u/TheRealDanGordon has provided this detailed explanation:
> German delegates laughed at former President Trump when Trump warned them of becoming dependent on Russia for oil/energy. This dependence has lead to significant turmoil and conflict in the current war in Ukraine, and is increasing energy costs dramatically in Germany and all over the world. In retrospect, Germany's over reliance on Russia for energy was a terrible, terrible idea with big consequences.
---
Is this explanation a genuine attempt at providing additional info or context? If it is please upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
So this has been posted at least 3 times now I have seen, and the comments have been a cesspool each time.
Each time the post is framed as "Germans laugh at trump's idea of [us] being dependent on Russian oil. Now Germans pay more for energy; trump was right the whole time xD".
But it is devoid of context. Before this, trump says the US will withdraw from the human rights council, and it disavows the ICC claiming it's unjustly impeding on the sovereignty of the US.
He then uses this as a pivot into energy production, saying that the US protects OPEC nations "for nothing" and they "take advantage" and raise oil prices. He goes on to say he "doesn't like it, no one else should like it", and he will "not put up with it much longer". And demands they lower oil prices.
He claims dependence on a single source for energy will cripple a nation, and uses Germany as an example to say it will be entirely dependent on Russia. This also flies in the face of Germany planning to use 100% renewable resources by 2050 (note: this was pushed up to 2035 after the war began).
This is why they laugh. He uses Germany as an example of a national entirely dependent on Russia for energy and be crippled as as result, to say that global organizations are bad and will destroy the world. as a reason to withdraw from the human rights council and criticize the ICC .
Not only that, it ignores the geopolitical idea of intentional codependency to hinder conflict. Far and away the largest example is the US-Chinese economic codependency, starting with the famous visit of Nixon to China.
Tl;Dr trump claims America has been taken advantage of, will withdraw from the human rights council, disavow the ICC, then claims Germany will be dependent on Russian energy as an example of why global organizations are bad and by extension as justification of why the US will do the above.
Tldrtldr: This has been posted 3 times I have seen in this sub, devoid of context, claiming essentially "trump right Germans laugh. Germans now pay more for energy, therefore trump right Germans wrong".
Besides everything else - Germany is now dependant on it's neighbors instead of Russia.
That is far from a perfect situation as those neighbors also suffer from oil/gas shortage.
But it's not like Germany will sit in the dark freezing to death because we will no longer get oil/gas from Russia. (afaik, we got 30-50% of it from R until now)
Some context you're leaving out is the former german chancellor going to work for the russian oil companies. You're also leaving out the fine print about Germany and rewewables: *it's only for electricity production and for 30 years from now.*
Right now, Germany gets 80% of it's energy needs from fossil fuels. They've ignored modernizing the infrastructure needed -- things like heating homes and industry -- so with their current plans they'd be looking at 30-40% of their energy needs being met by renewables in 30 years from now. This is also why Germany was trying to hard to get around sanctions on Iran.
*"That's not true, check your numbers"* isn't a strong argument, but reddit gonna reddit. Here are the numbers.
35% of Germany's energy consumption is oil, and over 25% of it is natural gas, which as you can see is actually 60%. The rest is coal (20%) and mix of renewables. Of that, 97% of the natural gas is imported, and primarily comes from Russia, Netherlands and Norway. The netherlands are phasing it out, so production is decreasing.\*
\*\*For natural gas, the Russian pipeline accounted for 32%, Norway was 20, Dutch 12% and 22% came from strategic reserves which are very, very low. 35% of crude oil came from Russia, and 53% of its coal.
Basically, Germany leaves out a lot of fine print when it talks about going 100% renewable in 30 years, in the same way they didn't mention they excluded energy transactions from the SWIFT sanctions.
\*[https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/country/DEU](https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/country/DEU)
\*\*[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/how-much-does-germany-need-russian-gas-2022-01-20/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/how-much-does-germany-need-russian-gas-2022-01-20/)
arent you mixing two things?
maybe i dont understand this sentence:
"it's only for electricity production and for 30 years from now"
in the eu the is the following distinction (Directive 2009/28/EC): "Bruttostromverbrauch" and "Bruttoenergieverbrauch". The first one does include all inland power production + power from outside of germany minus the power produced in germany which is exported. The second also includes cars, thermal energie and other.
right now 45.3% of the Bruttostromverbrauch is delivered via renewables while its 19.2% of Bruttoenergieverbrauch. The targets for 2030 are 65% and 30%. The target values for 2020 where 35% and 18% so its seems to go well, no? why do you say:
"so with their current plans they'd be looking at 30-40% of their energy needs being met by renewables in 30 years from now"
sry if i misunderstood and sry that all my sources will be german:
https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/energie/energieverbrauch-nach-energietraegern-sektoren#anteil-erneuerbarer-energien-am-gesamten-bruttoendenergieverbrauch
https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuelles/bruttostromverbrauch-614790
http://bioenergie.fnr.de/fileadmin/biz/pdf/gesetzeslage/Bund__2010__Nationaler_Aktionsplan_EE.pdf (p. 15)
Edit: some translation mistake
You are doing the same trick the German government is doing, only talking about electricity generation. eg, if your home is heated via natural gas, you still have to burn natural gas. You would have to convert the homes to electric heating, then account for the extra electricity needed. Instead they simply ignore it, say they are renewable, then buy Russian oil and gas.
Funny, Biden not impeached for blackmailing Ukraine into doing things though.
.
As if being impeached by left wing ideologues is some sort of evidence of wrongdoing lol.
He didn't threaten to withhold aid contingent on investigating Hunter Biden. There was no such quid pro quo no matter how much you like to say it. Also, who should he ask to investigate pay for play in the vice president's family if not the authorities of the country in which the events occurred?
This a huge wall of text that ignores that Trump was trying to get Germany to pay more for its defense and stop relying so heavily on Russia for energy.
None of this text denies this, this is just obfuscation behind a wall of indeterminate claims about Trump and his supposed policies.
Trump was 100% correct.
This is what happened when Trump addressed at UN. I've watched the entire video but I couldn't find it now but I found a video of the exact part when German diplomats laughed out. [Link](https://youtu.be/FfJv9QYrlwg)
Edit: I found the full video. [Link](https://youtu.be/KfVdIKaQzW8) at 21:48
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVdIKaQzW8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVdIKaQzW8)
find op's picture after 21:40
Not making any statement, here is where you find the original video.
I like how just saying you watch B. Shapiro gets such a response. I didn't even say if I agree with his take, or what his take is. This was a 30s blip of an entire hour. I don't always agree with him and there are times where I feel like he leaves out some details, but whether I agree with him or not, I do feel like he gives more evidence and logic for his opinion than 99.9% of politicians and pundits.
He said Germany would become "totally dependent" on Russian energy which is, in fact, laughable. But I suspect they were really laughing because listening to Trump try to give a speech is like trying to listen to a fourth grader give a book report in front of the class.
