541
Secret White House spreadsheet ranks US companies based on loyalty to Trump
(www.telegraph.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
541 points (99.6% liked)
politics
25300 readers
2858 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Stop the pollution first. Geoengineering is at best speculative, and at worst, may be a cure that's worse than the problem.
Stop all pollution today and we're still done and over with, as will about 90% of all species. Geo engineering is our last chance. I particularly like blocking sunlight as a solution. Any solution will have drawbacks. Huge amounts of water vapor above parts of the ocean sounds tempting to me too.
Edit: for all the down voters: https://presearch.com/search?q=accidental+geo-engineering+experiment
Edit 2: Yes, the Climate Crisis May Wipe out Six Billion People
Blocking sunlight? Like the one nearly limitless energy source we have?
How about stuff like... Planting more trees, ending deforestation of the Amazon? How about reducing automobile usage?
Like, these all have no negative impacts, but blocking the sun does, in fact.
Plants don't use heat to make energy, they use sunlight. And you're discussing cutting off the energy source of the one type organism capable of cleaning our atmo...
Those are indeed much better examples of changes we need but we are rapidly approaching the point where those changes are too late. Given the severity of the likely impact, we need the urgency to act in greater desperation. By all means we need to go all out with renewable energy, net zero, walkable cities, and so many more transformation of modern society. It is the only sustainable approach. But is it too little, too late? At what point do we need to take more desperate measures?
We need to at least develop a better understanding of terraforming earth because that may quickly become our best hope
We already passed that point. It already is too late. Your proposed solutions are too little too late. All these things had to have happened in the mid 90s at the latest. Instead, we doubled down on energy efficiency, which makes the bad thing only cheaper to use and thus the net pollution increases while sealing our future.
Wrong, If you are correct, though, the only correct way to proceed is to completely exterminate all human life on the planet, since we are obviously the problem.
What we are long past is maintaining the current level of consumption the western world does, and maintain current climate.
Note, the only ones reducing consumption and pollution of the working class. Jeff Bezos still dumps tons of carbon into the air needlessly, just to go golfing.
Didn't you pay attention? Even if we stopped all pollution today, it's too late. The temperatures will keep increasing. Up to 7 degrees at least. The only thing that can save this current epoch is humanity. But it will need extreme measures. And we'll need them yesterday.
Edit: Yes, the Climate Crisis May Wipe out Six Billion People
I didn't say just stop all pollution. We can reforest, and repair the damage we did.
If this is the case, then your original premise is false, that there's nothing to be done.
Yes, extreme measures like abolishing capitalism, reducing our consumption models, and repairing the damage we've done.
That is a myth. We are not past the point of healing the planet. If we are, then we should just self-exterminate, so the planet can heal itself, which it will, once we're gone.
We're past the point of maintaining the current consumption model of western nations, and maintaining a status quo, or return, to pre-industrialization levels of pollution.
We’re rapidly approaching several possible tipping points that will “rapidly” (over decades or a century) make many of the most populated parts of the world much less livable, disrupt agriculture on a global scale, cause mass die offs, disrupt water supplies and weather patterns.
The only thing “saving” us is the uncertainty: we’re not good at predicting them yet (since they’ve never happened in the history of the earth) so we don’t know how desperate we need to be
I agree with this statement. Those "tipping points" however can be walked back, by doing things like actually repairing the damage we've done, instead of just reducing the amount of damage.
I can make one prediction with near 100% certainty: As long as we maintain out current economic model, human life on this planet will likely cease to exist within the next couple hundred years.
They really can’t. They’re called tipping points because they’re likely irreversible, in society terms.
As we approach these tipping points we’re quickly running out of things we can do, and the scariest part is we can’t even predict when it’s too late and probably won’t until well afterword
Most all of these can be prevented, and even reversed, if we: Drastically reduce our consumption based lifestyles, reforest places like the Amazon (Our planet's lungs), and get creative with other methods (ie, algae cultivation on a large scale).
But, these all require abolishing capitalism, in order to be done.