|
Post by rivival on Sept 22, 2019 1:47:52 GMT
Why? do they have to breath in all the black dust that coated every building in Stoke-on-Trent? Do they work in Pits and Pot banks with ridiculous levels of dust? Do they have Dripping on toast for breakfast, dinner and tea......I don't think so. Spoiled rotten generation is what they are. Fucking hell, so just cause you had to deal with disgusting conditions and companies not giving a shit about workers and normal people means they should accept it too? What a vindictive way of seeing things. No they don't have to accept it because WE changed it for them. WE gave them the world on a plate. My Daughter was put through Uni got a degree and a great job, my son is manager of a computer shop. WE gave them that. I gave them that so forgive me if I don't feel sorry for them. I envy them the world is their oyster and all they have to do is reach out and grab it. NEVER have the young had such opportunities. It's not vindictive at all. It's the reality of what they have compared to the people who gave it to them and what is more I am well aware of the sacrifices my family made so I could have a better life than they had. After all half of them died in the war. That is the whole point of being a parent . To give your children better than what you had and by God I have done that. So get the F**k off my back I've done my job and done it well.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Sept 22, 2019 5:33:43 GMT
Here’s what would impress me with those young folk protesting;
they have a mass (recycling) binning of their mobile phones and video game consoles recognising the massive economic harm those devices cause.
Oh - and they go on strike when their parents book an overseas holiday insisting on a holiday in the UK.
(Of course anyone over 50 would recognise that as being our childhood.)
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Sept 22, 2019 8:04:17 GMT
Now that would take real sacrifice BJR and we both know that's not going to happen. How about them all sailing over to Disney in Florida while they're at it And do we need to upgrade our cars on a regular basis...." Perpetuating capitalism"?.... even if the excuse is....they are now more environmentally friendly. Is the move to electric cars simply the next marketing technique to stimulate the market. In years to come will the movement to efficient batteries ( which i think is brilliant by the way.... just using a Ryobi extended chain saw) be criticised in terms of production of the batteries and disposal? I've listened to the criticism of the move to electric cars a few times recently by people who believe in walking, cycling and using public transport. The problem is for huge swathes of rural Britain there is no public transport to speak of. The only bus I see is school bus.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Sept 22, 2019 8:06:57 GMT
Here’s what would impress me with those young folk protesting; they have a mass (recycling) binning of their mobile phones and video game consoles recognising the massive economic harm those devices cause. Oh - and they go on strike when their parents book an overseas holiday insisting on a holiday in the UK. (Of course anyone over 50 would recognise that as being our childhood.) Don't they all go into meltdown when they haven't got a signal. I reckon at one point my lad only got out of bed to reset the router
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 11:53:36 GMT
Now that would take real sacrifice BJR and we both know that's not going to happen. How about them all sailing over to Disney in Florida while they're at it And do we need to upgrade our cars on a regular basis...." Perpetuating capitalism"?.... even if the excuse is....they are now more environmentally friendly. Is the move to electric cars simply the next marketing technique to stimulate the market. In years to come will the movement to efficient batteries ( which i think is brilliant by the way.... just using a Ryobi extended chain saw) be criticised in terms of production of the batteries and disposal? It already is. The resources used to create car batteries are already running out faster than fossil fuels, and their carbon-intense mining and production process is not a great help. To be honest, the best thing by a million miles that people can do is take public transport. The fact trains are so expensive is an absolute joke, and I genuinely cannot believe it is still so costly despite the awful service. Besides that, get a second hand car that does over 50mpg, a hybrid is probably a good bet, and keep it for as long as you can.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 12:06:36 GMT
Fucking hell, so just cause you had to deal with disgusting conditions and companies not giving a shit about workers and normal people means they should accept it too? What a vindictive way of seeing things. No they don't have to accept it because WE changed it for them. WE gave them the world on a plate. My Daughter was put through Uni got a degree and a great job, my son is manager of a computer shop. WE gave them that. I gave them that so forgive me if I don't feel sorry for them. I envy them the world is their oyster and all they have to do is reach out and grab it. NEVER have the young had such opportunities. It's not vindictive at all. It's the reality of what they have compared to the people who gave it to them and what is more I am well aware of the sacrifices my family made so I could have a better life than they had. After all half of them died in the war. That is the whole point of being a parent . To give your children better than what you had and by God I have done that. So get the F**k off my back I've done my job and done it well. Okay, so why refuse to change it for the next generation? You gave them a lot, but as a part of that you gave them a world crisis because of exponential growth based capitalism. You gave them a society whereby wealth inequality is rising and rising, and where millennials are only half as likely to own their own home by the age of 30 as Boomers. They're 4 times more likely to be renting, they have near-zero interest rates, far more likely to be forced into zero-hours contracts, and far more likely to be in debt, using food banks, or overqualified for the position they are in. They are also the first generation to have a lower life expectancy than their parents. The throwaway culture that they were brought up in, created by the generations previous, has caused so much harm in the world that we're heading for a genuinely global catastrophe. The world is better in a lot of ways, but the generations before always seem to feel that they had it worse and therefore the younger lot shouldn't complain about their issues. It's more than a bit petty to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 22, 2019 12:13:28 GMT