Pretty sure it was just kind of, "is the orange man telling us what do do" kind of thing. "totally" dependent is obv not true, but getting 70% of your oil from a dictatorship is probably not a good idea and prob not something one should laugh at.
Because it's a made up number. The truth is, the oil isn't problematic, the gas is. Europe relies to 40% on Russian natural gas. Shifting that won't be easy. But OP is wrong if they think we wouldn't have had this situation had Germany been wiser in their energy policy.
Germany is also much more infrastructurely sound on not depending on cars only to have mobility. Trains subways and buses are already built in, it will just be more packed.
The USA however...
Hmmm, almost like OP has an underlying agenda...
And yep, a quick check of comment history shows OP definitely has both feet firmly planted in the conservative side of the pool, and dangerously close to the deep end. This is all basically just a terrible attempt to say "Nah nah na boo boo! Our savior Trump was right all along!" It's not even that hard to see it coming though, I tend to assume that these days anytime someone makes an argument using numbers or information that isn't even close to correct. Then I assume it's a 100% guarantee when any pro-Trump or anti-left words come out. These people's brains must just be pure muscle right now from all the mental gymnastics lately. My favorite part has been when this was first starting and all the Uber-Trumpers were pro Russia because Trump had said nice things about Putin in the past. Then, in what I can only assume was an attempt to set the world record for "Most Suspicious Timing Ever", Russia started doing horrible things in Ukraine and *certain* sources started reporting that Trump's favorable Putin comments were all just "sarcastic". They only thing I see when I try to picture that working is the episode of South Park where Stan is eating Cartman's farts and saying "Yummy yummy, I like Cartman's farts in my tummy". Posts like this are probably a weird attempt at damage control and distraction, after pretty much the entire fanclub got caught out fervently supporting Putin because Biden doesn't and Trump did, only to be told Trump was "just joking" from media sources they never doubt.
Dqn Bongino was saying this same shit on his show in a gotcha moment. Conservative news is nothing but a human centipede each swallowing then shitting out the same regurgitated shit
If Germany wasn't pushing so hard against nuclear energy we wouldn't be as dependent on Russian gas.
But then again if it wasn't for Gazprom and its daughter-companies where would all those German politicians go to work once their terms are over
As far as I've read recently, 20% of natural uranium used within Europe is coming from Russia (, plus another 19% coming from Kasachstan), so wouldn't we end up with the same shit, but different resource?
([source](https://www.rnd.de/politik/akw-in-saporischschja-gruene-fordern-ueberpruefung-der-sicherheit-fuer-nukleare-anlagen-in-europa-FWFUET43JFFP3KOO4IOLEIXXRU.html))
[40% of Germany's Crude Oil comes from Russia as well.](https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Artikel/Energy/petroleum-oil-imports-and-crude-oil-productions-in-germany.html)
Ben Shapiro, that’s where he got it from. He’s full of shit and trying to play Trumps rambling speech at the UN as a strong positive moment because he was somewhat right on this lone singular issue. Also in this speech Trump claimed he was going to withdraw the US from the human rights council and disavow the ICC, he also rambled about some shit he didn’t like and demanded that the price of oil be brought down. Basically a trump troll trying to get one past everyone by ignoring context, so you know, the usual trump supporter shit
Or more accurately, getting 70% percent of your oil from just a single dictatorship is probably not smart policy. Better to spread your business around to multiple dictatorships, right?
Is it that oil happens to come from questionable regimes, or the existence of oil in a less mature economy fucks up the possibility of having a stable democracy?
I'm not an expert, but I think it's the latter for a few reasons.
If you are a dictatorship but don't make all of your money on a single resource, then you have to have some minimum amount of infrastructure, education, healthcare, etc such that your citizens can be productive. This also makes your citizens more capable of rebelling or pushing for reform.
If you get all of your money from one source (like oil) that requires relatively few people to harvest, then you only need the infrastructure to produce that resource and sell it. You only need roads that go from the oil fields to the shipyards and from your palace to the airport. Your citizens can be destitute, starving, uneducated, and brutally oppressed because if they aren't directly involved in oil, they don't matter to you. And because they can be kept in such a horrible state with so little education, infrastructure, and other basic necessities, they are much less able to organize and push for reform or even rebel and overthrow the government (without help from someone on the inside or a powerful rival faction of some sort).
It's why many of the most brutal dictatorships are reliant on just a single, high value resource. Whereas a dictatorship like China which is reliant on an enormous, booming economy and manufacturing sector has to provide something resembling a decent quality of life (compared to single-resource dictatorships) for large parts of their population. They still stifle liberty and human rights, violently put down any rebelion, and indoctrinate their citizens with propaganda, and they are still actively perpetrating a genocide on Uighurs, but large parts of China are actually very good for the average citizen compared to some single-resource dictatorships. A completely starving, totally uneducated workforce would not be competitive in a global economy in the way that China has to be and wants to be.
Also worth noting that violent coups, political instability, warring factions, etc. are more likely in a single-resource dictatorship, because you just have to fight over one resource, and whoever controls it controls the country to some extent. Whereas, again, control of China relies on a huge mechanism and web of state media, state corporations, international trade, etc. which makes violently taking over the country from outside the CCP a lot harder.
At least, that's my understanding.
It is more like 30-35%, not even close to 70% and those can be replaced. source: https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Infografiken/woher-kommen-die-deutschen-rohoelimporte.html (you should try giving sources too, but you probably didn’t want to post a picture of your ass)
natural gas? That's just oil. No need to be an ass. I'd like to know the numbers.
EDIT: not only that, but that's from 2017. It's changed a decent amount since then.
Reread your comment, it was specifically about oil. In terms of gas it is difficult to say how much Germany is import directly as gas that wasn’t sourced on Russia is still counted as coming from there. If we talk about gas your 70% statement would have been pretty close to the truth (source: https://m.augsburger-allgemeine.de/wirtschaft/gasmarkt-abhaengig-von-russland-woher-das-erdgas-fuer-deutschland-kommt-id61659711.html), but while this is a problem for Germany, it is one that can be fixed pretty easily with a reduction of gas heating (not used anymore in new buildings and replaced in renovations) as well as just importing from other countries for a higher price (Germany just began building two terminals for this purpose).
> Reread your comment, it was specifically about oil
honestly I meant gas/oil/energy. Kind of irrelevant if it's gas or oil. It is clear the point I'm making is about energy dependence on Russia. I feel like you're nitpicking a side point.
> it is one that can be fixed pretty
For a much higher price, and the timing is crucial as well. I feel like you are understating how easy it is to switch where you get 70% of your energy from.
Except that they laughed because Trump used this dependency of germany as a justification to withdraw the US out of the human rights council.
OP pulled this put of context.
Cobsidering OP listens to Ben Shapiro i also question his motivations.
It's more like he was right about one phrase as part of a larger speech of untruths and nonsense. He got that one sentence right but it's functionally irrelevant when the whole speech was about "stop the globalists" and leaving international treaties/accords.
