss on freedom of speech. Your going to be Lucky if anyone reads anything you've written if you keep mthis silliness's up
Lee I feel that we need more “ how to” our lives are changing drastically that’s okay I rely on Substack to teach us ways to cope. Not hearing todays news in twelve different versions so let them write the news but yet they should also seek ways to deal with this
When broadcast media silences those voices , they need to be heard, they have that right , just as you do, to speak here . You aren't forced to listen and can easily scroll past them. You should be more concerned of the “why“ instead of expressing outrage as they are expressing their rights your enjoying yourself at the moment .
AI is very good for transforming content. For example, turning a video into a blog. If Substack integrated a tool for this then it can keep everyone happy.
Thank you Carin, there’s a real danger of Substack blending into other social media platforms, when we thought it was a place for fresh and informed writing 🙏🏼
Lee your the first I found that I agree 100% my other problem is that I never favored Facebook I understand why they keep begging for Facebook data to drive up their followers yet we are getting flooded with Facebook absurd comments selfie pictures like overnight that are just out of control I guess it just comes with the territory Substack was great I found a lot of wisdom such enjoyable things to read real journalism now it takes me a half hour or more just to filter. We appreciate though that we found you in all of the confusion
HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY* Which is why I have come to Love Substack. ♥️ Perfect timing in a strange“wunderland”? , this world is sadly🌀creepin’ into.🥴😷😱
While I agree with you, it’s not going to happen—it’s not happening. The plan it looks like is a delivery system for mainstream video “broadcasters” with tens of millions of subscribers
An absolute shame. The quiet little "creative" accounts with < 1k subscribers will have no place & no way of existing here once the multi-million megabroadcasters make all the noise. All online communities and platforms degrade, it's a given, but I didn't think this one would go as fast as it has. Maybe the next act for the indie voice & wanderer is a return to Usenet ...
Though I am from the old school, literature, writing, novels… the love of books… the importance of the written word… I always separated television, as that was movies, cartoons, and shows.. and total love for that, but they were separate… I never put the two together, as I believed, you could not ever have a James Joyce or Leo Tolstoy, or James Michener turned into video…. Even the great novels turned into movies, these were always separate for me, I never expected the movie to be like the book that would be impossible. But what I’m realizing today with social media and people writing, the non-book, the masses of people being able to articulate and take their time to message even with text messaging…. Dating apps…. Where people connect online and a boy and a girl can message each other for days, weeks, until they feel comfortable, start having some feelings, and then they go on a date. You probably know where I’m going now with this….. the idea today that we are going to see creative writing on these platforms as a reflection of the person who is publishing he’s going to be hindered, even with the use of chat GPT, AI…. The time people take to choose the right words.. to look things up, to sound smarter than they actually are… to show an intellect that might not exist if you heard the person speak…. And this is where the argument that video and a lot of instances is much better to watch if somebody is speaking about their ideas, whether it be about God, politics, culture, relationship relationships, marriage, children…. I would much rather see somebody today on social media, speaking about these things, then read what they write about them… as almost 100% of the time you will get a completely different idea of where the idea is coming from in the first place…. And it makes me think that a lot of my favorite authors were probably not anything like I imagined… and if I had heard them speak about their lives or ideas, I would probably have been disappointed or maybe even shocked…. Thinking this couldn’t be the person that wrote the book I just read… like I heard that Albert Einstein might not have written a lot of the ideas in his books, that it might have been his wife. And when I look at the history, it actually makes sense… I think that might be true…. The thing is before the cell phones before social media, people who were writers, there was a social aspect to life that was interactive… human interaction… that was at the core of almost every journalist novelist anybody in the literary world, they thrived social scenes, going out of the house and meeting other others, at cafés bars, restaurants, salons…. Private parties and social gatherings…. The face-to-face conversations were the food for thought… the arguments… the free thinking between two people and the articulation of speech… these things were vital, and they created some of the greatest publications in history…. The great American novel… the idea of that could not have come from somebody who spent 20 years secluded in some room and just communicating with others over some kind of device…. With no real human interaction….. there would be no reality, no truth of human nature or understanding of anything that would be considered viable on a literary level…. Maybe something like Gulliver’s travels…. Dr. Seuss….. some fantastic other world maybe that could be created with that kind of lifestyle…. Today’s lifestyles of the modern man… the phone, the EarPods, the dog… single…. No longer even working at any particular place of business…. But from home…. Alone….. and thousands of friends that are never seen in person, but they are on Instagram… Substack… Facebook…. So what do we really have here? I wonder…. Even though I think Alan Ginsburg was basically a self-centered narcissist, not the genius. I thought he was when I was young younger…. He was absolutely a product of somebody who was out and about cohen constantly every day of his life, he was surrounded by all kinds of people…. His thoughts came from absorbing a lot from others… from hearing their voices, the verbiage coming out of the mouth in a physical realm…. Again this is vital to having a vibrant and healthy society, especially in the literary world…. And we have lost that…. We have lost it from computers and phones and social media…. Not to mention a government control over schooling, which has decimated critical thinking… but I won’t go into that. So I am almost siding with the video people with the podcast…. It’s almost the only thing that is the closest to what we once had where people could actually speak to one another in person…. Because where are we after we write these things on Substack? Where is the average person on Substack after they are done publishing something? Are they out and about? Are they socializing…. Do they have a great community of people interacting with one another in the afternoons and evenings…. Or do they walk away from the computer with the phone in the hand, put the EarPods in, and take the dog for a walk, with the little plastic box full of green bag baggies, to stroll around the block alone and pick up the feces that falls out of the dogs rear end…. Dog food for thought….
Interesting thoughts Bud, and I don’t disagree with your sentiments. Personally I have no issue with the way people need to communicate (though modern methods do bring downsides) - it has opened the door for every one of us to have our say and show who we are. My issue and concern is with Substack, who established themselves and earned our trust and investment by being a point of difference in a frantic world of content. I really don’t need pretty pictures, reels and lectures to camera on this platform. And it seems lots of people agree. We are all still trying to find our way on it. I wish our writing was being represented and collated and showcased with more care. We dont need another showboating ‘’look at the famous person’. There was depth here. There is depth here. Let us cherish that and find wonderful writing and writers. Best wishes, Lee
I love this platform…. I’ve only been on social media since last October. I stayed Off it for over 20 years since I first saw it I knew instinctively just to wait until someday when I might use it for something important and not want any history. Jessica Reed Kraus recorded me last spring so it wasn’t until after she published some of my audio that I went on Instagram and started posting some stuff that she would grab and put it on her feed, but it It’s all audio. Although I do write a lot of comments and notes… And I just started using Substack recently. It’s a really wonderful looking platform though I don’t know how to use it very well.. I post stuff all the time and then it’s not under where it says post on my profile so I don’t know where those things are going. I’m sure they’re on here somewhere. But it seems like there’s normal people here, Or at least People that feel that this Is a place that’s worthy of spending some energy….. Compared to Instagram, which is like a cesspool of insanity…. And a lot of sexual Immoral content, foul language… Though I see some of that here… It’s not as bad… But I’d like to use this platform for some good…. The aesthetics are awesome…. It really has a cool look to all the pages…. And I get a lot of great notes from people… So anyway, that’s all…. Thanks for responding…
I read very fast faster than most people talk, so for me video is worthless and gives me less understanding, that said when it’s raw and real driven by regular people it is really powerful so it doesn’t cheapen the writing video when done right makes it more powerful
Your comment is as funny as your lack of understanding of climate change. I suggest taking a look at the ice caps, recognize the rising ocean temps and if you haven’t noticed, the increasing number of weather catastrophes.
Perhaps look into waterfront property if it’s all a joke.
Then ask the rich people why they are still on Martha's Vineyard. It's quite waterfront. And, by the way, one of Obama's mansions is on the beach in Hawaii. If climate change were true, how come the rich are always on the waterfront?
Climate change is like that old story of the frog in the pot. It creeps up very slowly so you are underwater and being parboiled before you are aware of it. I wrote a very short story about harvesting icebergs before they have a chance to melt from fresh, drinkable water into undrinkable salt water. Someone really ought to get onto it and salvage trillions of gallons worth of iceberg water before they are lost forever.
Except when the climate change nonsense was going around in my daughter's elementary class I said let's go see if it's true. As a result, I took her to two glacier national parks in Alaska and Montana. Oops, glaciers are expanding, and so much so that in Montana the embarrassed park rangers had to take down the signs which showed the ice retreating. Try to destroy her but Mother Earth is doing just fine: the fire next time.
Carbon is not guilty. Proven by ice core studies which show that a warming climate PREDATES a rise in carbon in the atmosphere. If we could add images here I could show you the graph.
I recall watching a Democrat president named Barack Obama publicly drink from a glass of Flint, Michigan water [supposedly, anyway] via mass media, signifying the water system was safe from which to drink. But many say it is STILL not safe to drink. ["Ten Years Later, Flint Still Doesn't Have Clean Water": https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/20/ten-years-later-flint-still-doesnt-have-clean-water]
As a then-admirer of then-president Obama, I muttered “Say it isn’t so”. It greatly reinforced my belief that U.S. presidents, indeed along with Canadian prime ministers, essentially act as instruments of big corporate/money/power interests.
I know that the lead-tainting was not Obama’s doing; however, what he did was a major shock to and disappointment for the lead-poisoned Flint folk, who'd expected far more/better from him. To a lot of people, he had behaved like some TV-promotion actor hired by an (in this case) seriously ethically/morally challenged corporation.
Though I would expect it from a Republican president or even the Democrat President Bill Clinton, I found it very disappointing of Obama (maybe because he is Black, as were many or most of the lead-water-ingesting Flint folk), regardless of the big business and/or political pressure he probably had on his head.
EVERYTHING today is about "Global Warming", particularly the catastrophic weather conditions around the entire globe. We were warned by Al Gore and scientists that is was coming over fifty years ago, and here we are today.
Fires, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, extreme cold and heat are destroying land to produce food, and animals, cities, towns, waterways, roads, bridges all of which drive up the price of shipping. Lack of food, and livelihoods around the globe are diminishing thus causing shortages of resources. Wars are breaking out because of the lack of resources. This is turn is forcing migration and immigration around the globe. WAKE UP EVERYONE. Now the insurance rates are going up if you can still get insurance.
Global Warming is driving everything around the globe and it is time we not only have to listen to scientists, we are living the reality of the extreme conditions we have been faced with and the media is not linking the extreme weather definitively to the earth warming but it is the truth that none of us can afford to deny.
We are stripping this planet of all its resources and buying up everything they keep telling us we can't live without, but the reality is we don't need all they are peddling because the earth does not have unlimited resources and we are not entitled to everything we want. The more the capitalist strip the earth and sell it back to us for them to gain massive profits the more of the planet we lose.
Except the Earth has been ravaged far worse and had catastrophic changes long before humans existed on the planet and in no way compares to what has happened over 1000s and thousands of years in fact, excessive changes have taken place over millions of years. 50 years is a ridiculous snapshot of theEarth’s conditions to be so alarmed all out of proportion to the data.
The amount of people on this planet are more than there has ever been. It is one thing to respect the earth and it's resources and quite another thing to exploit the resources, particularly the ones in the ground like coal, oil, gas, cadmium and lithium, as well as other rare earth metals are being stripped from the earth for batteries, computer chips and electric vehicles that do nothing to help the planet.
The lumber for building as they take down the precious echo systems of the forests are destroying bird and animal habitats and their shelter and foods. All of which regulates and effects the temperatures, the winds and the earth's core. We are polluting the oceans and the reality is we are destroying habitats of all that live including for humans. The waters are getting more polluted along with the air.
The trees they cut keep the earth surfaces cooled and the winds deterred. Now we have excessive heat and extreme cold around the entire globe. Capitalism will strip everything as long as they make a profit, and we believe what they tell is which is that we can never have enough and we are not good enough unless we buy the next commodity they can sell us for massive profits.
We also now have space travel more than ever and again the use of fossil fuels and junk and debris floating in space, and boats leaking into our oceans, lakes and ponds. Our air is becoming more polluted every day. Wake up and stop pretending these truths that we can see and feel do not exist because they do, all over the planet.
Everyday many catastrophic events occur and they increase as time goes on. No living organism can live a healthy life without clean air and water.
Here’s a clean, Substack-ready version of your article—formatted for clarity, professional polish, and reader engagement:
Counterpoint: A More Accurate, Evidence-Based Look at Resource Use, Climate Impact, and the Planet's Future
You're right to be concerned about ecological harm. But we need to distinguish facts from fears—and hyperbole from evidence. Here’s a data-driven, evidence-based counterpoint that affirms legitimate environmental concerns while correcting inaccuracies and adding much-needed nuance.