And do we need to upgrade our cars on a regular basis...." Perpetuating capitalism"?.... even if the excuse is....they are now more environmentally friendly. Is the move to electric cars simply the next marketing technique to stimulate the market. In years to come will the movement to efficient batteries ( which i think is brilliant by the way.... just using a Ryobi extended chain saw) be criticised in terms of production of the batteries and disposal? It already is. The resources used to create car batteries are already running out faster than fossil fuels, and their carbon-intense mining and production process is not a great help. To be honest, the best thing by a million miles that people can do is take public transport. The fact trains are so expensive is an absolute joke, and I genuinely cannot believe it is still so costly despite the awful service. Besides that, get a second hand car that does over 50mpg, a hybrid is probably a good bet, and keep it for as long as you can. Lil, yes I knew that there were some questions being asked...I just wonder if future generations may look back and say that the whole thing was some sort of mistake. Realistically, I don't think people in the west will be prepared to entirely give up the convenience and luxury of car ownership and travel. For some journeys, at the right price, yes....but we then have the problem of overcrowded trains ( eg) which needs to be paid for and may not equate to comfortable travel. You are right about the ridiculous cost of public transport but even then it is never going to meet the demands of convenience. What do you think of the idea of ( young?) People boycotting/ not buying new phone upgrades/ clothes for a year? If Greta asked them to do it, would they/ we?.....Equally unrealistic?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 12:20:16 GMT
It already is. The resources used to create car batteries are already running out faster than fossil fuels, and their carbon-intense mining and production process is not a great help. To be honest, the best thing by a million miles that people can do is take public transport. The fact trains are so expensive is an absolute joke, and I genuinely cannot believe it is still so costly despite the awful service. Besides that, get a second hand car that does over 50mpg, a hybrid is probably a good bet, and keep it for as long as you can. Lil, yes I knew that there were some questions being asked...I just wonder if future generations may look back and say that the whole thing was some sort of mistake. Realistically, I don't think people in the west will be prepared to entirely give up the convenience and luxury of car ownership and travel. For some journeys, at the right price, yes....but we then have the problem of overcrowded trains ( eg) which needs to be paid for and may not equate to comfortable travel. You are right about the ridiculous cost of public transport but even then it is never going to meet the demands of convenience. What do you think of the idea of ( young?) People boycotting/ not buying new phone upgrades/ clothes for a year? If Greta asked them to do it, would they/ we?.....Equally unrealistic? They won't no, unless public transport is cheap and well-run. Which it easily could be if govt and companies put the money in. I think they would really. Young people are already far more likely to buy recycled/reused/sustainable consumer items than older people, although they are less likely to recycle annoyingly. Things like zero-waste shops, more water fountains, boycotts of companies like Coca-cola and Shell are all headed up by younger people, and there is definitely an appetite among many to do this stuff. But really, there's only so much individuals can contribute here, and companies won't lose out enough, or will make virtue statements that will draw in people to buy again. One major supermarket for instance (not sure which off my head so won't speculate in case it was another one) says that they recycle all waste food, and they have been proven to be lying. The major systemic change will come from govt, who will only act if they're forced to.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 22, 2019 12:44:14 GMT
Lil, yes I knew that there were some questions being asked...I just wonder if future generations may look back and say that the whole thing was some sort of mistake. Realistically, I don't think people in the west will be prepared to entirely give up the convenience and luxury of car ownership and travel. For some journeys, at the right price, yes....but we then have the problem of overcrowded trains ( eg) which needs to be paid for and may not equate to comfortable travel. You are right about the ridiculous cost of public transport but even then it is never going to meet the demands of convenience. What do you think of the idea of ( young?) People boycotting/ not buying new phone upgrades/ clothes for a year? If Greta asked them to do it, would they/ we?.....Equally unrealistic? They won't no, unless public transport is cheap and well-run. Which it easily could be if govt and companies put the money in. I think they would really. Young people are already far more likely to buy recycled/reused/sustainable consumer items than older people, although they are less likely to recycle annoyingly. Things like zero-waste shops, more water fountains, boycotts of companies like Coca-cola and Shell are all headed up by younger people, and there is definitely an appetite among many to do this stuff. But really, there's only so much individuals can contribute here, and companies won't lose out enough, or will make virtue statements that will draw in people to buy again. One major supermarket for instance (not sure which off my head so won't speculate in case it was another one) says that they recycle all waste food, and they have been proven to be lying. The major systemic change will come from govt, who will only act if they're forced to. I agree that real changes have to come from governments. Also not just ours but global....I am not confident that it will really happen. In this country I just don't think that public transport, even if free, will meet the needs or be chosen by people who want their individual freedom.... perhaps for example to visit 2 or 3 different places in one day. In my experience (young) people generally do seem to want to upgrade their phones at the end of contracts and (some to) buy the latest fashion... .. I'm not saying that they should be condemned for this but a change of behaviour in this way is a more impressive statement than street protest. I don't think that the " climate" issue should be framed as young v old though at all. Many of us old ones with children are concerned about the future for the sake of their children..... many aspects of the societies that we are creating.