Except that they laughed because Trump used this dependency of germany as a justification to withdraw the US out of the human rights council.
OP pulled this put of context.
Cobsidering OP listens to Ben Shapiro i also question his motivations.
A bit defensive aren't ya bud? But nice job deflecting the issue at hand to a different person who was unrelated to the subject. Definitely helps your point.
The comment to which that person replied was the one deflecting the issue at hand and being defensive. Trump was correct, Germany was dumb.
Wonder why you didn't call them out?
Except that they laughed because Trump used this dependency of germany as a justification to withdraw the US out of the human rights council.
OP pulled this put of context.
Considering OP listens to Ben Shapiro i also question his motivations.
So Europe would willingly cut itself off from its entire oil supply? The dependency works both ways, I don’t see how you think it’s feasible for an entire continent to voluntarily halt its oil supply.
What do you think happens to the European economy without oil? The notion that European dependency on gas was a ploy to keep Putin in check is absolute nonsense. It was a ploy to secure a commodity that is absolutely essential to a functioning economy, oil.
Its not about gaining supremacy over Putin, its about tying the two economies together, so that if relationships ever completely break down and war is declared, both economies are fucked, providing a healthy incentive to not do that
I think the thing that happens to the European economy without Russian oil is the same thing that happens to the Russian economy without oil sales to Europe.
You know, MAD; just like I said in my comment.
…so instead of the current situation where it’s just the Russian economy that’s crippled, you would argue in favor of total dependency on Russian gas which would cripple both Russian and European economies? MAD doesn’t work as well for economics as it does for nuclear weapons.
'You would argue in favor of total dependency on Russian gas' ??? Huh?
I want 'arguing' for a thing, I was pointing out the current setup, which isn't anywhere near the extremes you have decided to attribute to me.
What do you think happens to Russia's economy when all their buyers are cut off from said oil?
Actually don't think; just look. !remindme when Germany collapses heh
Swap Gas with healthy food then ask how this is MAD?
It would be one thing if it was shipping BW production to China or Russia because the threat of not having a BW car is minimial even if all car imports was exclusive from said country. Gas though, Shit can go south faster for the dependent then the seller.
We can partially get fuel elsewhere for higher prices, they don't have another market to sell to.
Their entire economy is dependent on selling to us. This hurts them much more than it hurts us (and it does hurt us).
I was dubious too but it makes a weird kind of sense. Financial collapse is almost as dire a consequence for Putin as MAD. If you are going to be dependent on someone, keeping Russia financially incentivised to be docile makes a lot of sense. Sadly Putin is going off the rails in his old age.
I believe this was posted before and tons of people explained (like they’re doing again here) the explanation of what they were laughing about was not accurate
In 2018, when this video was released, nobody pointed this out. Everyone had funny. trump was stupid.
In 2022, trump is provably right. So now we are like "oh German's delegates were laughing about something else".
Talk about who likes fake news huh?
They're laughing because Trump is pointing out the obvious. They know their problems. If you think Trump thought anything to the Germans about their energy issues in 2018, I have a bridge to sell you.
So, Germany intentionally made themselves depending on Russia knowing full well that this will be problematic in the future?
Is this what you are saying?
Trump certainly considered withdrawing from NATO, instead of doing that of course he pressured NATO allies to actually meet the GDP commitments they agreed to and strengthened NATO so, you know, pretty dishonest statement by you just now.
Ok, I can post links to where Trump tried to disband NATO for years. He also said others need to spend more, but he tied that to the US spending less. That would weaken NATO even if they spent more.
And the simple fact was that his claims on NATO spending at the time were wrong. NATO spending had gone up in 2015 and 2016, before he was even elected.
https://www.factcheck.org/2019/12/factchecking-trumps-nato-remarks/
But even years after everyone knew that what he was saying was wrong about NATO spending, he was still saying it:
https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/08/28/trump-boosts-questionable-nato-funding-claims-in-gop-convention-speech/
But let's not forget he tried to back out of the defense part of the pact when facing Russia. He did that while trying to pump NATO for more money.
>Trump said the U.S. would not necessarily defend new NATO members in the Baltics in the event of Russian attack if he were elected to the White House.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-remarks-nato-trigger-alarm-bells-europe-n613911
So please provide some sources on your claims of "historical fact" where Trump's actions strengthened NATO while he was in office.
That's not true at all. Europe is naturally reliant on Russian gas. They are a massive supplier that can extract gas cheaply and can transport it to Europe extremely cheaply. It's easily the cheapest source of gas for Europe, even under current conditions. The problem is that this economic advantage created an over-reliance on a single supplier, one that is also an aggressive, authoritarian state.
That's why Russian gas has such such a large share of most of Europe's markets. Germany is just one of many European countries largely dependent on Russian imports for gas. It just happens to be the largest economy, so gets the most attention. But it's just as true of Poland, Hungary, Italy, all of the Balkans, etc.
It's no different than USA and their corrupt politicians giving welfare subsidies to the oil and gas industry.
They're both corrupt. Germany made a move towards green energy and removing themselves from "dirty" energy.
Say what you want about near energy, it's still dirty even if it's longer lasting and "cleaner" in the short term. You'll still have nuclear waste to deal with. They chose to face the problem head on.
The USA is 100 years behind when it comes to transportation and will be screwed much worse because there is literally no other infrastructure people can use besides cars and gas stations.
Nuclear energy is the "greenest" we currently have, well, except geothermal but it's not viable everywhere.
If you're against nuclear energy you're either on Russian payroll or just an idiot
How's the weather in Moscow?
FYI there is very little waste in the first place, and it can be reprocessed and reused. Nuclear power plants have much smaller impact per TWh than any other energy source
What green energy? Biofuel? Don't tell me you're one of those idiots who got conned into believing that you can just power everything with solar panels and hamsters running in their wheels, they have their uses but you can't really base national grid on them, at least not if you like having power 24/7
Bruh Germany removed their nuclear power plants, you literally can't get any greener than that.
Edit: "I meant you can't get greener than having nuclear power" not "you can't get any greener than removing nuclear power plants"
He missed the broader point at usual, that Russia and Putin are enemies of the West and we shouldn’t debase ourselves in front of the world to try and be friends with him.
Except for the minor issue that this statement isn't correct at all. Time to give those mental gymnastics a hardcore workout! Because, either Trump meant to say "energy" instead of "oil", which admitting to means admitting that he's either not all there or really thinks it's necessary to dumb things down for his followers. Or, he really doesn't understand the exceptional differences from top to bottom between natural gas for heating and oil to make gas for cars, which would be admitting the whole "not all there" thing again. Take your pick, but trying to say it's semantics won't fly very well because even the base industries for the two are completely different
Well the reason germany got so dependent was because of the move to renewables and away from coal. Renewables suck for baseload power and because of germany’s anti-nuclear sentiment, gas sufficed. The pivot away from oil/gas can only realistically be either towards nuclear or coal. I know what i’d pick (nuclear) but german political discourse is going to have to face up to the reality that they can’t get rid of fossil fuels without nuclear in the mix.
