Someone’s looking for a payday. Or attention
Farmer sues Volkswagen over climate change
A German court on Friday is set to begin hearing a case brought against Volkswagen by a farmer who claims the automaker is partly responsible for the impact that global warming is having on his family business.
“Farmers are already being hit harder and faster by climate change than expected,” the plaintiff, Ulf Allhoff-Cramer, told reporters this week ahead of the hearing before a regional court in the western town of Detmold. (snip)4
In the latest case, Allhoff-Cramer is calling for VW — the world’s second-biggest car manufacturer based on sales — to end production of combustion engine vehicles by 2030.
German automakers rejected a similar demand from environmental groups last year. (snip)
The company said lawmakers should decide on climate change measures.
“Disputes in civil courts through lawsuits against individual companies singled out for this purpose, on the other hand, are not the place or the means to do justice to this responsible task,” VW said. “We will defend this position and ask for the lawsuit to be dismissed.”
VW’s lawyers should be asking many pointed questions of Allhoff-Cramer, such as
- Do you use fossil fueled vehicles in your farming operations?
- Do you use any fossil fueled implements, like mowers and tractors?
- Do you own any fossil fueled personal vehicles? If so, why have you not replaced them with EVs?
- Why do you have cows, which climate cultists say are bad for ‘climate change?
Yeah, the photo above comes from the article. These Warmists need to mind their own business, stop trying to force their cult beliefs on Everyone Else
These pro-birthers need to mind their own business, stop trying to force their cult beliefs on Everyone Else.
But they’re not. The people of each state, through their legislatures, can decide for themselves whether to make abortion legal or not.
That sounds great! Even better, actually let the voters decide for themselves. Would you be content to allow a vote on a proposition that allows abortions?
For example in Arizona.
Almost every Republican candidate for the General Assembly in the Commonwealth of Kentucky include being prolife in their campaign statements and literature . . . and the voters have given them huge majorities in the legislature.
Mr. Dowd asks: That sounds great! Even better, actually let the voters decide for themselves. Would you be content to allow a vote on a proposition that allows abortions?
Which would be exactly the way it was before the unconstitutional ruling RvW was made. The people and the states decided for themselves. Funny how any time the vote goes against the left they reflexively hate democracy.
“That sounds great”. Yes it does, because it follows the Constitution.
“Let the voters decide for themselves”. In a pure democracy they could, but that’s not our system
These Abolitionists need to mind their own business, stop trying to force their cult beliefs on Everyone Else. If they believe that slavery is wrong, then they don’t need to own slaves.
Dear Elwood:
You’re on the wrong page.
So what else is new?
Rimjob is always on the wrong page.
#LGBFJB
Bwaha! Lolgf
Probably the only questions VW should ask;
“What specifically is VW doing that is specifically having an impact on your business?
Could you please provide your proof?”
#LGBFJB
#BelieveTheLie
Bwaha! Lolgf
Drowning Puppies, I think the thread has been jacked.
You are on the right track, ‘Exactly what did VW do that directly impacted his business and how is he quantifying that?’. The cat probably uses a tractor and probably has some harvesting equipment. The Old Order Amish do work with horses, etc., but I don’t think they are major agricultural producers. EV tractors and harvesters are being developed as are EV trucks, they just aren’t ready for prime time yet. To faze out ICE propulsion arbitrarily is patently foolish if the replacement is not yet viable.
The world is already looking at food crisis without any more stupid moves.
CarolAnn: Which would be exactly the way it was before the unconstitutional ruling RvW was made.
The Supreme Court has maintained that Roe v. Wade IS Constitutional, or that it’s unConstitutional for states to ban abortions. Has been for 50 years, still is. For now.
My question was whether the pro-birther movement would be satisfied with state voters determining propositions directly.
Here’s a summary of the Arizona proposition:
This would essentially make Roe v. Wade the law in Arizona. Do you object to the people of a state deciding that, or should it be left to politicians?