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Sept 22, 2019 14:41:27 GMT
Relevant article on Reason ( reason.com/2019/09/20/capitalism-is-the-key-to-fixing-climate-change/?amp&__twitter_impression=true) "Capitalism is the Key to Fixing Climate Change Today's Climate Strike protests are supposed to bring attention to the science showing that human-made global warming is becoming a problem. Fair enough. But some participants see climate change as pretext for destroying a market system that they have always hated. Naomi Klein made this point crystal clear in her 2014 book, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. Speaking with New York magazine this week, Klein claimed that "taking climate change seriously decimates the entire neoliberal project because you can't have a laissez-faire attitude, where it's having your emissions in 11 years; you actually need to regulate your way out of it. And yeah, you can have a few market mechanisms in place, but the market is not going to do it for you." The science, insists Klein, "says our future is radical. The present is pretty radical too. The idea that there is some sort of gradual, incremental, let's-split-the-difference pathway to respond to this crisis is silly at this point." A headline in The Guardian put it even more forthrightly: "Ending climate change requires ending capitalism." Global warming is a classic example of what happens in an open-access commons. The atmosphere is unowned, so no one has an incentive to protect and conserve it. Instead, people overexploit and pollute it. Historically this happened with sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and smoke. In the United States, cities initially implemented regulations to cut back on noxious air pollutants. (For example, the first smoke abatement regulations were enacted by Chicago and Cincinnati in 1881.) Eventually federal regulations and market mechanisms were adopted. As a result, since 1980 air pollutants have collectively declined by 68 percent while the economy grew by 175 percent. Scientists call this the environmental Kuznets curve. Environmental commons tend to deteriorate as countries begin to develop economically—but once per-capita income reaches a certain level, the public starts to demand a cleanup. It's a U-shaped pattern: Economic growth initially hurts the environment, but after a point it makes things cleaner. By then, slowing or stopping economic growth will delay environmental improvement, including efforts to mitigate the problem of man-made global warming. The MIT economist Andrew McAfee explains the process in a forthcoming book, More from Less: We have finally learned how to tread more lightly on our planet….In America—a large rich country that accounts for about 25 percent of the global economy—we're now generally using less for most resources year after year, even as our economy and population continue to grow. What's more, we're also polluting the air and water less, emitting fewer greenhouse gases, and seeing population increases in many animals that had almost vanished. America, in short, is post-peak in its exploitation of the earth. The situation is similar in many other rich countries, and even developing countries such as China are now taking better care of the planet in important ways. How did this happen? Through more capitalism, not less: The strangest aspect of the story is that we didn't make any radical course changes to eliminate the trade-off between human prosperity and planetary health. Instead, we just got a lot better at doing things we'd already been doing. In particular, we got better at combining technological progress with capitalism to satisfy human wants and needs. McAfee's book documents how technological progress spurred by market competition is dematerializing the economy. McAfee makes a strong case that climate change is an open-access commons problem that markets can dematerialize once a price is put on greenhouse gas emissions. The upshot is that Klein, The Guardian, and many of the climate strikers have it exactly backwards. Properly incentivized capitalism is the key to solving the problems caused by climate change."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2019 15:01:16 GMT
Relevant article on Reason ( reason.com/2019/09/20/capitalism-is-the-key-to-fixing-climate-change/?amp&__twitter_impression=true) "Capitalism is the Key to Fixing Climate Change Today's Climate Strike protests are supposed to bring attention to the science showing that human-made global warming is becoming a problem. Fair enough. But some participants see climate change as pretext for destroying a market system that they have always hated. Naomi Klein made this point crystal clear in her 2014 book, This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. Speaking with New York magazine this week, Klein claimed that "taking climate change seriously decimates the entire neoliberal project because you can't have a laissez-faire attitude, where it's having your emissions in 11 years; you actually need to regulate your way out of it. And yeah, you can have a few market mechanisms in place, but the market is not going to do it for you." The science, insists Klein, "says our future is radical. The present is pretty radical