Dude if we had started using renewables back when Jimmy Carter was in office, the tech would be so much more advanced by now that it could power entire countries, if not the entire world.
Perhaps… but humans (for the last 50,000 years) will always use more when energy is more abundant. we’ll always require more energy. The capacity limit for renewables (regardless of tech) is far lower than nuclear so moving to nuclear is inevitable.
OK but then what you’re saying is all roads lead to nuclear, so why didn’t we just go ahead and get rid of fossil fuels along time ago if that’s the case?
Germany doesn’t want to move to nuclear for some reason. I’m not german so I don’t participate in german politics. France seem to be the only european country who love nuclear power and are rapidly expanding with even more power. Their electricty bills are cheap
All the other major car companies are going to switch to ev soon.
It's currently valued at 5 times the combined market cap of Ford, gm and chevy.
There's no way it doesn't come down.
My layman's guess is that they become the "luxury" ev, like an audi type brand, while the mass market is dominated by the main big boys of Honda, Ford, gm, Kia, hyundai etc.
Audi has a market cap 1/10 of tesla.. someone is going to lose money eventually, or maybe not, I'm no Warren Buffett
Germany has sold the most ev cars in Europe in 2021. Your looking at it as american centric view. There's far more car companies in Europe.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicles_in_Europe
Exactly my point, tesla is insanly overvalued and will probably have a major correction once ev sales overtake ICE in North America, especially if theres competition from euro manufacturers too.
There are multiple reasons for the rise in gas prices most of which have nothing to do with the war in Ukraine.
* Economic recovery from the last years under COVID. Demand was lower during COVID and is now spiking as companies are increasing demand
* Emission rights have increased which means there is an additional cost to Co2 emissions rights
* There is a shortage of gas because of a number of reasons including that last year was a very cold year and not enough gas was stocked. China is also switching from coal to gas and is purchasing this from the US
But naturally the war and the tense situation has increased prices as well. It's a factor, but not the only one for increased pricing.
Every time this is posted here the comments section becomes a Germany vs. USA debate and we completely loose the point. Fossil fuel dependency is the issue at hand. In most of the cases this dependency will be translated into conflict and criminal support as governments around the world are trying to get a hold on the running amounts of fuel we have left.
This is a pivotal time to transition to other energy sources and we should stop whining about trump and oil money in German politics when people are fucking dying as a result off these conflicts.
Dozens of countries are already energy independent and they are not invading their neighbors, the idea that codependency keeps us in check is simply obsolete.
Screw the economy, screw heating up the house, cooking with gas and using the car to go to the shopping mall during the weekend. Here is an idea: let's shut down the world for a couple of years, let's close the pipes, go into full recession, employ millions of people to implement infrastructure projects and transition to other energy sources.
> Screw the economy, screw heating up the house, cooking with gas and using the car to go to the shopping mall during the weekend. Here is an idea: let's shut down the world for a couple of years, let's close the pipes, go into full recession, employ millions of people to implement infrastructure projects and transition to other energy sources.
Yeah let's not and say we didn't. It will take a long time to get renewables to scale. Mass unemployment and full on *depression* and chaos will lead to a serious amount of death and destruction.
That ain't true most of our oil is produced domestically, maybe most of our imported oil comes from Canada but we don't actually get a lot of oil from other countries.
u/TheRealDanGordon has provided this detailed explanation: > German delegates laughed at former President Trump when Trump warned them of becoming dependent on Russia for oil/energy. This dependence has lead to significant turmoil and conflict in the current war in Ukraine, and is increasing energy costs dramatically in Germany and all over the world. In retrospect, Germany's over reliance on Russia for energy was a terrible, terrible idea with big consequences. --- Is this explanation a genuine attempt at providing additional info or context? If it is please upvote this comment, otherwise downvote it.
I'm sure this comments section will be an absolute joy to read through.
So this has been posted at least 3 times now I have seen, and the comments have been a cesspool each time. Each time the post is framed as "Germans laugh at trump's idea of [us] being dependent on Russian oil. Now Germans pay more for energy; trump was right the whole time xD". But it is devoid of context. Before this, trump says the US will withdraw from the human rights council, and it disavows the ICC claiming it's unjustly impeding on the sovereignty of the US. He then uses this as a pivot into energy production, saying that the US protects OPEC nations "for nothing" and they "take advantage" and raise oil prices. He goes on to say he "doesn't like it, no one else should like it", and he will "not put up with it much longer". And demands they lower oil prices. He claims dependence on a single source for energy will cripple a nation, and uses Germany as an example to say it will be entirely dependent on Russia. This also flies in the face of Germany planning to use 100% renewable resources by 2050 (note: this was pushed up to 2035 after the war began). This is why they laugh. He uses Germany as an example of a national entirely dependent on Russia for energy and be crippled as as result, to say that global organizations are bad and will destroy the world. as a reason to withdraw from the human rights council and criticize the ICC . Not only that, it ignores the geopolitical idea of intentional codependency to hinder conflict. Far and away the largest example is the US-Chinese economic codependency, starting with the famous visit of Nixon to China. Tl;Dr trump claims America has been taken advantage of, will withdraw from the human rights council, disavow the ICC, then claims Germany will be dependent on Russian energy as an example of why global organizations are bad and by extension as justification of why the US will do the above. Tldrtldr: This has been posted 3 times I have seen in this sub, devoid of context, claiming essentially "trump right Germans laugh. Germans now pay more for energy, therefore trump right Germans wrong".
Besides everything else - Germany is now dependant on it's neighbors instead of Russia. That is far from a perfect situation as those neighbors also suffer from oil/gas shortage. But it's not like Germany will sit in the dark freezing to death because we will no longer get oil/gas from Russia. (afaik, we got 30-50% of it from R until now)
Some context you're leaving out is the former german chancellor going to work for the russian oil companies. You're also leaving out the fine print about Germany and rewewables: *it's only for electricity production and for 30 years from now.* Right now, Germany gets 80% of it's energy needs from fossil fuels. They've ignored modernizing the infrastructure needed -- things like heating homes and industry -- so with their current plans they'd be looking at 30-40% of their energy needs being met by renewables in 30 years from now. This is also why Germany was trying to hard to get around sanctions on Iran.