1. “There are more people now than ever before, and they’re destroying the planet.”
True, but needs context.
Earth’s population in 2025 is around 8.1 billion—the highest in history. But global *population growth is slowing dramatically*. According to the UN Population Division, fertility rates have halved since the 1950s and are projected to fall below replacement level in many countries by 2050.
* Countries like Japan, Italy, and South Korea are already experiencing population *decline*, not growth.
* And critically, it’s not just about how many people exist—it’s about *how resources are consumed*. The wealthiest 10% of the global population are responsible for nearly half of all carbon emissions (Oxfam, 2020).
2. “Batteries, EVs, and computers are destroying the Earth by mining rare earths like cadmium and lithium.”
Partially true, but misleading.
Mining impacts are real. Lithium, cobalt, and other rare earths are often extracted under exploitative conditions that can harm ecosystems. However:
* EVs still have a *lower lifetime carbon footprint* than internal combustion engine vehicles—even accounting for battery production and mining (IEA, 2022).
* Transitioning to EVs and renewables is *essential* to meeting climate goals like those in the Paris Agreement.
* Battery recycling technologies (e.g., Redwood Materials, Li-Cycle) and solid-state battery research are improving sustainability fast.
3. “Cutting forests destroys habitats and changes the earth’s core and winds.”
Yes on habitat and wind patterns. No on the Earth’s core.
* Deforestation significantly impacts ecosystems and climate, especially in key regions like the Amazon, which has lost over 17% of its forest cover in the last 50 years (WWF).
* Trees influence carbon absorption, rainfall, and wind patterns—but not the Earth’s core. The core lies nearly 3,000 kilometers below the surface and is unaffected by surface-level biosystems.
4. “Air and water pollution are increasing daily.”
False in many places.
Thanks to policy and technology, many developed nations have seen major improvements:
* The U.S. Clean Air Act has cut major air pollutants by **78%** since 1970—even as the economy tripled in size (EPA).
* The Clean Water Act has dramatically improved river and lake health across the U.S.
* However, industrial pollution remains a *serious problem* in many developing nations—often due to outsourced manufacturing from wealthier countries.
5. “Extreme weather and natural disasters are increasing.”
True.
The IPCC (2023) confirms that climate change is driving more frequent and severe:
* Heatwaves
* Flooding
* Droughts
* Hurricanes
These events are increasingly amplified by human-driven greenhouse gas emissions. Nature plays a role, but we’ve accelerated the instability.
6. “Space travel is causing fossil fuel use and space debris.”
Yes—but the scale matters.
* Rocket launches do use fossil fuels and contribute to high-altitude emissions, but their impact is *minuscule* compared to road, sea, and air transport.
* Space debris is a concern, but agencies like NASA and the European Space Agency have adopted mitigation protocols.
* Crucially, satellites help us monitor climate change, manage agriculture, and respond to disasters—making them *part of the solution*, not the problem.
7. “Capitalism will strip the Earth for profit.”
It can—but it doesn’t have to.
Unregulated capitalism has indeed exploited resources. But regulatory frameworks and market shifts are changing that narrative:
* Environmental regulations, carbon pricing, and ESG investing are tools that *steer markets toward sustainability*.
* Companies like Patagonia, Tesla, and Ørsted are proving that *profit and planetary stewardship* can coexist—and even reinforce each other.
Conclusion
The real issue isn’t how many people live on Earth—it’s how we consume, regulate, and innovate.
To move forward with integrity and impact, we need to:
* Invest in clean energy, sustainable agriculture, and reforestation.
* Demand strong environmental regulation and corporate accountability.
* Trust science, not despair. Policy, data, and global cooperation are our best tools to protect this planet.
Ecological grief is real—but so is ecological hope. Let’s act from truth, not fear.
Why Rich People and Communist China Fall Short on Sustainable Resource Use and Equitable Distribution
1. Rich Individuals & Elites
Disproportionate Consumption
- The wealthiest 10% of the global population are responsible for nearly 50% of global carbon emissions, according to Oxfam and UNEP.
- Billionaires and high-net-worth individuals own multiple homes, private jets, and yachts—lifestyles that are orders of magnitude more resource-intensive than the global average.
Waste & Hoarding
- Rich individuals often drive excessive consumption and food waste, not out of necessity, but convenience.
- Vast wealth is stored in assets (e.g., land, water rights, luxury real estate) that could otherwise serve broader social and environmental needs.
Control of Resource Flows
- A small elite controls the major corporations and investment decisions that shape global resource use.
- Decisions are typically based on profit maximization, not sustainability or equity—leading to over-extraction, deforestation, and pollution.
Insulation from Consequences
- Rich people are shielded from the effects of environmental degradation (e.g., buying clean water, air filtration, private healthcare).
- This removes urgency and accountability, further distancing them from meaningful action.
2. Communist China
Hyper-Industrialization
- Although governed by a Communist Party, China operates under state capitalism, prioritizing rapid industrial growth and infrastructure development.
- It is the world’s largest emitter of CO₂, and leads in coal consumption, steel production, and cement use—industries that place enormous pressure on global resources.
Authoritarian Development Model
- The Chinese government often displaces rural populations, exploits ethnic minority regions, and suppresses dissent to enable mega-projects like dams, highways, and industrial zones.
- Environmental regulations exist but are unevenly enforced, especially at the local level where growth metrics drive promotion.
Global Supply Chain Domination
- China is a major exporter of cheap goods—manufactured using intensive energy, labor, and raw materials.
- These goods feed overconsumption in richer nations, but also drive unsustainable extraction domestically and in other countries (e.g., Belt and Road Initiative).
Pollution & Environmental Costs
- Air, water, and soil pollution remain critical issues in China. Entire regions have been degraded for decades to support development.
- While China leads in renewable energy production (solar, wind), it still builds more coal plants than any other nation—contradicting sustainability goals.
Summary
It’s not nations per se that are responsible for unsustainable resource use—it’s:
- The ultra-wealthy minority, regardless of nationality, who consume and control far more than their share, and
- Communist China’s authoritarian-industrial model, which prioritizes growth and global influence over environmental balance and equitable distribution.
Together, these forces overwhelm the planet’s regenerative capacity, creating the illusion of scarcity for the majority—even though Earth has enough in theory to meet human needs sustainably.
I am 68 years old and grew up in the Northeast on the seacoast. I WAS in the agriculture business for over thirty years and kept weather records daily, crops I grew, as well as the yield from those crops. Some field grown and others in greenhouses. The reason I am OUT of business is that the last three years come August, we were in such a severe drought conditions that I could not keep up with the irrigation in the fields and lost my cut flower crops, particularly my sunflowers. That income would carry me through the fall, three years losing it put me under.
The Northeast is still seven inches below level in our water table in NH, below what we should have by now in April 2025. I will tell you I have been watching the evergreen trees in NH and surrounding states dying along the road ways for the past ten years. They are no longer getting enough sunlight, the air is filled with smog and they are NOT getting enough water. It takes trees and shrubs under duress three to seven years to completely die.
What I am seeing in mortifying because if it isn't bad enough that they are dying, but with the building of housing they are clear cutting trees for the housing shortages, removing wildlife habitat, in addition to removing the work of the trees keeping down wind conditions and cooling the earth in the higher temperatures of summer heat. Trees filtering the air from pollutants and the roots removing toxins as well.
I KNOW global warming is here because the entire globe is dealing with excessive heat and cold, droughts, fires, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes and so much more. This is why insurance rates are going up, if you can still get insurance. Each year more and more people are dying from these conditions and as the land dies do does the livelihoods, the abilities to produce food, and shipping costs to escalate. All of which is connected to global warming, wars breaking out for limited resources and mass migration and immigration.
Have you lived millions of years? The only way to know about climate change is actually to know what has actually happened over time and how quickly. 68 is a pittance when it comes to understanding the climate.
The fact that Davos has seized upon this fear tactic is a clue. They build their homes on the waterfront, jet around in fuel guzzling private jets, and laugh at the peons under their thumb.
How come I can’t find Al Gore’s movie anymore? Oh right, because it was exposed as a bunch of crap. How many more years do we have? Why doesn’t China and India stop building coal plants? Because they aren’t idiots.
The earth has always had bad weather. Now it’s like the global warmers have suddenly discovered hurricanes and tornadoes. But all that’s been around forever, some years worse than others. But none of it just started with humans.
Why are the poor on the waterfronts, lol. I live on the waterfront. You guys just stay angry about some nonsensical imaginary ideal that some stark mad evil entity is going to pounce upon your heads, when all along the monster you should fear, you Revere and put on a pedestal
The rich can live anywhere they want and in a moments notice call a taxi, a yacht, a helicopter ...They are not the ones that will suffer from a catastrophe. Weather conditions are not the same from place to place. There is a saying in New England if you don't like the weather wait five minutes. I live on a three mile road and it can be snowing a mile from my house and nothing happening on the other three miles. We have the Great Bay in our town. When storms come in they split right at the bay. Half the town can have one weather condition but the other half can have completely different weather and sometimes no bad weather at all.
When it comes to the globe, altitude, water and ocean fronts can change on a dime. GLOBAL WARMING IS HERE, it means that the conditions are unpredictable and can occur one place and not another and NO there is no reason to believe that this is like times past because this planet has never been exploited, stolen from, extracted from, clear cut of rain forests or been dumped on with fossil fuels over the oceans and the skies ... and the list goes on ..... like the horrific times we are now living in. The earth has never been enshrined with plastic before, like it is now. Mankind has done all this. All so the Capitalists can exploit, drain, destruct for their profits, while they sell it back to us amassing great profits for themselves and poisoning all of us in the process.
Earlier I was told I was part of the status quo because of my opinion. Now, I'm a poor person. Better procedure is to investigate and research on your own.
And, why don't climate alarmists ever criticize Communist China for developing like gangbusters and destroying all the land they can?
Obviously, climate change policies is the restraint needed on Western countries to prosper and uplift the poor and middle class.
How else would the Davos class maintain the status quo?
All the large countries are contributing to the pollution, and stripping the planet of all the resources they can get. The islands and the smaller living places on earth are diminishing along with the native peoples incomes and food sources. It is large countries like the US and China that are adding the most and worst pollution causing the people with low impact on the planet to die because they have no places to go and no way to get there. The media is not covering any of this so they can keep peddling their crappy commercials showing us addition stuff we have to buy because we can't live without their crap.
Except Communist China Continues to ravage the Earth while the data shows that America has significantly become less polluted, more environmentally conscious, and has a smaller imprint for its excessive production. This is what the Davos crowd resents: a successful country, which uplifts the poor and the middle class.
People worried about the climate crisis are not alarmists. We are alarmed, and those are two different things. This is not a game. The acidification of the ocean is well under way and killing life in what can be said to be the womb of all life, the waters that cover this planet. People do criticize China for their production of carbon (and a host of other things, including human rights abuses — you will find that pollution and authoritarianism go hand in hand, by the way.) The U.S., China, and India are the world three largest producers of greenhouse gasses and users of carbon. Were I you, I’d get off the internet and read some books.
Fear is not evidence. In the ‘70s we were told that we were facing the next ice age and overpopulation. Neither happened. Now, the elites have changed their fear tactics. Be passive, don’t build or develop, let Communist China and India surpass America, and meanwhile die from Wuhan.
I agree with your point; get off the Internet and read books.
Below is a discussion of credible academic books that document how the United States has reduced greenhouse gas emissions, performing better than China and India in specific contexts, such as per capita reductions or sectoral shifts. These sources are grounded in environmental science, energy policy, and climate economics, offering a comparative lens where applicable. Note that while the U.S. has made strides in lowering emissions, China and India remain mired in pollution, which is also acknowledged in these works.
1. The Power Surge: Energy, Opportunity, and the Battle for America’s Future" by Michael Levi (Oxford University Press, 2013)
Michael Levi, an energy policy expert, explores the U.S. energy transition, particularly the shift from coal to natural gas facilitated by the shale gas revolution. He documents how this transition, driven by hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, significantly reduced U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide (CO₂), starting in the late 2000s. Levi notes that between 2005 and 2012, U.S. CO₂ emissions from energy dropped by about 12%, largely due to natural gas displacing coal in electricity generation. In contrast, he highlights that China’s emissions during this period surged due to rapid industrialization and coal dependency, with CO₂ output rising by over 50% from 2005 to 2012. India, while less coal-reliant than China, also saw emissions climb due to growing energy demand, albeit at a slower rate. Levi’s analysis underscores America’s structural shift as a key differentiator.