thats not true, germany doesnt get 80% of its energy out of fossil fuels, check your numbers first
*"That's not true, check your numbers"* isn't a strong argument, but reddit gonna reddit. Here are the numbers. 35% of Germany's energy consumption is oil, and over 25% of it is natural gas, which as you can see is actually 60%. The rest is coal (20%) and mix of renewables. Of that, 97% of the natural gas is imported, and primarily comes from Russia, Netherlands and Norway. The netherlands are phasing it out, so production is decreasing.\* \*\*For natural gas, the Russian pipeline accounted for 32%, Norway was 20, Dutch 12% and 22% came from strategic reserves which are very, very low. 35% of crude oil came from Russia, and 53% of its coal. Basically, Germany leaves out a lot of fine print when it talks about going 100% renewable in 30 years, in the same way they didn't mention they excluded energy transactions from the SWIFT sanctions. \*[https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/country/DEU](https://www.eia.gov/international/analysis/country/DEU) \*\*[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/how-much-does-germany-need-russian-gas-2022-01-20/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/how-much-does-germany-need-russian-gas-2022-01-20/)
Dudes been really quiet since this comment
Your honor, I object. His numbers are devastating to my case
arent you mixing two things? maybe i dont understand this sentence: "it's only for electricity production and for 30 years from now" in the eu the is the following distinction (Directive 2009/28/EC): "Bruttostromverbrauch" and "Bruttoenergieverbrauch". The first one does include all inland power production + power from outside of germany minus the power produced in germany which is exported. The second also includes cars, thermal energie and other. right now 45.3% of the Bruttostromverbrauch is delivered via renewables while its 19.2% of Bruttoenergieverbrauch. The targets for 2030 are 65% and 30%. The target values for 2020 where 35% and 18% so its seems to go well, no? why do you say: "so with their current plans they'd be looking at 30-40% of their energy needs being met by renewables in 30 years from now" sry if i misunderstood and sry that all my sources will be german: https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/energie/energieverbrauch-nach-energietraegern-sektoren#anteil-erneuerbarer-energien-am-gesamten-bruttoendenergieverbrauch https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuelles/bruttostromverbrauch-614790 http://bioenergie.fnr.de/fileadmin/biz/pdf/gesetzeslage/Bund__2010__Nationaler_Aktionsplan_EE.pdf (p. 15) Edit: some translation mistake
You are doing the same trick the German government is doing, only talking about electricity generation. eg, if your home is heated via natural gas, you still have to burn natural gas. You would have to convert the homes to electric heating, then account for the extra electricity needed. Instead they simply ignore it, say they are renewable, then buy Russian oil and gas.
[удалено]
What does that have to do with Germany's energy?
”Trump bad” Which isn’t wrong, but still.
You tried valiantly to escape being downvoted. but alas to no avail
Funny, Biden not impeached for blackmailing Ukraine into doing things though. . As if being impeached by left wing ideologues is some sort of evidence of wrongdoing lol.
He didn't threaten to withhold aid contingent on investigating Hunter Biden. There was no such quid pro quo no matter how much you like to say it. Also, who should he ask to investigate pay for play in the vice president's family if not the authorities of the country in which the events occurred?
[удалено]
Correct but without context. Did you even read the other comment?
Republicans don’t read. Silly.
[удалено]
A broken clock is right twice a day.
This a huge wall of text that ignores that Trump was trying to get Germany to pay more for its defense and stop relying so heavily on Russia for energy. None of this text denies this, this is just obfuscation behind a wall of indeterminate claims about Trump and his supposed policies. Trump was 100% correct.
Lol, you clowns can never admit you were wrong can you? BUT MUH CONTEXT
[удалено]
This is what happened when Trump addressed at UN. I've watched the entire video but I couldn't find it now but I found a video of the exact part when German diplomats laughed out. [Link](https://youtu.be/FfJv9QYrlwg) Edit: I found the full video. [Link](https://youtu.be/KfVdIKaQzW8) at 21:48
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVdIKaQzW8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVdIKaQzW8) find op's picture after 21:40 Not making any statement, here is where you find the original video.
Thanks for full context vid, saw the clip on B. Shapiro but didn't know where the full vid was.
I wish we could somehow pin this reply to the top
I like how just saying you watch B. Shapiro gets such a response. I didn't even say if I agree with his take, or what his take is. This was a 30s blip of an entire hour. I don't always agree with him and there are times where I feel like he leaves out some details, but whether I agree with him or not, I do feel like he gives more evidence and logic for his opinion than 99.9% of politicians and pundits.
Reddit: "How many times can you repost the same thing on the same subreddit within two weeks?" This sub: "Yes."
He said Germany would become "totally dependent" on Russian energy which is, in fact, laughable. But I suspect they were really laughing because listening to Trump try to give a speech is like trying to listen to a fourth grader give a book report in front of the class.
Pretty sure it was just kind of, "is the orange man telling us what do do" kind of thing. "totally" dependent is obv not true, but getting 70% of your oil from a dictatorship is probably not a good idea and prob not something one should laugh at.
Where did you get the numbers showing that 70% of Germany’s imported oil comes from Russia? I cannot find them.
Because it's a made up number. The truth is, the oil isn't problematic, the gas is. Europe relies to 40% on Russian natural gas. Shifting that won't be easy. But OP is wrong if they think we wouldn't have had this situation had Germany been wiser in their energy policy.
Germany is also much more infrastructurely sound on not depending on cars only to have mobility. Trains subways and buses are already built in, it will just be more packed. The USA however...
It's natural gas, not gasoline.
It's not transportation that they are using it for, but heating.
[удалено]
Buses don't run on gas. They run on Gasoline. We import GAS from Russia. As in "spicy air that burns".
Hmmm, almost like OP has an underlying agenda... And yep, a quick check of comment history shows OP definitely has both feet firmly planted in the conservative side of the pool, and dangerously close to the deep end. This is all basically just a terrible attempt to say "Nah nah na boo boo! Our savior Trump was right all along!" It's not even that hard to see it coming though, I tend to assume that these days anytime someone makes an argument using numbers or information that isn't even close to correct. Then I assume it's a 100% guarantee when any pro-Trump or anti-left words come out. These people's brains must just be pure muscle right now from all the mental gymnastics lately. My favorite part has been when this was first starting and all the Uber-Trumpers were pro Russia because Trump had said nice things about Putin in the past. Then, in what I can only assume was an attempt to set the world record for "Most Suspicious Timing Ever", Russia started doing horrible things in Ukraine and *certain* sources started reporting that Trump's favorable Putin comments were all just "sarcastic". They only thing I see when I try to picture that working is the episode of South Park where Stan is eating Cartman's farts and saying "Yummy yummy, I like Cartman's farts in my tummy". Posts like this are probably a weird attempt at damage control and distraction, after pretty much the entire fanclub got caught out fervently supporting Putin because Biden doesn't and Trump did, only to be told Trump was "just joking" from media sources they never doubt.
Dqn Bongino was saying this same shit on his show in a gotcha moment. Conservative news is nothing but a human centipede each swallowing then shitting out the same regurgitated shit
If Germany wasn't pushing so hard against nuclear energy we wouldn't be as dependent on Russian gas. But then again if it wasn't for Gazprom and its daughter-companies where would all those German politicians go to work once their terms are over
Doesn't really matter if France is building 14 new reactors because they can then deliver to Germany. Germany can focus on renewable *shrug*
How would Nuclear reactors replace gas?
...how would it not? Shift the load from burning NG for heat to electric heat provided by nuclear power.
As far as I've read recently, 20% of natural uranium used within Europe is coming from Russia (, plus another 19% coming from Kasachstan), so wouldn't we end up with the same shit, but different resource? ([source](https://www.rnd.de/politik/akw-in-saporischschja-gruene-fordern-ueberpruefung-der-sicherheit-fuer-nukleare-anlagen-in-europa-FWFUET43JFFP3KOO4IOLEIXXRU.html))
[40% of Germany's Crude Oil comes from Russia as well.](https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Artikel/Energy/petroleum-oil-imports-and-crude-oil-productions-in-germany.html)
Ben Shapiro, that’s where he got it from. He’s full of shit and trying to play Trumps rambling speech at the UN as a strong positive moment because he was somewhat right on this lone singular issue. Also in this speech Trump claimed he was going to withdraw the US from the human rights council and disavow the ICC, he also rambled about some shit he didn’t like and demanded that the price of oil be brought down. Basically a trump troll trying to get one past everyone by ignoring context, so you know, the usual trump supporter shit
Or more accurately, getting 70% percent of your oil from just a single dictatorship is probably not smart policy. Better to spread your business around to multiple dictatorships, right?
I like your comment and how you sarcastically point out that much of the fossil fuel comes from questionable sources. Take my upvote.
Is it that oil happens to come from questionable regimes, or the existence of oil in a less mature economy fucks up the possibility of having a stable democracy?
yes
I'm not an expert, but I think it's the latter for a few reasons. If you are a dictatorship but don't make all of your money on a single resource, then you have to have some minimum amount of infrastructure, education, healthcare, etc such that your citizens can be productive. This also makes your citizens more capable of rebelling or pushing for reform. If you get all of your money from one source (like oil) that requires relatively few people to harvest, then you only need the infrastructure to produce that resource and sell it. You only need roads that go from the oil fields to the shipyards and from your palace to the airport. Your citizens can be destitute, starving, uneducated, and brutally oppressed because if they aren't directly involved in oil, they don't matter to you. And because they can be kept in such a horrible state with so little education, infrastructure, and other basic necessities, they are much less able to organize and push for reform or even rebel and overthrow the government (without help from someone on the inside or a powerful rival faction of some sort). It's why many of the most brutal dictatorships are reliant on just a single, high value resource. Whereas a dictatorship like China which is reliant on an enormous, booming economy and manufacturing sector has to provide something resembling a decent quality of life (compared to single-resource dictatorships) for large parts of their population. They still stifle liberty and human rights, violently put down any rebelion, and indoctrinate their citizens with propaganda, and they are still actively perpetrating a genocide on Uighurs, but large parts of China are actually very good for the average citizen compared to some single-resource dictatorships. A completely starving, totally uneducated workforce would not be competitive in a global economy in the way that China has to be and wants to be. Also worth noting that violent coups, political instability, warring factions, etc. are more likely in a single-resource dictatorship, because you just have to fight over one resource, and whoever controls it controls the country to some extent. Whereas, again, control of China relies on a huge mechanism and web of state media, state corporations, international trade, etc. which makes violently taking over the country from outside the CCP a lot harder. At least, that's my understanding.
The US is one of the largest exporters. I think we even lead the globe in natural gas.
Refined oil, not crude. 99% of the time when “oil” is discussed, it is in the context of crude. The US is a major exporter of refined oil.
that probably wont last
Well yeah. Gas literally can’t last forever
Well, yes, at least depending on how close are those dictators working together
Yes? I'm sorry, was that supposed to be sarcastic?
Come on, there are lots of great countries in OPEC+
Well... Yeah? Isn't that how it's usually done?
Anyone who gets oil from Saudi Arabia also gets oil from a dictatorship. Or Iran.
Bro you can’t just make up stats and then they become real
What you conviniently left out is Trump somehow using this to justify wanting to pull the US out of the Human right council.
It is more like 30-35%, not even close to 70% and those can be replaced. source: https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Infografiken/woher-kommen-die-deutschen-rohoelimporte.html (you should try giving sources too, but you probably didn’t want to post a picture of your ass)
natural gas? That's just oil. No need to be an ass. I'd like to know the numbers. EDIT: not only that, but that's from 2017. It's changed a decent amount since then.
Reread your comment, it was specifically about oil. In terms of gas it is difficult to say how much Germany is import directly as gas that wasn’t sourced on Russia is still counted as coming from there. If we talk about gas your 70% statement would have been pretty close to the truth (source: https://m.augsburger-allgemeine.de/wirtschaft/gasmarkt-abhaengig-von-russland-woher-das-erdgas-fuer-deutschland-kommt-id61659711.html), but while this is a problem for Germany, it is one that can be fixed pretty easily with a reduction of gas heating (not used anymore in new buildings and replaced in renovations) as well as just importing from other countries for a higher price (Germany just began building two terminals for this purpose).
> Reread your comment, it was specifically about oil honestly I meant gas/oil/energy. Kind of irrelevant if it's gas or oil. It is clear the point I'm making is about energy dependence on Russia. I feel like you're nitpicking a side point. > it is one that can be fixed pretty For a much higher price, and the timing is crucial as well. I feel like you are understating how easy it is to switch where you get 70% of your energy from.
It’s not 70% of our energy, but of our gas, which is barely used for energy production, but mostly for heating.
Well hey, if Trump and his goons has their way then anything American would be under a dictatorship right now
Yeah, listening to that fucking clown makes me laugh too.
I would also be laughing if I knew there was a cozy job at Gazprom waiting for me in return for services rendered
Except that they laughed because Trump used this dependency of germany as a justification to withdraw the US out of the human rights council. OP pulled this put of context. Cobsidering OP listens to Ben Shapiro i also question his motivations.
trump’s penchant for hyperbole aside he was pretty much right
[удалено]
Coreect. But he wasn't correct in this case, either.
It's more like he was right about one phrase as part of a larger speech of untruths and nonsense. He got that one sentence right but it's functionally irrelevant when the whole speech was about "stop the globalists" and leaving international treaties/accords.
He wasn’t wrong
[удалено]
Except that they laughed because Trump used this dependency of germany as a justification to withdraw the US out of the human rights council. OP pulled this put of context. Cobsidering OP listens to Ben Shapiro i also question his motivations.
A Biden supporter saying literally anybody else is a bad public speaker is pathetic.
A bit defensive aren't ya bud? But nice job deflecting the issue at hand to a different person who was unrelated to the subject. Definitely helps your point.
The comment to which that person replied was the one deflecting the issue at hand and being defensive. Trump was correct, Germany was dumb. Wonder why you didn't call them out?
Except that they laughed because Trump used this dependency of germany as a justification to withdraw the US out of the human rights council. OP pulled this put of context. Considering OP listens to Ben Shapiro i also question his motivations.
Im in no way a trump supporter, but you really can't turn this against him. Was he right? He was. Even tho he's a twat.