2. "Climate Change Policy Failures: Why Effective Action Has Not Been Taken" by Howard R. Ernst (Praeger, 2012)
Ernst provides a critical examination of global climate policies, including U.S. efforts to curb emissions. He cites data showing that U.S. greenhouse gas emissions peaked around 2007 and began declining due to a combination of regulatory measures (e.g., the Clean Air Act amendments) and market-driven shifts toward renewables and efficiency. Ernst contrasts this with China, where emissions continued to rise sharply through the 2000s and 2010s, driven by coal-fired power expansion to support manufacturing. India’s emissions, though lower per capita, also trended upward due to urbanization and limited renewable adoption at the time. The book emphasizes America’s relative success in bending its emissions curve downward, even if imperfectly, compared to the steep increases in China and India.
3. "Energy and Climate: Vision for the Future" by Michael B. McElroy (Oxford University Press, 2016)
McElroy, a Harvard atmospheric scientist, details how U.S. emissions reductions have outpaced many developing nations, including China and India. He highlights the role of federal and state policies, such as renewable portfolio standards and vehicle efficiency regulations, alongside technological advances in wind and solar energy. By 2015, U.S. emissions had fallen to levels not seen since the mid-1990s, a reduction of about 10% from their 2007 peak. Meanwhile, China’s emissions grew by over 3% annually during the same period, fueled by coal, while India’s rose steadily due to population growth and industrial expansion. McElroy’s data-driven approach shows America’s progress in decoupling economic growth from emissions, a feat not evident in China and India at the time of publication.
4. "Global Climate Change and U.S. Law" edited by Michael B. Gerrard and Jody Freeman (American Bar Association, 2nd Edition, 2014)
This legal anthology examines U.S. climate mitigation through legislation and regulation. It documents how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implemented measures under the Clean Air Act to reduce emissions from power plants and vehicles, contributing to a decline in CO₂ output after 2007. The book contrasts this with China’s state-led push for coal-based energy, which saw emissions climb to over 10 billion metric tons annually by 2014, dwarfing U.S. totals (around 5.4 billion tons). India, while emitting less overall (around 2 billion tons), showed no significant downturn due to coal reliance and weak regulatory frameworks. The editors argue that America’s legal and market mechanisms provided a more effective emissions reduction pathway than the growth-focused strategies of China and India.
5. "The Climate Casino: Risk, Uncertainty, and Economics for a Warming World" by William D. Nordhaus (Yale University Press, 2013)
Nobel laureate William Nordhaus analyzes climate economics, including U.S. emissions trends. He notes that America’s greenhouse gas emissions intensity (emissions per unit of GDP) dropped significantly from the 1990s onward, thanks to energy efficiency gains and a shift to cleaner fuels. By 2012, U.S. emissions were down roughly 10% from 2005 levels, a stark contrast to China’s tripling of emissions over two decades (from 3.4 billion tons in 1990 to over 10 billion by 2012) and India’s doubling (from 0.8 billion to 1.7 billion tons). Nordhaus attributes America’s edge to technological innovation and policy, though he critiques its overall pace. China and India, he argues, prioritized economic growth over emissions cuts, delaying their mitigation efforts.
Comparative Context and Caveats
These books collectively illustrate that the U.S. has achieved notable emissions reductions, particularly since the mid-2000s, through a mix of market shifts (e.g., natural gas over coal), policy interventions, and efficiency improvements. China and India, conversely, have seen emissions rise due to their wasteful developmental surges—China as the "world’s factory" and India as an emerging economy with vast energy needs. These sources don’t claim U.S. efforts are flawless but highlight a significant advantage in reducing emissions trajectories compared to the excessive upward trends in China and India during the periods studied.
For the most current data beyond these books’ publication dates (up to April 3, 2025), my knowledge confirms the U.S. continues to lower emissions (e.g., a 17% drop from 2005 to 2020 per EPA reports), while China’s emissions are peaking and India’s still rise. These books remain foundational for understanding the historical and structural reasons behind America’s significant progress.
It's the same reason that, as you stated, you "took your young daughter to see glaciers, to see if it's true."
Yeah, "doctor of maintain the status quo."
Maybe you've already got an audience, but that doesn't mean anything you say is truthful, or even authentic. I know others who have made their fortune by being nothing more than a loud mouth. Not my preference, but I've fought for everyone's right to choose, so that's fine.
But you can't convince me against what I know to be true: climate change is a fact. It has happened before, from various causes, this time it's because of humans and their Unintended Consequences.
Rich people in my town have to deal with their yards & houses flooding at every high tide. "Why don't they move?" You ask?
Well, they'd have to take a loss, who would but their property?!
No, they just complain that "someone needs to fix it."
The city is "working on it." (Sorta) They "have a plan." (It's a long-term plan that never comes close to addressing the problem. It's just to calm the complainers.)
Why are you stuck on Obama? He is no longer a black threat to some of you that feel threatened from black people. I feel bad for you being so obsessed as he has no influences any more.
I will tell you this, if you want to be upset it should be about tRUMP, (LIAR & CHEAT), and president Musk. They are the ones the world is truly worried about. Focus on this for awhile, while we still have a planet. As far as the economy goes these two bozo's wiped out America's economy and the entire globe for that matter.
Al Gore has made MILLIONS for decades jetting around the world crying wolf and screaming that the world's about to end in 8-10 years but his B.S. never comes true. But he keeps it up. For decades now. NYC was supposed to be under water by now.
He and John Kerry jet around decrying so called catastrophic "climate change" while burning huge amounts of fossil fuels needed to power their private jets.
Such limousine liberals. Such hypocrites. Such scammers.
NOW we have liberal Democrats turning on their pet: Electric vehicles and Tesla! All because they want to maintain their slush funds, their waste, and their fraud which Doge is exposing.
Dems' heads are spinning and exploding.
Thing I never thought I would see in 2025: libs turning on Tesla. All because of their irrational hate for Donald Trump.
Lithium extraction from the earth is destroying and pulverizing the earth to extract the lithium. If that isn't bad enough lithium batteries, large or small catch fire all the time. They even cause fires in the cargoes on planes from electronic devices. The fact is like everything our government does they did not do their homework on electric cars. For one thing lithium battery cars are so much heavier with those batteries that the median strips on highways don't hold the weight of those cars and they end up crashing through them and into oncoming traffic on the opposite sides of the highway. Then when the cars and batteries catch fire it takes hours and tons of water to put them out because once they put out one cell of the battery the next cell catches fire. SO... Lithium and electric batteries are not any better for the planet and this is the truth. Some fire departments have been at the fire scenes for over four hours trying to put out battery fires. It takes massive amounts of water to do so as well.
60 Minutes Season 57 Episode 27 showed the clean up in LA after all those houses burned and the toxic clean up from the cars with lithium batteries are hazardous waste and how carefully it needs to be handled. They showed other products with danger with lithium batteries.
Musk is doing nothing for the planet and in fact is making global warming worse, watch him blow up another one of his spaceship endeavors on take off while he burns massive amounts of fossil fuel in doing so. The guy is a loser and he is not only taking down the planet, democracy, THE CONSTITUTION, the American economy but the world economy as well. He can't move off this planet fast enough as far as I am concerned.
I'm not at all a fan of electric vehicles which require gas and oil energy to charge them. I think Musk's pipedream to colonize Mars is a HUGE waste of money 💰. NASA'S and SpaceX's budget should be significantly cut.
Musk puts forth the RIDICULOUS notion that our planet is suffering from and threatened with population COLLAPSE 😆 🤣 Even though world population actually is INCREASING and has now gone above 8 billion.
Musk puts forth this ridiculous notion to justify having multiple children with multiple women...as though he's just doing his part to counter this non-existent so called population 🙄 collapse.
No to so called green energy tax credits, mandates, and phasing out of gas and oil vehicles.
But YES to cutting waste, fraud, and Democrat slush funds such as what profiteer Stacey Abrams grifted.
More bombastic,, discombobulated yammer from the echo chamber, lol
How do feel about no-party- preference independents. You can’t call me aRINO or a left wing radical. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO LABLE ME. Get over Biden move on - quoting your cult leader “ get over it” djt “ Gods in control” jo both quotes from after a mass shooting and an attempted mass shooting respectively
We feel that the DOGE Agency has somewhat overtly taken over or country. If Congress had decided to curtail those various Federally funded agency's which were designed specifically by our representatives, then the people would understand. For Trump to designate one agency to suspend or delete those past standing agency's which we are familiar over apparent fraud without self examination is very discerning at best.
They're being very transparent. Publicizing their findings. Yes, trimming some fat and making judgement calls. The courts and Congress can counter them. And the voters can speak their minds in 2026.
I am apolitical, I respect the Constitution as my duty as a soldier demands. All these sarcastic statements were heard long before your leader repeated them to his rank and file, and the Kremlin propaganda, which we are advised to avoid, is spreading on social media. I thought you were the ones always saying "educate yourself." Perhaps you should take your own advice.
The ‘world’ is nothing if not resilient - and I would never expect a politician to have the tools to predict the ‘end of times’ accurately. But in many ways Gore was prescient. Climate Change is not only an accepted reality by more than 9 of 10 scientists, but whole INDUSTRIES - importantly, including the insurance industry and others who manage risk or large funds put at risk by its effects (just ask the 23% of Floridians who can no longer get insurance for their houses). Cripes - even the large oil companies recognized the impact of their products (on climate) based on internal documents and calculations from the 1960s…
Do you have to like Gore? No. Do you have to approve of his methods? No. But acknowledge he was probably more correct than virtually ALL U.S. politicians, you, and many others for whom it’s more expedient to ignore what scientists to know as reality.
Here’s the thing about science: it doesn’t give a fuck about the OPINIONS of those not educated to the issues at hand. It happily exists anyway. The meteorite that destroyed the dinosaurs didn’t care that dinosaurs weren’t educated about celestial mechanics - it simply changed things when it hit…
Al Gore is a con artist who JETS around predicting the seas are going to rise and that NYC will be under water in 7 years. Said that DECADES ago. A real profiteer charlatan.
The Bible talked about floods and famines. Electric vehicles are charged via so called "dirty* energy. Solar, wind, and nuclear CANNOT meet our needs currently. Not even close.
Climate change profiteers are a dime a dozen. Jihn Kerry and AL Gore are not very bright as they JET around using so called dirty fuel.. Total hypocrite like so many limousine liberals.
Getting oil from the ground is just recycling. Nothing wring with that. Drill baby drill and let the Luddites who want everyone riding in "clean" mass transportation go use that type of transportation and leave our air conditioners, gas stoves, showers, toilets, and furnaces ALONE. Liberal totalitarian power freaks. A bunch of control freaks who ..Know...Nothing.
Yes, go look at water levels. They’re exactly the same as they were 50 years ago...Just the way your brain saw them then, and your eyes can see them now. The only change is that we allow ourselves to conned by the BIG GREEN LIE illusions.
When they tell you the sky is falling, and then you go outside and see that it isn’t – but still believe it is because “experts” told you so - you’re being CONNED.
And President Trump said the Earth was flat, but Elon Musk is a rocket expert. He loves to blow them up and they are And leader trump said the earth is flat but elon is a good rocket man, he likes rockets, he likes blowing them up and then they fall all over our nation. Oh and king trump did say penguins and seals are now tarriffed, i guess they need to form a currency ?? Yeah I really think his business deals are outstanding especially in business law they were just beautiful. i heard he already has 6 bankruptcies under his belt. Sounds great for the economy that was once the envy of the world. Fox news you dont know what you're missing 🤣I get so tired of that im sorry for intruding but couldn't resist.I feel like im in a nightmare I'll never wake from
Or, perhaps the joke is on us with "climate change" being used as a cover story for geoengineering/weather modification/stratospheric aerosol injection/ aka chemtrails, weather warfare, etc., etc ...
There is so much more where all that came from, but to only speak of "climate change" WITHOUT mentioning geoengineering is like saying "yes I'm a paid shill" or "yes, I am a sheeple who only believes what my televised overlords tell me"
OMG, the stupidity is at an all time high. Climate change....have you noticed the incessant number of planes spraying aluminum chalk, barium and strontium.
This is where you weather is coming from. Now study, learn and wake up.
We noticed a bulk of people who profit from the man-made-climate-change- religion can afford beachfront property, and are buying multiple properties. Their lifestyle exudes so many signals that they don't subscribe to their purported religion.