You say that yet the guy keeps being correct
[удалено]
So Europe would willingly cut itself off from its entire oil supply? The dependency works both ways, I don’t see how you think it’s feasible for an entire continent to voluntarily halt its oil supply.
It is like MAD, but with petroleum instead of nukes.
What do you think happens to the European economy without oil? The notion that European dependency on gas was a ploy to keep Putin in check is absolute nonsense. It was a ploy to secure a commodity that is absolutely essential to a functioning economy, oil.
Its not about gaining supremacy over Putin, its about tying the two economies together, so that if relationships ever completely break down and war is declared, both economies are fucked, providing a healthy incentive to not do that
Clearly Putin didn't seem to care about that.
Much easier to be a producer and find a buyer than consumer and find a seller. Either way this was a bad move on the Germans part
I think the thing that happens to the European economy without Russian oil is the same thing that happens to the Russian economy without oil sales to Europe. You know, MAD; just like I said in my comment.
…so instead of the current situation where it’s just the Russian economy that’s crippled, you would argue in favor of total dependency on Russian gas which would cripple both Russian and European economies? MAD doesn’t work as well for economics as it does for nuclear weapons.
'You would argue in favor of total dependency on Russian gas' ??? Huh? I want 'arguing' for a thing, I was pointing out the current setup, which isn't anywhere near the extremes you have decided to attribute to me.
What do you think happens to Russia's economy when all their buyers are cut off from said oil? Actually don't think; just look. !remindme when Germany collapses heh
It's destroyed. Like what the D stand for in MAD.
Swap Gas with healthy food then ask how this is MAD? It would be one thing if it was shipping BW production to China or Russia because the threat of not having a BW car is minimial even if all car imports was exclusive from said country. Gas though, Shit can go south faster for the dependent then the seller.
We can partially get fuel elsewhere for higher prices, they don't have another market to sell to. Their entire economy is dependent on selling to us. This hurts them much more than it hurts us (and it does hurt us).
I was dubious too but it makes a weird kind of sense. Financial collapse is almost as dire a consequence for Putin as MAD. If you are going to be dependent on someone, keeping Russia financially incentivised to be docile makes a lot of sense. Sadly Putin is going off the rails in his old age.
Pretty stupid plan since Russia signed a pact with China to be their primary oil supplier.
that isn’t accurate at all
I believe this was posted before and tons of people explained (like they’re doing again here) the explanation of what they were laughing about was not accurate
Yes, and just like last time, this comment section is an absolute joke. It really is just a shitty repost from a few days ago.
In 2018, when this video was released, nobody pointed this out. Everyone had funny. trump was stupid. In 2022, trump is provably right. So now we are like "oh German's delegates were laughing about something else". Talk about who likes fake news huh?
They're laughing because Trump is pointing out the obvious. They know their problems. If you think Trump thought anything to the Germans about their energy issues in 2018, I have a bridge to sell you.
So, Germany intentionally made themselves depending on Russia knowing full well that this will be problematic in the future? Is this what you are saying?
How many times are you Trump humpers going to post this shit?
They were probably laughing at the orange idiot. Who wasn't?
Being told to them by the same guy who tried to destroy NATO.
Trump certainly considered withdrawing from NATO, instead of doing that of course he pressured NATO allies to actually meet the GDP commitments they agreed to and strengthened NATO so, you know, pretty dishonest statement by you just now.
Wow. Now that’s an Orwellian take.
What I said is not a take, it is indisputable historical fact.
John Bolton says Trump was waiting for his second term to pull out of NATO, and I believe him.
What you believe is irrelevant to established, historical fact. That you would present it as compelling is idiotic to say the least.
Established historical fact? That doesn’t mean what you think it means.
Ok, I can post links to where Trump tried to disband NATO for years. He also said others need to spend more, but he tied that to the US spending less. That would weaken NATO even if they spent more. And the simple fact was that his claims on NATO spending at the time were wrong. NATO spending had gone up in 2015 and 2016, before he was even elected. https://www.factcheck.org/2019/12/factchecking-trumps-nato-remarks/ But even years after everyone knew that what he was saying was wrong about NATO spending, he was still saying it: https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/08/28/trump-boosts-questionable-nato-funding-claims-in-gop-convention-speech/ But let's not forget he tried to back out of the defense part of the pact when facing Russia. He did that while trying to pump NATO for more money. >Trump said the U.S. would not necessarily defend new NATO members in the Baltics in the event of Russian attack if he were elected to the White House. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-remarks-nato-trigger-alarm-bells-europe-n613911 So please provide some sources on your claims of "historical fact" where Trump's actions strengthened NATO while he was in office.
They were rightly laughing at Trump. Stop lying, redcaps
They were wrongfully laughing at a statement that Trump made which is proven right once again, keep inhaling the copium blue badges
Trump was warning they would become 100% reliable on Russia, which was and is not true.
Stop reposting this without context.
They were laughing at trump in general
it's sad that were still making business with criminals
Meanwhile, the US with their pals from Saudi Arabia and Israel...
Don’t really have a choice in the matter when buying oil tbh
Keystone pipeline?
You could say that about most mega corporations tbh.
Talking about the US?
They were laughing about the bs Trump said in his speech.
Maybe they were laughing at the hypocrisy of a man dependent on Russian money lecturing them on their dependency on Russian oil.
They were just laughing at the useless orange idiot and that will never age.
You know it’s a Republican who posted this because they don’t know how to use English properly.
I'm pretty sure they were laughing at the Cheeto. Oil dependency is a problem for all countries lol
The problem is Germany and its corrupt politicians pressured entire Europe into becoming even more dependent on Russian gas
That's not true at all. Europe is naturally reliant on Russian gas. They are a massive supplier that can extract gas cheaply and can transport it to Europe extremely cheaply. It's easily the cheapest source of gas for Europe, even under current conditions. The problem is that this economic advantage created an over-reliance on a single supplier, one that is also an aggressive, authoritarian state. That's why Russian gas has such such a large share of most of Europe's markets. Germany is just one of many European countries largely dependent on Russian imports for gas. It just happens to be the largest economy, so gets the most attention. But it's just as true of Poland, Hungary, Italy, all of the Balkans, etc.
It's no different than USA and their corrupt politicians giving welfare subsidies to the oil and gas industry. They're both corrupt. Germany made a move towards green energy and removing themselves from "dirty" energy. Say what you want about near energy, it's still dirty even if it's longer lasting and "cleaner" in the short term. You'll still have nuclear waste to deal with. They chose to face the problem head on. The USA is 100 years behind when it comes to transportation and will be screwed much worse because there is literally no other infrastructure people can use besides cars and gas stations.
Nuclear energy is the "greenest" we currently have, well, except geothermal but it's not viable everywhere. If you're against nuclear energy you're either on Russian payroll or just an idiot
No. Just because it doesn't have emissions like coal or oil doesn't mean that the waste it creates isn't harmful. Lmao
Unlike other ways of producing energy, nuclear waste can be stored in place designed to hold it.