Donald (Gimme’a Bl-w Jo-) Trump and other like-minded conservatives remain quite willing to pollute and warm the planet most liberally. And it must be convenient for the very-profitable mega polluters.
To date there clearly has been pathetically insufficient political courage/will to properly act upon the scientific cause-and-effect of them. Human-caused global warming and its resultant increasing number and intensity of climate-change-induced extreme weather events rightfully continue to stir up alarm. Perhaps even for many of those people who still claim to distrust climate science.
Yet, increasingly problematic is the very large and growing populace who are too overworked, worried and even angry about food and housing unaffordability for themselves or their family — all while on insufficient income — to criticize the fossil fuel industry, etcetera, for environmental damage their policies cause/allow, particularly when not immediately observable.
There’s a continuance of polluting the natural environment with a business as usual attitude. Societally, we still discharge out of elevated exhaust pipes, smokestacks and, quite consequentially, from sky-high jet engines like it’s all absorbed into the natural environment without repercussion. Out of sight, out of mind.
… Obstacles to environmental progress were quite formidable pre-pandemic. But Covid-19 not only stalled most projects being undertaken, it added greatly to the already busy landfills and burning centers with disposed masks and other non-degradable biohazard-protective single-use materials.
And you believe Biden was fit for office and that Hunter was worth the millions he was paid overseas via influence peddling. You believe his artwork is good and worth thousands.
Dems lost in 2024 and are sore losers. They hate the MAJORITY of Americans. The cult of Left wing extremists lack common sense and are quite dysfunctional.
No they are not sore losers. They just don’t like to see America in the hands of a deeply corrupt felon taking a chain saw to services people have relied for decades. Working with a billionaire he’s already tired of because he’s more toxic than even Trump. Do you actually believe there is some left wing “cult” ….. the noise is coming from ordinary people waking up to the lies and the corruption in Trumps swamp.
When you call truth lies and lies truth ,Kelli, that's no longer an independent thought. It slowly becomes a form of brainwashing. It can be dangerous and cruel. Nothing of what was said is false , I checked myself . I don't care what side of the fence you sit on. You should look into the information before you declare these two highly respectable gentlemen are liars, and it took me about 7 minutes to prove the opposite . They haven't been dishonest , but you were
Jim Acosta has been an insult to journalism from the minute he stepped foot in the WH Briefing Room. Anything he's up to now just adds to the obscenity of his career.
Actually, Ms. Christensen, I do know who Jim Acosta is. I know him very well in fact, having had CNN on in my work place for much of Trump's first term, so I speak from a position of a viewer's authentic revulsion. You may love Acosta. You may also believe someone like Ron Klain, Biden's Chief of Staff, who lied to the public in perhaps the greatest display of blatant mendacity in our nation's history, is worthy of your respect. Up to you. Just saying, in my opinion I consider these two public figures vulgar, dishonorable cretins for what they willingly did. And I am not an outlier. Stick around for a few years...you'll see how lonely you'll be defending these creatures.
Jim Acosta would not know authenticity if it slapped him upside his head! He has always been and will always be an ass and this is as much time as I will waste on him.
Wow, Jim Acosta discovers podcasting. Brilliant! And, this is news? How long has podcasting been around? Seriously now, if the guy failed on TV and he just discovered podcasting why is this of any relevance?
Fake? This is about as real and visceral as it gets. The plasticized opinion pieces from Fox are pretty awful. Just yesterday, I think I heard a few times on Fox “Dems want to put molesters and killers back on the street”. They say something so disgustingly vial, with a twinkle in their eyes and a half-cocked smile. They say it as casually as “pass the salt”. No big deal, but it leaves another tiny impression on the minds of their viewers. Enough barbs like that and it becomes a reality (in the minds of their viewers).
I don’t consider 49.9% the vast majority of voters. Yes, trump won but by vast majority-I don’t think so. Any so many who did vote for him were bombarded with fake news & false narratives and just weren’t able to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Trump beat Harris in the popular vote and wom ALL of the swing states. Made strides in blue states and WON young voters. Made strides with black men. Liberal women clung to their "sacred" right to abort their own children but fortunately common sense and those being more humane and civilized prevailed over liberal women in love with abortion.
Much of what you just said is false. Propaganda built on partial truths. But, that one tidbit of info means very little in the big scope of things. I’m not going to convince you or change your mind, regardless of the volume of facts, etc.
You’re not going to change my mind. Not in the least bit.
So fine. We’ll agree to disagree. My original comment still stands. If you can prove it wrong, go for it. It will not change the reality. Like I said, you will continue to believe what you want…and so will I. I do appreciate the conversation, it’s healthy to have civil discourse.
Great interview.... and it just signals the change even in stock market news. I can go live on here and alert my subscribers to a stock that may be flying and it emails them immediately and they can hop on and trade it if they'd like. You guys have just built such a great platform and I'm finding it's less about the tech and just more about getting the word out. When the tech doesn't hold you back - that's when you have a winner! Thanks so much to the entire Substack team!
This is a great interview, I've been watching Jim since he came over here. I've found that I'm reading as much as I'm watching video as well. I'm getting away from mainstream media and feel like I'm getting much more from the long format interviews and discussions. I'm doing as many paid subscriptions as I can because I know that SubStacks gonna need to scale with the increasing demand for live video and the influx of new journalists, creators and subscribers. Keep up the great work Chris!
Please concentrate on writing. It’s why I signed up. And please employ people to collate, highlight and show our talents. I spent many years as a broadcaster to millions, but in modern times all of us on social media are essentially broadcasters. It’s saturation. Good writing, creative writing, informed writing. In a world of gurning and attention-seeking to camera (phones) that’s what can still make Substack special. 🙏🏼
I get why Substack wants to focus on video, because that’s where the whole internet is headed, as are the younger generations. But I agree with the sentiment that writing should be preserved on here, and highlighted as a primary feature.
85% of new households do not have cable tv for a reason. Furthermore, too many simply do not have the attention spans to listen to anything longer than a 2 min soundbite. It is very difficult to obtain complete information in this 2 minutes. Free speech was censored and people died. Lives changed forever because we were told to trust the science. Those spewing the deceit will not be trusted again. Substack should remain THE uncensored platform for those that do not wish to hear the noise and not become an escape door.
Another way to look at it is that cable “news“ also provides a short attention span. It seems that every two minutes it is interrupted by four minutes of erectile dysfunction and psoriasis advertisements among others. I commonly listen to 27 minute long videos on YouTube And I’m just fine with that. Everyone has their own go to source and none of them should be marginalized because someone doesn’t like it for some reason or another.
Your listening to 27-min vids on YT encourages me to do that kind of YT channel on mental health, mental fitness, creativity, writing and art. Thanks, Dan!
Short attention spans is right! I hate the "shorts" on YT!
Hi Galloping Girl, You are welcome to subscribe and read' this very true raw musical story
''free of charge'' in fact anyone can.... https://jollyrroger.substack.com
Sure, follow the herd, off the cliff ...
This is such a great point
Video is too slow. I prefer to read.
JosephZeigler.substack.com
Thank you. Not only is Substack overlooking writers (their core audience), now they are throwing themselves at ‘journalists’ who were released from CNN. This is very worrisome for the future.
Do people really wish to hear live news on substack? I dont think so, people can still listen to CNN if they want to hear their version of news. Disappointed! Without the independent brilliant writers on Substack, too many would still be in the dark regarding covid and other topics telling truth and facts. This is a mistake! This different kind of audience does not wish to listen, we wish to read.
Freedom of speech is not divided! Vocal nor written. You do not have a monopoly on this right many have died for
I haven't read ANY comments advocating against freedom of speech!
What I see is that most ppl who participate on Substack don't want to see "broadcast news" on their beloved Substack.
Nobody is wanting censorship. They'd just rather READ about it than have their senses offended by someone yelling or scolding. I know I feel that way. I can watch any kind of news on TV or social media. When I go to Substack it's because I want to read.
This “ breaking news“ began here for a reason, when people start the beginning of oppression, they gravitate to a “ safe“ enviroment to have a voice. Substack was the safe-haven for those people . If substack silences this, I will tell you now, you writer's will be silenced next. It's called freedom of Speech, whether it's vocal or written. I fought for the very freedom that gave you this platform to write your truth any way you desire to express it , I also fought for the freedom of those here who wish to speak their truth as well . I ask you to respect my brothers and sisters who died for that freedom you have today.
Hi Mack, You are welcome to subscribe and read' this very true raw musical story ''free of charge'' in fact anyone can.... https://jollyrroger.substack.com
I whole-heartedly agree!
The podcasts, I suppose, are an outgrowth of blogs <idk> but PLEASE leave the "Live Video News" to the broadcast media.
Maybe startup your own media company.
Please don't destroy that you've built in substack!
If you do the live video news crap, I'm sure it will make it impossible for us writers to get readers... people will avoid Substack altogether.
I know I will.
I disagree. Legacy media is dead to me. Oligarch owned social media is dead to me. Substack and Bluesky is where I reside now. Evolve or die. There is a continued thirst for quality print publications on Substack and a growing appetite for video publications. They are not mutually exclusive and actually support and build upon each other.
Agreed! Writers who lament the proliferation of video journalism on Substack may wish to look at themselves!
Don Lemon wrote a moving essay about going back home to visit, and it took Substack by storm!
Excellent writing begets excellent response!
Try it!
I agree. It was heart rending and poignant.
Yes, the traditional media gatekeepers are not as relevant today as in the past. I'm also putting my time and effort into these two channels. And why shouldn't Substack provide video? This doesn't mean that every video posted is going to be news. This gives writers another avenue to share their content to others who prefer watching video. I think it's a brilliant idea!
True that. I usually start my day making coffee and cutting up a grapefruit while I have Robert Hubbel in my EarPods, air pods, whatever.
Listening can be a nice change from reading nonstop. It breaks things up.
I agree with Jeff Jackson - please don’t turn Substack into your local news station!!!
the live action broadcasts may provide interesting visuals, but the reason that I found Substack to be so informative is because of the different viewpoints, voices, and opinions that provide some background - some research information or insight that you’re not going to get with a short soundbite on Main Stream media -
I also see more and more podcasts showing up on Substack and I’m sure the younger generations may prefer seeing people perform but when those podcasts start getting more and more into their personalities or chatter about themselves, it loses interest for me - please do not turn Substack into an infotainment production
I fought for freedom of speech, vocal as well as written. My brothers and sisters died for that freedom. I ask that you not disrespect their sacrifice for these freedoms you enjoy still today . Because when your voice is silenced , you will not be writing freely as you are today . All voices are silenced.
Respectfully , I don’t think my original point has landed. It’s not about silencing voices. It’s about what this platform (Substack) is. Writers like myself were invited to create here on an understanding it was a writers and subscription community. But increasingly it’s been turned into something else. There’s a lot of noise. Audio, visual, now we’re talking ‘tv studios’. It felt like this was and should be a library. A respite from other platforms. But I wouldn’t wish to silence broadcasters. We are suggesting this doesn’t become primarily a broadcasting platform. Very best and genuine good wishes from UK, Lee
Most of the independent journalists have been silenced and/or censored on other platforms. Do you feel they ni longer have a right to use the platform they also find useful in exercising their freedoms as well? This is a public platform and many subscribe to read your articles . It was meant to ve a win win when we fought for freedom of speech. But I'll say this, when you silence voices, yours may be next and it's hard to believe im explaing this to anyone . We didn't divide it into groups when we fought for it.
I do think there’s a slight breakdown of communications between us here , I don’t disagree with what you’re saying. Nobody should be silenced. Broadcasting here ? Go for it and I wish them every success. What we’re talking about (me and those agreeing with me) is our concern Substack moves too far from being mainly a writer’s space. Which made this a point of difference to other areas/platforms. Best wishes, we’re really not in broad disagreement, just talking about different areas 🙏🏼👊🏼
I really don’t understand your comment
If you silence a voice, written or vocal, you silence them all. Freedom of speech can't be divided here or anywhere in America. The comment I'm referring to is your statement of turning substack into a “ local news station.“ It's still posted above for reference
Somehow, you have misinterpreted what I said.
The main subject matter was Jim Acosta explaining his approach to being on Substack by being more of a podcaster (which means a visual presentation) and preferring a breaking news approach to get on a media outlet and comment on something as soon as it happens.
this approach in my opinion goes after being a performer and being someone who wants to grab the attention as news is happening.
if that’s what Jim Acosta wants to do that is fine, but I was expressing my opinion that I much prefer the writings on Substack that are the result of somebody doing research delving more in depth on a subject than an instantaneous reaction.
so I hope this clarifies my statement, which in no way was trying to limit free speech
This is pathetic coming from “so called writers“ silence this speech but not mine because my words more eloquent than a journalist. Listin to you-selves piss on freedom of speech. Your going to be Lucky if anyone reads anything you've written if you keep mthis silliness's up
I’ll say SubsTack is G00d for everybody, in all the ways it’s G00d for ANyBody. Use it Y0uR way without faulTing Others’ Ways
Thanks I agree and hope you will read this truly unique, in depth warning to America https://jethro25.substack.com/p/well-fill-your-mouth-with-cinnamon
Thank you Jeff, I really hope a step back can be taken before Substack goes too far down the road you’ve outlined there 🙏🏼. Best wishes to you
Lee I feel that we need more “ how to” our lives are changing drastically that’s okay I rely on Substack to teach us ways to cope. Not hearing todays news in twelve different versions so let them write the news but yet they should also seek ways to deal with this
I totally agree.
🙏🏼👍🏼
When broadcast media silences those voices , they need to be heard, they have that right , just as you do, to speak here . You aren't forced to listen and can easily scroll past them. You should be more concerned of the “why“ instead of expressing outrage as they are expressing their rights your enjoying yourself at the moment .
AI is very good for transforming content. For example, turning a video into a blog. If Substack integrated a tool for this then it can keep everyone happy.
👊🏼👊🏼 cheers Carin :)
You have hit the nail on the head thank you Lee wellings for expressing your beliefs you need to also keep writing no studio’s needed.
Thank you Carin, there’s a real danger of Substack blending into other social media platforms, when we thought it was a place for fresh and informed writing 🙏🏼
Lee your the first I found that I agree 100% my other problem is that I never favored Facebook I understand why they keep begging for Facebook data to drive up their followers yet we are getting flooded with Facebook absurd comments selfie pictures like overnight that are just out of control I guess it just comes with the territory Substack was great I found a lot of wisdom such enjoyable things to read real journalism now it takes me a half hour or more just to filter. We appreciate though that we found you in all of the confusion
HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY* Which is why I have come to Love Substack. ♥️ Perfect timing in a strange“wunderland”? , this world is sadly🌀creepin’ into.🥴😷😱
U agree wholeheartedly with you. And there is the issue of legal liability of an individual without an employer organisation behind them.
While I agree with you, it’s not going to happen—it’s not happening. The plan it looks like is a delivery system for mainstream video “broadcasters” with tens of millions of subscribers
Feels like you’re right Michael , and it’s certainly not what I came in board expecting it to be turned into. It’s a shame.
An absolute shame. The quiet little "creative" accounts with < 1k subscribers will have no place & no way of existing here once the multi-million megabroadcasters make all the noise. All online communities and platforms degrade, it's a given, but I didn't think this one would go as fast as it has. Maybe the next act for the indie voice & wanderer is a return to Usenet ...
Please read this long form article from a well connected American whose attempt to use the power of the pen to meaningfully dissent nearly cost him his life: https://jethro25.substack.com/p/well-fill-your-mouth-with-cinnamon
Though I am from the old school, literature, writing, novels… the love of books… the importance of the written word… I always separated television, as that was movies, cartoons, and shows.. and total love for that, but they were separate… I never put the two together, as I believed, you could not ever have a James Joyce or Leo Tolstoy, or James Michener turned into video…. Even the great novels turned into movies, these were always separate for me, I never expected the movie to be like the book that would be impossible. But what I’m realizing today with social media and people writing, the non-book, the masses of people being able to articulate and take their time to message even with text messaging…. Dating apps…. Where people connect online and a boy and a girl can message each other for days, weeks, until they feel comfortable, start having some feelings, and then they go on a date. You probably know where I’m going now with this….. the idea today that we are going to see creative writing on these platforms as a reflection of the person who is publishing he’s going to be hindered, even with the use of chat GPT, AI…. The time people take to choose the right words.. to look things up, to sound smarter than they actually are… to show an intellect that might not exist if you heard the person speak…. And this is where the argument that video and a lot of instances is much better to watch if somebody is speaking about their ideas, whether it be about God, politics, culture, relationship relationships, marriage, children…. I would much rather see somebody today on social media, speaking about these things, then read what they write about them… as almost 100% of the time you will get a completely different idea of where the idea is coming from in the first place…. And it makes me think that a lot of my favorite authors were probably not anything like I imagined… and if I had heard them speak about their lives or ideas, I would probably have been disappointed or maybe even shocked…. Thinking this couldn’t be the person that wrote the book I just read… like I heard that Albert Einstein might not have written a lot of the ideas in his books, that it might have been his wife. And when I look at the history, it actually makes sense… I think that might be true…. The thing is before the cell phones before social media, people who were writers, there was a social aspect to life that was interactive… human interaction… that was at the core of almost every journalist novelist anybody in the literary world, they thrived social scenes, going out of the house and meeting other others, at cafés bars, restaurants, salons…. Private parties and social gatherings…. The face-to-face conversations were the food for thought… the arguments… the free thinking between two people and the articulation of speech… these things were vital, and they created some of the greatest publications in history…. The great American novel… the idea of that could not have come from somebody who spent 20 years secluded in some room and just communicating with others over some kind of device…. With no real human interaction….. there would be no reality, no truth of human nature or understanding of anything that would be considered viable on a literary level…. Maybe something like Gulliver’s travels…. Dr. Seuss….. some fantastic other world maybe that could be created with that kind of lifestyle…. Today’s lifestyles of the modern man… the phone, the EarPods, the dog… single…. No longer even working at any particular place of business…. But from home…. Alone….. and thousands of friends that are never seen in person, but they are on Instagram… Substack… Facebook…. So what do we really have here? I wonder…. Even though I think Alan Ginsburg was basically a self-centered narcissist, not the genius. I thought he was when I was young younger…. He was absolutely a product of somebody who was out and about cohen constantly every day of his life, he was surrounded by all kinds of people…. His thoughts came from absorbing a lot from others… from hearing their voices, the verbiage coming out of the mouth in a physical realm…. Again this is vital to having a vibrant and healthy society, especially in the literary world…. And we have lost that…. We have lost it from computers and phones and social media…. Not to mention a government control over schooling, which has decimated critical thinking… but I won’t go into that. So I am almost siding with the video people with the podcast…. It’s almost the only thing that is the closest to what we once had where people could actually speak to one another in person…. Because where are we after we write these things on Substack? Where is the average person on Substack after they are done publishing something? Are they out and about? Are they socializing…. Do they have a great community of people interacting with one another in the afternoons and evenings…. Or do they walk away from the computer with the phone in the hand, put the EarPods in, and take the dog for a walk, with the little plastic box full of green bag baggies, to stroll around the block alone and pick up the feces that falls out of the dogs rear end…. Dog food for thought….
Interesting thoughts Bud, and I don’t disagree with your sentiments. Personally I have no issue with the way people need to communicate (though modern methods do bring downsides) - it has opened the door for every one of us to have our say and show who we are. My issue and concern is with Substack, who established themselves and earned our trust and investment by being a point of difference in a frantic world of content. I really don’t need pretty pictures, reels and lectures to camera on this platform. And it seems lots of people agree. We are all still trying to find our way on it. I wish our writing was being represented and collated and showcased with more care. We dont need another showboating ‘’look at the famous person’. There was depth here. There is depth here. Let us cherish that and find wonderful writing and writers. Best wishes, Lee
I love this platform…. I’ve only been on social media since last October. I stayed Off it for over 20 years since I first saw it I knew instinctively just to wait until someday when I might use it for something important and not want any history. Jessica Reed Kraus recorded me last spring so it wasn’t until after she published some of my audio that I went on Instagram and started posting some stuff that she would grab and put it on her feed, but it It’s all audio. Although I do write a lot of comments and notes… And I just started using Substack recently. It’s a really wonderful looking platform though I don’t know how to use it very well.. I post stuff all the time and then it’s not under where it says post on my profile so I don’t know where those things are going. I’m sure they’re on here somewhere. But it seems like there’s normal people here, Or at least People that feel that this Is a place that’s worthy of spending some energy….. Compared to Instagram, which is like a cesspool of insanity…. And a lot of sexual Immoral content, foul language… Though I see some of that here… It’s not as bad… But I’d like to use this platform for some good…. The aesthetics are awesome…. It really has a cool look to all the pages…. And I get a lot of great notes from people… So anyway, that’s all…. Thanks for responding…
I may be a serial lurker, but this is exactly why I came to Substack.
I read very fast faster than most people talk, so for me video is worthless and gives me less understanding, that said when it’s raw and real driven by regular people it is really powerful so it doesn’t cheapen the writing video when done right makes it more powerful
Fake News Jim. 🤪
Your comment is as funny as your lack of understanding of climate change. I suggest taking a look at the ice caps, recognize the rising ocean temps and if you haven’t noticed, the increasing number of weather catastrophes.
Perhaps look into waterfront property if it’s all a joke.
Then ask the rich people why they are still on Martha's Vineyard. It's quite waterfront. And, by the way, one of Obama's mansions is on the beach in Hawaii. If climate change were true, how come the rich are always on the waterfront?
Climate change is like that old story of the frog in the pot. It creeps up very slowly so you are underwater and being parboiled before you are aware of it. I wrote a very short story about harvesting icebergs before they have a chance to melt from fresh, drinkable water into undrinkable salt water. Someone really ought to get onto it and salvage trillions of gallons worth of iceberg water before they are lost forever.
Except when the climate change nonsense was going around in my daughter's elementary class I said let's go see if it's true. As a result, I took her to two glacier national parks in Alaska and Montana. Oops, glaciers are expanding, and so much so that in Montana the embarrassed park rangers had to take down the signs which showed the ice retreating. Try to destroy her but Mother Earth is doing just fine: the fire next time.
I try not to engage w representatives of the dunning-Kruger clan.
Perhaps we should assign someone to assess yearly atmospheric carbon loads.
Carbon is not guilty. Proven by ice core studies which show that a warming climate PREDATES a rise in carbon in the atmosphere. If we could add images here I could show you the graph.
I recall watching a Democrat president named Barack Obama publicly drink from a glass of Flint, Michigan water [supposedly, anyway] via mass media, signifying the water system was safe from which to drink. But many say it is STILL not safe to drink. ["Ten Years Later, Flint Still Doesn't Have Clean Water": https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/20/ten-years-later-flint-still-doesnt-have-clean-water]
As a then-admirer of then-president Obama, I muttered “Say it isn’t so”. It greatly reinforced my belief that U.S. presidents, indeed along with Canadian prime ministers, essentially act as instruments of big corporate/money/power interests.
I know that the lead-tainting was not Obama’s doing; however, what he did was a major shock to and disappointment for the lead-poisoned Flint folk, who'd expected far more/better from him. To a lot of people, he had behaved like some TV-promotion actor hired by an (in this case) seriously ethically/morally challenged corporation.
Though I would expect it from a Republican president or even the Democrat President Bill Clinton, I found it very disappointing of Obama (maybe because he is Black, as were many or most of the lead-water-ingesting Flint folk), regardless of the big business and/or political pressure he probably had on his head.
Obama is toxic: like attracts like.
"Why are you stuck on Obama?"
Top 10 Ways Obama Violated the Constitution during His Presidency
https://www.cato.org/commentary/top-10-ways-obama-violated-constitution-during-presidency
During Obama's Third Term for four years someone was signing in lieu of Biden since he was in absentia or impacted by dementia.
Who was running America?
Biden sources suspect key aide may have abused autopen as Trump’s ‘far more restrictive’ signing rules revealed
https://nypost.com/2025/03/14/us-news/trump-establishes-far-more-restrictive-autopen-rules-as-biden-aides-murmur-about-possible-misuse/
EVERYTHING today is about "Global Warming", particularly the catastrophic weather conditions around the entire globe. We were warned by Al Gore and scientists that is was coming over fifty years ago, and here we are today.
Fires, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, extreme cold and heat are destroying land to produce food, and animals, cities, towns, waterways, roads, bridges all of which drive up the price of shipping. Lack of food, and livelihoods around the globe are diminishing thus causing shortages of resources. Wars are breaking out because of the lack of resources. This is turn is forcing migration and immigration around the globe. WAKE UP EVERYONE. Now the insurance rates are going up if you can still get insurance.