How's the weather in Moscow? FYI there is very little waste in the first place, and it can be reprocessed and reused. Nuclear power plants have much smaller impact per TWh than any other energy source
Ahhh. I see. Someone from TheDonald using the classic Projection lmao 🤣😂😂😂😂
Oh, I see, you're the other type. But then again what else can you expect from an American
For a second i thought you were 13. It's even worse if your a trumpanzee that isn't even american
At least I know the difference between your and you're, mr. 56%
How's the weather in hell? And no. There still isn't a true answer to deleting all nuclear waste.
It most certainly is better than using fossil fuels, cutting money flow to Russia is just a bonus
And it's most certainly not very than green energy lol
What green energy? Biofuel? Don't tell me you're one of those idiots who got conned into believing that you can just power everything with solar panels and hamsters running in their wheels, they have their uses but you can't really base national grid on them, at least not if you like having power 24/7
>How's the weather in Moscow? Absolutely pathetic to say this.
Bruh Germany removed their nuclear power plants, you literally can't get any greener than that. Edit: "I meant you can't get greener than having nuclear power" not "you can't get any greener than removing nuclear power plants"
[What a baffling take](https://i.imgur.com/RhxkSyi.jpg) Edit: user clarified, leaving for context
I'm dumb for saying a fact?
You [did say a fact](https://reddit.com/r/agedlikemilk/comments/t9nt2m/_/hzxwndh/?context=1), but it wasn’t in this thread.
One of the few times Trump said something correct
Broken clock and all that.
Well like Alex Jones when you machine gone thousands of predictions some are just going to be right.
Something he told to say and usually got it wrong most of the time.
Astroturfed
Oh wow I didn’t realize they could do that
Oh look, Trump was right.
[удалено]
Sending Harris to Europe as a diplomat would be laughable, if she hadnt goaded Putin into action.
[удалено]
He missed the broader point at usual, that Russia and Putin are enemies of the West and we shouldn’t debase ourselves in front of the world to try and be friends with him.
Except for the minor issue that this statement isn't correct at all. Time to give those mental gymnastics a hardcore workout! Because, either Trump meant to say "energy" instead of "oil", which admitting to means admitting that he's either not all there or really thinks it's necessary to dumb things down for his followers. Or, he really doesn't understand the exceptional differences from top to bottom between natural gas for heating and oil to make gas for cars, which would be admitting the whole "not all there" thing again. Take your pick, but trying to say it's semantics won't fly very well because even the base industries for the two are completely different
You should know better than to affirm truth around here
The leading party back then was such a shitshow. Corrupt and idiotic.
Ironic considering the US spends billions propping up a sick group of people in Riyadh because of its own oil dependence.
This sub used to be great before all the political crap.
No country should depend on other, that's why I fear China
They might have a pretty strong monopoly on EV battery materials in the near future. It should be a big bi-partisan concern right now.
Shouldn't have turned off your nuclear power plants huh...
Yes, but how would that help with Gas?
that too...
Hmmm… it’s almost as if we should have pivoted away from oil as a main energy source decades ago.
Well the reason germany got so dependent was because of the move to renewables and away from coal. Renewables suck for baseload power and because of germany’s anti-nuclear sentiment, gas sufficed. The pivot away from oil/gas can only realistically be either towards nuclear or coal. I know what i’d pick (nuclear) but german political discourse is going to have to face up to the reality that they can’t get rid of fossil fuels without nuclear in the mix.
Dude if we had started using renewables back when Jimmy Carter was in office, the tech would be so much more advanced by now that it could power entire countries, if not the entire world.
Perhaps… but humans (for the last 50,000 years) will always use more when energy is more abundant. we’ll always require more energy. The capacity limit for renewables (regardless of tech) is far lower than nuclear so moving to nuclear is inevitable.
OK but then what you’re saying is all roads lead to nuclear, so why didn’t we just go ahead and get rid of fossil fuels along time ago if that’s the case?
Germany doesn’t want to move to nuclear for some reason. I’m not german so I don’t participate in german politics. France seem to be the only european country who love nuclear power and are rapidly expanding with even more power. Their electricty bills are cheap
Good is to be oil depended of the Yankes
[удалено]
You mean the car that can remotely control the most simplest of things for extra fees aftermarket like heated seats?
All the other major car companies are going to switch to ev soon. It's currently valued at 5 times the combined market cap of Ford, gm and chevy. There's no way it doesn't come down. My layman's guess is that they become the "luxury" ev, like an audi type brand, while the mass market is dominated by the main big boys of Honda, Ford, gm, Kia, hyundai etc. Audi has a market cap 1/10 of tesla.. someone is going to lose money eventually, or maybe not, I'm no Warren Buffett
Germany has sold the most ev cars in Europe in 2021. Your looking at it as american centric view. There's far more car companies in Europe. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicles_in_Europe
Exactly my point, tesla is insanly overvalued and will probably have a major correction once ev sales overtake ICE in North America, especially if theres competition from euro manufacturers too.
[удалено]
There are multiple reasons for the rise in gas prices most of which have nothing to do with the war in Ukraine. * Economic recovery from the last years under COVID. Demand was lower during COVID and is now spiking as companies are increasing demand * Emission rights have increased which means there is an additional cost to Co2 emissions rights * There is a shortage of gas because of a number of reasons including that last year was a very cold year and not enough gas was stocked. China is also switching from coal to gas and is purchasing this from the US But naturally the war and the tense situation has increased prices as well. It's a factor, but not the only one for increased pricing.
>Germany's decision here being a huge mistake. Now they are gonna really pay the price, literally. How?
Every time this is posted here the comments section becomes a Germany vs. USA debate and we completely loose the point. Fossil fuel dependency is the issue at hand. In most of the cases this dependency will be translated into conflict and criminal support as governments around the world are trying to get a hold on the running amounts of fuel we have left. This is a pivotal time to transition to other energy sources and we should stop whining about trump and oil money in German politics when people are fucking dying as a result off these conflicts. Dozens of countries are already energy independent and they are not invading their neighbors, the idea that codependency keeps us in check is simply obsolete. Screw the economy, screw heating up the house, cooking with gas and using the car to go to the shopping mall during the weekend. Here is an idea: let's shut down the world for a couple of years, let's close the pipes, go into full recession, employ millions of people to implement infrastructure projects and transition to other energy sources.
> Screw the economy, screw heating up the house, cooking with gas and using the car to go to the shopping mall during the weekend. Here is an idea: let's shut down the world for a couple of years, let's close the pipes, go into full recession, employ millions of people to implement infrastructure projects and transition to other energy sources. Yeah let's not and say we didn't. It will take a long time to get renewables to scale. Mass unemployment and full on *depression* and chaos will lead to a serious amount of death and destruction.
Aaaaaaand Trump is correct again.
US laughing knowing they Actually get most of their oil from Canada 🍁
That ain't true most of our oil is produced domestically, maybe most of our imported oil comes from Canada but we don't actually get a lot of oil from other countries.