Global Warming is driving everything around the globe and it is time we not only have to listen to scientists, we are living the reality of the extreme conditions we have been faced with and the media is not linking the extreme weather definitively to the earth warming but it is the truth that none of us can afford to deny.
We are stripping this planet of all its resources and buying up everything they keep telling us we can't live without, but the reality is we don't need all they are peddling because the earth does not have unlimited resources and we are not entitled to everything we want. The more the capitalist strip the earth and sell it back to us for them to gain massive profits the more of the planet we lose.
Except the Earth has been ravaged far worse and had catastrophic changes long before humans existed on the planet and in no way compares to what has happened over 1000s and thousands of years in fact, excessive changes have taken place over millions of years. 50 years is a ridiculous snapshot of theEarth’s conditions to be so alarmed all out of proportion to the data.
The amount of people on this planet are more than there has ever been. It is one thing to respect the earth and it's resources and quite another thing to exploit the resources, particularly the ones in the ground like coal, oil, gas, cadmium and lithium, as well as other rare earth metals are being stripped from the earth for batteries, computer chips and electric vehicles that do nothing to help the planet.
The lumber for building as they take down the precious echo systems of the forests are destroying bird and animal habitats and their shelter and foods. All of which regulates and effects the temperatures, the winds and the earth's core. We are polluting the oceans and the reality is we are destroying habitats of all that live including for humans. The waters are getting more polluted along with the air.
The trees they cut keep the earth surfaces cooled and the winds deterred. Now we have excessive heat and extreme cold around the entire globe. Capitalism will strip everything as long as they make a profit, and we believe what they tell is which is that we can never have enough and we are not good enough unless we buy the next commodity they can sell us for massive profits.
We also now have space travel more than ever and again the use of fossil fuels and junk and debris floating in space, and boats leaking into our oceans, lakes and ponds. Our air is becoming more polluted every day. Wake up and stop pretending these truths that we can see and feel do not exist because they do, all over the planet.
Everyday many catastrophic events occur and they increase as time goes on. No living organism can live a healthy life without clean air and water.
Here’s a clean, Substack-ready version of your article—formatted for clarity, professional polish, and reader engagement:
Counterpoint: A More Accurate, Evidence-Based Look at Resource Use, Climate Impact, and the Planet's Future
You're right to be concerned about ecological harm. But we need to distinguish facts from fears—and hyperbole from evidence. Here’s a data-driven, evidence-based counterpoint that affirms legitimate environmental concerns while correcting inaccuracies and adding much-needed nuance.
1. “There are more people now than ever before, and they’re destroying the planet.”
True, but needs context.
Earth’s population in 2025 is around 8.1 billion—the highest in history. But global *population growth is slowing dramatically*. According to the UN Population Division, fertility rates have halved since the 1950s and are projected to fall below replacement level in many countries by 2050.
* Countries like Japan, Italy, and South Korea are already experiencing population *decline*, not growth.
* And critically, it’s not just about how many people exist—it’s about *how resources are consumed*. The wealthiest 10% of the global population are responsible for nearly half of all carbon emissions (Oxfam, 2020).
2. “Batteries, EVs, and computers are destroying the Earth by mining rare earths like cadmium and lithium.”
Partially true, but misleading.
Mining impacts are real. Lithium, cobalt, and other rare earths are often extracted under exploitative conditions that can harm ecosystems. However:
* EVs still have a *lower lifetime carbon footprint* than internal combustion engine vehicles—even accounting for battery production and mining (IEA, 2022).
* Transitioning to EVs and renewables is *essential* to meeting climate goals like those in the Paris Agreement.
* Battery recycling technologies (e.g., Redwood Materials, Li-Cycle) and solid-state battery research are improving sustainability fast.
3. “Cutting forests destroys habitats and changes the earth’s core and winds.”
Yes on habitat and wind patterns. No on the Earth’s core.
* Deforestation significantly impacts ecosystems and climate, especially in key regions like the Amazon, which has lost over 17% of its forest cover in the last 50 years (WWF).
* Trees influence carbon absorption, rainfall, and wind patterns—but not the Earth’s core. The core lies nearly 3,000 kilometers below the surface and is unaffected by surface-level biosystems.
4. “Air and water pollution are increasing daily.”
False in many places.
Thanks to policy and technology, many developed nations have seen major improvements:
* The U.S. Clean Air Act has cut major air pollutants by **78%** since 1970—even as the economy tripled in size (EPA).
* The Clean Water Act has dramatically improved river and lake health across the U.S.
* However, industrial pollution remains a *serious problem* in many developing nations—often due to outsourced manufacturing from wealthier countries.
5. “Extreme weather and natural disasters are increasing.”
True.
The IPCC (2023) confirms that climate change is driving more frequent and severe:
* Heatwaves
* Flooding
* Droughts
* Hurricanes
These events are increasingly amplified by human-driven greenhouse gas emissions. Nature plays a role, but we’ve accelerated the instability.
6. “Space travel is causing fossil fuel use and space debris.”
Yes—but the scale matters.
* Rocket launches do use fossil fuels and contribute to high-altitude emissions, but their impact is *minuscule* compared to road, sea, and air transport.
* Space debris is a concern, but agencies like NASA and the European Space Agency have adopted mitigation protocols.
* Crucially, satellites help us monitor climate change, manage agriculture, and respond to disasters—making them *part of the solution*, not the problem.
7. “Capitalism will strip the Earth for profit.”
It can—but it doesn’t have to.
Unregulated capitalism has indeed exploited resources. But regulatory frameworks and market shifts are changing that narrative:
* Environmental regulations, carbon pricing, and ESG investing are tools that *steer markets toward sustainability*.
* Companies like Patagonia, Tesla, and Ørsted are proving that *profit and planetary stewardship* can coexist—and even reinforce each other.
Conclusion
The real issue isn’t how many people live on Earth—it’s how we consume, regulate, and innovate.
To move forward with integrity and impact, we need to:
* Invest in clean energy, sustainable agriculture, and reforestation.
* Demand strong environmental regulation and corporate accountability.
* Trust science, not despair. Policy, data, and global cooperation are our best tools to protect this planet.
Ecological grief is real—but so is ecological hope. Let’s act from truth, not fear.
The earth does not have unlimited resources.
Why Rich People and Communist China Fall Short on Sustainable Resource Use and Equitable Distribution
1. Rich Individuals & Elites
Disproportionate Consumption
- The wealthiest 10% of the global population are responsible for nearly 50% of global carbon emissions, according to Oxfam and UNEP.
- Billionaires and high-net-worth individuals own multiple homes, private jets, and yachts—lifestyles that are orders of magnitude more resource-intensive than the global average.
Waste & Hoarding
- Rich individuals often drive excessive consumption and food waste, not out of necessity, but convenience.
- Vast wealth is stored in assets (e.g., land, water rights, luxury real estate) that could otherwise serve broader social and environmental needs.
Control of Resource Flows
- A small elite controls the major corporations and investment decisions that shape global resource use.
- Decisions are typically based on profit maximization, not sustainability or equity—leading to over-extraction, deforestation, and pollution.
Insulation from Consequences
- Rich people are shielded from the effects of environmental degradation (e.g., buying clean water, air filtration, private healthcare).
- This removes urgency and accountability, further distancing them from meaningful action.
2. Communist China
Hyper-Industrialization
- Although governed by a Communist Party, China operates under state capitalism, prioritizing rapid industrial growth and infrastructure development.
- It is the world’s largest emitter of CO₂, and leads in coal consumption, steel production, and cement use—industries that place enormous pressure on global resources.
Authoritarian Development Model
- The Chinese government often displaces rural populations, exploits ethnic minority regions, and suppresses dissent to enable mega-projects like dams, highways, and industrial zones.
- Environmental regulations exist but are unevenly enforced, especially at the local level where growth metrics drive promotion.
Global Supply Chain Domination
- China is a major exporter of cheap goods—manufactured using intensive energy, labor, and raw materials.
- These goods feed overconsumption in richer nations, but also drive unsustainable extraction domestically and in other countries (e.g., Belt and Road Initiative).
Pollution & Environmental Costs
- Air, water, and soil pollution remain critical issues in China. Entire regions have been degraded for decades to support development.
- While China leads in renewable energy production (solar, wind), it still builds more coal plants than any other nation—contradicting sustainability goals.
Summary
It’s not nations per se that are responsible for unsustainable resource use—it’s:
- The ultra-wealthy minority, regardless of nationality, who consume and control far more than their share, and
- Communist China’s authoritarian-industrial model, which prioritizes growth and global influence over environmental balance and equitable distribution.
Together, these forces overwhelm the planet’s regenerative capacity, creating the illusion of scarcity for the majority—even though Earth has enough in theory to meet human needs sustainably.
I am 68 years old and grew up in the Northeast on the seacoast. I WAS in the agriculture business for over thirty years and kept weather records daily, crops I grew, as well as the yield from those crops. Some field grown and others in greenhouses. The reason I am OUT of business is that the last three years come August, we were in such a severe drought conditions that I could not keep up with the irrigation in the fields and lost my cut flower crops, particularly my sunflowers. That income would carry me through the fall, three years losing it put me under.
The Northeast is still seven inches below level in our water table in NH, below what we should have by now in April 2025. I will tell you I have been watching the evergreen trees in NH and surrounding states dying along the road ways for the past ten years. They are no longer getting enough sunlight, the air is filled with smog and they are NOT getting enough water. It takes trees and shrubs under duress three to seven years to completely die.
What I am seeing in mortifying because if it isn't bad enough that they are dying, but with the building of housing they are clear cutting trees for the housing shortages, removing wildlife habitat, in addition to removing the work of the trees keeping down wind conditions and cooling the earth in the higher temperatures of summer heat. Trees filtering the air from pollutants and the roots removing toxins as well.
I KNOW global warming is here because the entire globe is dealing with excessive heat and cold, droughts, fires, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes and so much more. This is why insurance rates are going up, if you can still get insurance. Each year more and more people are dying from these conditions and as the land dies do does the livelihoods, the abilities to produce food, and shipping costs to escalate. All of which is connected to global warming, wars breaking out for limited resources and mass migration and immigration.
Have you lived millions of years? The only way to know about climate change is actually to know what has actually happened over time and how quickly. 68 is a pittance when it comes to understanding the climate.
The fact that Davos has seized upon this fear tactic is a clue. They build their homes on the waterfront, jet around in fuel guzzling private jets, and laugh at the peons under their thumb.
How come I can’t find Al Gore’s movie anymore? Oh right, because it was exposed as a bunch of crap. How many more years do we have? Why doesn’t China and India stop building coal plants? Because they aren’t idiots.
Yeah, it’s caused dandruff, too.
The earth has always had bad weather. Now it’s like the global warmers have suddenly discovered hurricanes and tornadoes. But all that’s been around forever, some years worse than others. But none of it just started with humans.
Why are the poor on the waterfronts, lol. I live on the waterfront. You guys just stay angry about some nonsensical imaginary ideal that some stark mad evil entity is going to pounce upon your heads, when all along the monster you should fear, you Revere and put on a pedestal
The rich can live anywhere they want and in a moments notice call a taxi, a yacht, a helicopter ...They are not the ones that will suffer from a catastrophe. Weather conditions are not the same from place to place. There is a saying in New England if you don't like the weather wait five minutes. I live on a three mile road and it can be snowing a mile from my house and nothing happening on the other three miles. We have the Great Bay in our town. When storms come in they split right at the bay. Half the town can have one weather condition but the other half can have completely different weather and sometimes no bad weather at all.
When it comes to the globe, altitude, water and ocean fronts can change on a dime. GLOBAL WARMING IS HERE, it means that the conditions are unpredictable and can occur one place and not another and NO there is no reason to believe that this is like times past because this planet has never been exploited, stolen from, extracted from, clear cut of rain forests or been dumped on with fossil fuels over the oceans and the skies ... and the list goes on ..... like the horrific times we are now living in. The earth has never been enshrined with plastic before, like it is now. Mankind has done all this. All so the Capitalists can exploit, drain, destruct for their profits, while they sell it back to us amassing great profits for themselves and poisoning all of us in the process.
Because they're old, like the view, and can afford to lose it? Stop thinking like a poor person.
Earlier I was told I was part of the status quo because of my opinion. Now, I'm a poor person. Better procedure is to investigate and research on your own.
And, why don't climate alarmists ever criticize Communist China for developing like gangbusters and destroying all the land they can?
Obviously, climate change policies is the restraint needed on Western countries to prosper and uplift the poor and middle class.
How else would the Davos class maintain the status quo?
All the large countries are contributing to the pollution, and stripping the planet of all the resources they can get. The islands and the smaller living places on earth are diminishing along with the native peoples incomes and food sources. It is large countries like the US and China that are adding the most and worst pollution causing the people with low impact on the planet to die because they have no places to go and no way to get there. The media is not covering any of this so they can keep peddling their crappy commercials showing us addition stuff we have to buy because we can't live without their crap.
Except Communist China Continues to ravage the Earth while the data shows that America has significantly become less polluted, more environmentally conscious, and has a smaller imprint for its excessive production. This is what the Davos crowd resents: a successful country, which uplifts the poor and the middle class.
But climate scientists do criticize China and India, too. Where do you get that they don’t?
Kindly document your book sources as I did. Please cite climate scientists who are brutally attacking Communist China for destroying the environment.
People worried about the climate crisis are not alarmists. We are alarmed, and those are two different things. This is not a game. The acidification of the ocean is well under way and killing life in what can be said to be the womb of all life, the waters that cover this planet. People do criticize China for their production of carbon (and a host of other things, including human rights abuses — you will find that pollution and authoritarianism go hand in hand, by the way.) The U.S., China, and India are the world three largest producers of greenhouse gasses and users of carbon. Were I you, I’d get off the internet and read some books.
Fear is not evidence. In the ‘70s we were told that we were facing the next ice age and overpopulation. Neither happened. Now, the elites have changed their fear tactics. Be passive, don’t build or develop, let Communist China and India surpass America, and meanwhile die from Wuhan.
I agree with your point; get off the Internet and read books.
Below is a discussion of credible academic books that document how the United States has reduced greenhouse gas emissions, performing better than China and India in specific contexts, such as per capita reductions or sectoral shifts. These sources are grounded in environmental science, energy policy, and climate economics, offering a comparative lens where applicable. Note that while the U.S. has made strides in lowering emissions, China and India remain mired in pollution, which is also acknowledged in these works.
1. The Power Surge: Energy, Opportunity, and the Battle for America’s Future" by Michael Levi (Oxford University Press, 2013)
Michael Levi, an energy policy expert, explores the U.S. energy transition, particularly the shift from coal to natural gas facilitated by the shale gas revolution. He documents how this transition, driven by hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, significantly reduced U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide (CO₂), starting in the late 2000s. Levi notes that between 2005 and 2012, U.S. CO₂ emissions from energy dropped by about 12%, largely due to natural gas displacing coal in electricity generation. In contrast, he highlights that China’s emissions during this period surged due to rapid industrialization and coal dependency, with CO₂ output rising by over 50% from 2005 to 2012. India, while less coal-reliant than China, also saw emissions climb due to growing energy demand, albeit at a slower rate. Levi’s analysis underscores America’s structural shift as a key differentiator.
2. "Climate Change Policy Failures: Why Effective Action Has Not Been Taken" by Howard R. Ernst (Praeger, 2012)
Ernst provides a critical examination of global climate policies, including U.S. efforts to curb emissions. He cites data showing that U.S. greenhouse gas emissions peaked around 2007 and began declining due to a combination of regulatory measures (e.g., the Clean Air Act amendments) and market-driven shifts toward renewables and efficiency. Ernst contrasts this with China, where emissions continued to rise sharply through the 2000s and 2010s, driven by coal-fired power expansion to support manufacturing. India’s emissions, though lower per capita, also trended upward due to urbanization and limited renewable adoption at the time. The book emphasizes America’s relative success in bending its emissions curve downward, even if imperfectly, compared to the steep increases in China and India.
3. "Energy and Climate: Vision for the Future" by Michael B. McElroy (Oxford University Press, 2016)
McElroy, a Harvard atmospheric scientist, details how U.S. emissions reductions have outpaced many developing nations, including China and India. He highlights the role of federal and state policies, such as renewable portfolio standards and vehicle efficiency regulations, alongside technological advances in wind and solar energy. By 2015, U.S. emissions had fallen to levels not seen since the mid-1990s, a reduction of about 10% from their 2007 peak. Meanwhile, China’s emissions grew by over 3% annually during the same period, fueled by coal, while India’s rose steadily due to population growth and industrial expansion. McElroy’s data-driven approach shows America’s progress in decoupling economic growth from emissions, a feat not evident in China and India at the time of publication.
4. "Global Climate Change and U.S. Law" edited by Michael B. Gerrard and Jody Freeman (American Bar Association, 2nd Edition, 2014)
This legal anthology examines U.S. climate mitigation through legislation and regulation. It documents how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implemented measures under the Clean Air Act to reduce emissions from power plants and vehicles, contributing to a decline in CO₂ output after 2007. The book contrasts this with China’s state-led push for coal-based energy, which saw emissions climb to over 10 billion metric tons annually by 2014, dwarfing U.S. totals (around 5.4 billion tons). India, while emitting less overall (around 2 billion tons), showed no significant downturn due to coal reliance and weak regulatory frameworks. The editors argue that America’s legal and market mechanisms provided a more effective emissions reduction pathway than the growth-focused strategies of China and India.
5. "The Climate Casino: Risk, Uncertainty, and Economics for a Warming World" by William D. Nordhaus (Yale University Press, 2013)
Nobel laureate William Nordhaus analyzes climate economics, including U.S. emissions trends. He notes that America’s greenhouse gas emissions intensity (emissions per unit of GDP) dropped significantly from the 1990s onward, thanks to energy efficiency gains and a shift to cleaner fuels. By 2012, U.S. emissions were down roughly 10% from 2005 levels, a stark contrast to China’s tripling of emissions over two decades (from 3.4 billion tons in 1990 to over 10 billion by 2012) and India’s doubling (from 0.8 billion to 1.7 billion tons). Nordhaus attributes America’s edge to technological innovation and policy, though he critiques its overall pace. China and India, he argues, prioritized economic growth over emissions cuts, delaying their mitigation efforts.
Comparative Context and Caveats
These books collectively illustrate that the U.S. has achieved notable emissions reductions, particularly since the mid-2000s, through a mix of market shifts (e.g., natural gas over coal), policy interventions, and efficiency improvements. China and India, conversely, have seen emissions rise due to their wasteful developmental surges—China as the "world’s factory" and India as an emerging economy with vast energy needs. These sources don’t claim U.S. efforts are flawless but highlight a significant advantage in reducing emissions trajectories compared to the excessive upward trends in China and India during the periods studied.
For the most current data beyond these books’ publication dates (up to April 3, 2025), my knowledge confirms the U.S. continues to lower emissions (e.g., a 17% drop from 2005 to 2020 per EPA reports), while China’s emissions are peaking and India’s still rise. These books remain foundational for understanding the historical and structural reasons behind America’s significant progress.
The rich are exploiting you.
Are you going to Communist China now to ask them to stop harming the planet?
Why do the rich own waterfront property?!
You really have to ask that?
I won't explain it, I know you know the answer.
It's the same reason that, as you stated, you "took your young daughter to see glaciers, to see if it's true."
Yeah, "doctor of maintain the status quo."
Maybe you've already got an audience, but that doesn't mean anything you say is truthful, or even authentic. I know others who have made their fortune by being nothing more than a loud mouth. Not my preference, but I've fought for everyone's right to choose, so that's fine.
But you can't convince me against what I know to be true: climate change is a fact. It has happened before, from various causes, this time it's because of humans and their Unintended Consequences.
Rich people in my town have to deal with their yards & houses flooding at every high tide. "Why don't they move?" You ask?
Well, they'd have to take a loss, who would but their property?!
No, they just complain that "someone needs to fix it."
The city is "working on it." (Sorta) They "have a plan." (It's a long-term plan that never comes close to addressing the problem. It's just to calm the complainers.)
Status quo? Who do you think I am, John Kerry?
Al Gore maybe?
Because it's pretty and they can afford to lose it.
By building more mansions like Obama on the beach?
Why are you stuck on Obama? He is no longer a black threat to some of you that feel threatened from black people. I feel bad for you being so obsessed as he has no influences any more.
I will tell you this, if you want to be upset it should be about tRUMP, (LIAR & CHEAT), and president Musk. They are the ones the world is truly worried about. Focus on this for awhile, while we still have a planet. As far as the economy goes these two bozo's wiped out America's economy and the entire globe for that matter.
Al Gore has made MILLIONS for decades jetting around the world crying wolf and screaming that the world's about to end in 8-10 years but his B.S. never comes true. But he keeps it up. For decades now. NYC was supposed to be under water by now.
He and John Kerry jet around decrying so called catastrophic "climate change" while burning huge amounts of fossil fuels needed to power their private jets.
Such limousine liberals. Such hypocrites. Such scammers.
NOW we have liberal Democrats turning on their pet: Electric vehicles and Tesla! All because they want to maintain their slush funds, their waste, and their fraud which Doge is exposing.
Dems' heads are spinning and exploding.
Thing I never thought I would see in 2025: libs turning on Tesla. All because of their irrational hate for Donald Trump.
😆 🤣
Lithium extraction from the earth is destroying and pulverizing the earth to extract the lithium. If that isn't bad enough lithium batteries, large or small catch fire all the time. They even cause fires in the cargoes on planes from electronic devices. The fact is like everything our government does they did not do their homework on electric cars. For one thing lithium battery cars are so much heavier with those batteries that the median strips on highways don't hold the weight of those cars and they end up crashing through them and into oncoming traffic on the opposite sides of the highway. Then when the cars and batteries catch fire it takes hours and tons of water to put them out because once they put out one cell of the battery the next cell catches fire. SO... Lithium and electric batteries are not any better for the planet and this is the truth. Some fire departments have been at the fire scenes for over four hours trying to put out battery fires. It takes massive amounts of water to do so as well.
60 Minutes Season 57 Episode 27 showed the clean up in LA after all those houses burned and the toxic clean up from the cars with lithium batteries are hazardous waste and how carefully it needs to be handled. They showed other products with danger with lithium batteries.
https://www.cbs.com/shows/video/0npz5UFoyEKaBIkjtx6D1emNtkUEoh1/
Musk is doing nothing for the planet and in fact is making global warming worse, watch him blow up another one of his spaceship endeavors on take off while he burns massive amounts of fossil fuel in doing so. The guy is a loser and he is not only taking down the planet, democracy, THE CONSTITUTION, the American economy but the world economy as well. He can't move off this planet fast enough as far as I am concerned.
I'm not at all a fan of electric vehicles which require gas and oil energy to charge them. I think Musk's pipedream to colonize Mars is a HUGE waste of money 💰. NASA'S and SpaceX's budget should be significantly cut.
Musk puts forth the RIDICULOUS notion that our planet is suffering from and threatened with population COLLAPSE 😆 🤣 Even though world population actually is INCREASING and has now gone above 8 billion.
Musk puts forth this ridiculous notion to justify having multiple children with multiple women...as though he's just doing his part to counter this non-existent so called population 🙄 collapse.
No to so called green energy tax credits, mandates, and phasing out of gas and oil vehicles.
But YES to cutting waste, fraud, and Democrat slush funds such as what profiteer Stacey Abrams grifted.
More bombastic,, discombobulated yammer from the echo chamber, lol
How do feel about no-party- preference independents. You can’t call me aRINO or a left wing radical. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO LABLE ME. Get over Biden move on - quoting your cult leader “ get over it” djt “ Gods in control” jo both quotes from after a mass shooting and an attempted mass shooting respectively
SAVE OUR DEMOCRACY - IMPEACH TRUMP AGAIN
LOTS of bluster and projection, Skippy 🤡
We feel that the DOGE Agency has somewhat overtly taken over or country. If Congress had decided to curtail those various Federally funded agency's which were designed specifically by our representatives, then the people would understand. For Trump to designate one agency to suspend or delete those past standing agency's which we are familiar over apparent fraud without self examination is very discerning at best.
They're being very transparent. Publicizing their findings. Yes, trimming some fat and making judgement calls. The courts and Congress can counter them. And the voters can speak their minds in 2026.
I am apolitical, I respect the Constitution as my duty as a soldier demands. All these sarcastic statements were heard long before your leader repeated them to his rank and file, and the Kremlin propaganda, which we are advised to avoid, is spreading on social media. I thought you were the ones always saying "educate yourself." Perhaps you should take your own advice.
You're making up strawmen and not at all addressing my actual comment…
Mr. Trump: this is what happens to your brain when you try smoking pot but never exhaling.
Trump doesn't smoke or drink and never has. What caused Biden's and Kamala's dysfunctional brains? 🤔
Nonsensical What planet are you on
Meaning you got nothing and can't refute the specifics. Of COURSE you can't.
The climate crisis is real. Go read a book.
You just told a joke 😆 🤣
If you're trying to convince people to look into YOUR substack, you are failing ............
ROFLMAO!
The ‘world’ is nothing if not resilient - and I would never expect a politician to have the tools to predict the ‘end of times’ accurately. But in many ways Gore was prescient. Climate Change is not only an accepted reality by more than 9 of 10 scientists, but whole INDUSTRIES - importantly, including the insurance industry and others who manage risk or large funds put at risk by its effects (just ask the 23% of Floridians who can no longer get insurance for their houses). Cripes - even the large oil companies recognized the impact of their products (on climate) based on internal documents and calculations from the 1960s…
Do you have to like Gore? No. Do you have to approve of his methods? No. But acknowledge he was probably more correct than virtually ALL U.S. politicians, you, and many others for whom it’s more expedient to ignore what scientists to know as reality.
Here’s the thing about science: it doesn’t give a fuck about the OPINIONS of those not educated to the issues at hand. It happily exists anyway. The meteorite that destroyed the dinosaurs didn’t care that dinosaurs weren’t educated about celestial mechanics - it simply changed things when it hit…
Libs think men are women. Scientifically CONFUSED 🤡
Al Gore is a con artist who JETS around predicting the seas are going to rise and that NYC will be under water in 7 years. Said that DECADES ago. A real profiteer charlatan.
The Bible talked about floods and famines. Electric vehicles are charged via so called "dirty* energy. Solar, wind, and nuclear CANNOT meet our needs currently. Not even close.
Climate change profiteers are a dime a dozen. Jihn Kerry and AL Gore are not very bright as they JET around using so called dirty fuel.. Total hypocrite like so many limousine liberals.
Getting oil from the ground is just recycling. Nothing wring with that. Drill baby drill and let the Luddites who want everyone riding in "clean" mass transportation go use that type of transportation and leave our air conditioners, gas stoves, showers, toilets, and furnaces ALONE. Liberal totalitarian power freaks. A bunch of control freaks who ..Know...Nothing.
Good c*****! Y'all are so beyond ridiculous.
Meaning you got nothing. No valid counter argument.
You’re an angry elf
LOL!!!
Dunning-Kruger, amirite??
Yes, go look at water levels. They’re exactly the same as they were 50 years ago...Just the way your brain saw them then, and your eyes can see them now. The only change is that we allow ourselves to conned by the BIG GREEN LIE illusions.
Dumbest s*** ever said. You understand nothing.
When they tell you the sky is falling, and then you go outside and see that it isn’t – but still believe it is because “experts” told you so - you’re being CONNED.
Time to wake up.
And President Trump said the Earth was flat, but Elon Musk is a rocket expert. He loves to blow them up and they are And leader trump said the earth is flat but elon is a good rocket man, he likes rockets, he likes blowing them up and then they fall all over our nation. Oh and king trump did say penguins and seals are now tarriffed, i guess they need to form a currency ?? Yeah I really think his business deals are outstanding especially in business law they were just beautiful. i heard he already has 6 bankruptcies under his belt. Sounds great for the economy that was once the envy of the world. Fox news you dont know what you're missing 🤣I get so tired of that im sorry for intruding but couldn't resist.I feel like im in a nightmare I'll never wake from
That's just silly. Either you're a gaslighter or you're being gaslit.
Or, perhaps the joke is on us with "climate change" being used as a cover story for geoengineering/weather modification/stratospheric aerosol injection/ aka chemtrails, weather warfare, etc., etc ...
https://rumble.com/v6rgxl3-trump-launches-chemtrails-task-force-with-power-to-arrest-geoengineering-cr.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20People%27s%20Voice
https://rumble.com/v6raiho-state-chemtrail-poisoning-bans-are-useless.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Dr.%20Jane%20Ruby
https://www.bitchute.com/video/oRJl4txNJjsk/
There is so much more where all that came from, but to only speak of "climate change" WITHOUT mentioning geoengineering is like saying "yes I'm a paid shill" or "yes, I am a sheeple who only believes what my televised overlords tell me"
Tighten that tinfoil.
You should try reading and looking at some of those links, Bella. You might learn something.
It totally couldn't be from all of the geoengineering of recent decades...
OMG, the stupidity is at an all time high. Climate change....have you noticed the incessant number of planes spraying aluminum chalk, barium and strontium.
This is where you weather is coming from. Now study, learn and wake up.
https://tempest.aos.wisc.edu/radar/us3comphtml5.html
We noticed a bulk of people who profit from the man-made-climate-change- religion can afford beachfront property, and are buying multiple properties. Their lifestyle exudes so many signals that they don't subscribe to their purported religion.
But the faithful are not connecting the dots.
Donald (Gimme’a Bl-w Jo-) Trump and other like-minded conservatives remain quite willing to pollute and warm the planet most liberally. And it must be convenient for the very-profitable mega polluters.
To date there clearly has been pathetically insufficient political courage/will to properly act upon the scientific cause-and-effect of them. Human-caused global warming and its resultant increasing number and intensity of climate-change-induced extreme weather events rightfully continue to stir up alarm. Perhaps even for many of those people who still claim to distrust climate science.
Yet, increasingly problematic is the very large and growing populace who are too overworked, worried and even angry about food and housing unaffordability for themselves or their family — all while on insufficient income — to criticize the fossil fuel industry, etcetera, for environmental damage their policies cause/allow, particularly when not immediately observable.
There’s a continuance of polluting the natural environment with a business as usual attitude. Societally, we still discharge out of elevated exhaust pipes, smokestacks and, quite consequentially, from sky-high jet engines like it’s all absorbed into the natural environment without repercussion. Out of sight, out of mind.
… Obstacles to environmental progress were quite formidable pre-pandemic. But Covid-19 not only stalled most projects being undertaken, it added greatly to the already busy landfills and burning centers with disposed masks and other non-degradable biohazard-protective single-use materials.
One of the many brainwashed by the liars on Fox News.
And you believe Biden was fit for office and that Hunter was worth the millions he was paid overseas via influence peddling. You believe his artwork is good and worth thousands.
MSNBC has many fooled.
Apathetic, it suits you does it?
The truth hurts, doesn't it. Guess I ruffled some feathers. Flipped the script...
MAGA moron cultists 😵💫 are immune to decency, respect, and TRUTH.🕊️
Dems lost in 2024 and are sore losers. They hate the MAJORITY of Americans. The cult of Left wing extremists lack common sense and are quite dysfunctional.
No they are not sore losers. They just don’t like to see America in the hands of a deeply corrupt felon taking a chain saw to services people have relied for decades. Working with a billionaire he’s already tired of because he’s more toxic than even Trump. Do you actually believe there is some left wing “cult” ….. the noise is coming from ordinary people waking up to the lies and the corruption in Trumps swamp.
Dumb Kelli
Climate change is the least of our worries.
https://jesscravenvideos.substack.com/p/hands-off-downtown-la?r=3kr1ua&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=audio-player
When you call truth lies and lies truth ,Kelli, that's no longer an independent thought. It slowly becomes a form of brainwashing. It can be dangerous and cruel. Nothing of what was said is false , I checked myself . I don't care what side of the fence you sit on. You should look into the information before you declare these two highly respectable gentlemen are liars, and it took me about 7 minutes to prove the opposite . They haven't been dishonest , but you were
Jim Acosta has been an insult to journalism from the minute he stepped foot in the WH Briefing Room. Anything he's up to now just adds to the obscenity of his career.
You obviously have no idea who the well spoken and intelligent Jim Acosta is. He is certainly not a clown. Or does it take one to know one I wonder...
Actually, Ms. Christensen, I do know who Jim Acosta is. I know him very well in fact, having had CNN on in my work place for much of Trump's first term, so I speak from a position of a viewer's authentic revulsion. You may love Acosta. You may also believe someone like Ron Klain, Biden's Chief of Staff, who lied to the public in perhaps the greatest display of blatant mendacity in our nation's history, is worthy of your respect. Up to you. Just saying, in my opinion I consider these two public figures vulgar, dishonorable cretins for what they willingly did. And I am not an outlier. Stick around for a few years...you'll see how lonely you'll be defending these creatures.
"It takes one to know one." I laughed. Out loud. Try "My dad can beat up your dad!" next time.
Jim Acosta would not know authenticity if it slapped him upside his head! He has always been and will always be an ass and this is as much time as I will waste on him.
Good! We don't care.Go away!
Nobody cares what you think, Tom, nobody.
I agree with Tom and care what he thinks. That makes you a liar. Is that why you like Jim?
Then why are you replying, dopey
Then why are you responding, dopey?
Because “dopes” like you are so self-centred that you actually think others are impressed by you, so call it a
message of reality, dopey.
Wrong Gary. I do. Certainly you and I know that you can do better than that.
This is a good pitch for the potential power of Substack.
Immediacy + Authenticity + Integrity = Genuine, quality expression, real connection, meeting people where they're at
We're going to see how this platform is a much better space for engagement than legacy social media ~
Great point! I love that people on here interact with their audience and subscribers. It does make it seem more authentic and real.
Why amplify this clown? There are so many more honest and thoughtful news sources on Substack.
I have zero interest in this Jim Acosta. Why am I being sent this?
Little Jimmy may go live on his phone, but his “journalism” career is dead as a door nail.
Wow, Jim Acosta discovers podcasting. Brilliant! And, this is news? How long has podcasting been around? Seriously now, if the guy failed on TV and he just discovered podcasting why is this of any relevance?
Being paid millions by pharma is much easier than busting your butt every day.
JFK, Jr.
JFK, Jr. died in a plane crash, didn't he or did we just learn something new from Jim Acosta?
RFK, Jr.
Fake? This is about as real and visceral as it gets. The plasticized opinion pieces from Fox are pretty awful. Just yesterday, I think I heard a few times on Fox “Dems want to put molesters and killers back on the street”. They say something so disgustingly vial, with a twinkle in their eyes and a half-cocked smile. They say it as casually as “pass the salt”. No big deal, but it leaves another tiny impression on the minds of their viewers. Enough barbs like that and it becomes a reality (in the minds of their viewers).
The vast majority of voters rejected Biden and the Democrats' careless and dangerous open borders in 2024.
I don’t consider 49.9% the vast majority of voters. Yes, trump won but by vast majority-I don’t think so. Any so many who did vote for him were bombarded with fake news & false narratives and just weren’t able to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Trump beat Harris in the popular vote and wom ALL of the swing states. Made strides in blue states and WON young voters. Made strides with black men. Liberal women clung to their "sacred" right to abort their own children but fortunately common sense and those being more humane and civilized prevailed over liberal women in love with abortion.
I'm a Democrat and I saw long before the election that the border would be a big problem. Couple that with an uncertain economy, and we were doomed.
Okay. That doesn’t invalidate what I said.
It adds context. Who ever heard of not adequately vetting millions flooding our borders. For no good reason.
AND funding them via an app that flew them into our country, fed them, gave them debit cards loaded with funds, and gave them luxury hotels.
Dems are reckless. They represent America Last.
America First > America Last.
Yep. Okay. You win.
Much of what you just said is false. Propaganda built on partial truths. But, that one tidbit of info means very little in the big scope of things. I’m not going to convince you or change your mind, regardless of the volume of facts, etc.
You’re not going to change my mind. Not in the least bit.
So fine. We’ll agree to disagree. My original comment still stands. If you can prove it wrong, go for it. It will not change the reality. Like I said, you will continue to believe what you want…and so will I. I do appreciate the conversation, it’s healthy to have civil discourse.
Sharp as a tack, JNelliE.
Hard pass. Late to the authenticity game.
Great interview.... and it just signals the change even in stock market news. I can go live on here and alert my subscribers to a stock that may be flying and it emails them immediately and they can hop on and trade it if they'd like. You guys have just built such a great platform and I'm finding it's less about the tech and just more about getting the word out. When the tech doesn't hold you back - that's when you have a winner! Thanks so much to the entire Substack team!
I have no interest in legacy media partisan hacks. I’ll stick with Greenwald, Benz, and people interested in the truth.
This is a great interview, I've been watching Jim since he came over here. I've found that I'm reading as much as I'm watching video as well. I'm getting away from mainstream media and feel like I'm getting much more from the long format interviews and discussions. I'm doing as many paid subscriptions as I can because I know that SubStacks gonna need to scale with the increasing demand for live video and the influx of new journalists, creators and subscribers. Keep up the great work Chris!
Mediocrity has no limits....