too. The idea that there is some sort of gradual, incremental, let's-split-the-difference pathway to respond to this crisis is silly at this point." A headline in The Guardian put it even more forthrightly: "Ending climate change requires ending capitalism." Global warming is a classic example of what happens in an open-access commons. The atmosphere is unowned, so no one has an incentive to protect and conserve it. Instead, people overexploit and pollute it. Historically this happened with sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and smoke. In the United States, cities initially implemented regulations to cut back on noxious air pollutants. (For example, the first smoke abatement regulations were enacted by Chicago and Cincinnati in 1881.) Eventually federal regulations and market mechanisms were adopted. As a result, since 1980 air pollutants have collectively declined by 68 percent while the economy grew by 175 percent. Scientists call this the environmental Kuznets curve. Environmental commons tend to deteriorate as countries begin to develop economically—but once per-capita income reaches a certain level, the public starts to demand a cleanup. It's a U-shaped pattern: Economic growth initially hurts the environment, but after a point it makes things cleaner. By then, slowing or stopping economic growth will delay environmental improvement, including efforts to mitigate the problem of man-made global warming. The MIT economist Andrew McAfee explains the process in a forthcoming book, More from Less: We have finally learned how to tread more lightly on our planet….In America—a large rich country that accounts for about 25 percent of the global economy—we're now generally using less for most resources year after year, even as our economy and population continue to grow. What's more, we're also polluting the air and water less, emitting fewer greenhouse gases, and seeing population increases in many animals that had almost vanished. America, in short, is post-peak in its exploitation of the earth. The situation is similar in many other rich countries, and even developing countries such as China are now taking better care of the planet in important ways. How did this happen? Through more capitalism, not less: The strangest aspect of the story is that we didn't make any radical course changes to eliminate the trade-off between human prosperity and planetary health. Instead, we just got a lot better at doing things we'd already been doing. In particular, we got better at combining technological progress with capitalism to satisfy human wants and needs. McAfee's book documents how technological progress spurred by market competition is dematerializing the economy. McAfee makes a strong case that climate change is an open-access commons problem that markets can dematerialize once a price is put on greenhouse gas emissions. The upshot is that Klein, The Guardian, and many of the climate strikers have it exactly backwards. Properly incentivized capitalism is the key to solving the problems caused by climate change." I get the reasoning completely, but if there isn't extremely heavy regulation on resource use and growth, we stand no chance. The US is still the highest polluting developed country on Earth per capita, and guess what, it's as hyper-capitalist as you can get. The rich won't be as badly affected as the poor, so why should they bother losing money to help, cause it'll be basically fine for them? I get that money is a good incentive, but it's a short term one here. We need to aim for sustainability long-term, and stop using money as a primary incentive for our species, because it has caused countless problems.
|
|
|
Post by rivival on Sept 23, 2019 2:33:05 GMT
No they don't have to accept it because WE changed it for them. WE gave them the world on a plate. My Daughter was put through Uni got a degree and a great job, my son is manager of a computer shop. WE gave them that. I gave them that so forgive me if I don't feel sorry for them. I envy them the world is their oyster and all they have to do is reach out and grab it. NEVER have the young had such opportunities. It's not vindictive at all. It's the reality of what they have compared to the people who gave it to them and what is more I am well aware of the sacrifices my family made so I could have a better life than they had. After all half of them died in the war. That is the whole point of being a parent . To give your children better than what you had and by God I have done that. So get the F**k off my back I've done my job and done it well. Okay, so why refuse to change it for the next generation? You gave them a lot, but as a part of that you gave them a world crisis because of exponential growth based capitalism. You gave them a society whereby wealth inequality is rising and rising, and where millennials are only half as likely to own their own home by the age of 30 as Boomers. They're 4 times more likely to be renting, they have near-zero interest rates, far more likely to be forced into zero-hours contracts, and far more likely to be in debt, using food banks, or overqualified for the position they are in. They are also the first generation to have a lower life expectancy than their parents. The throwaway culture that they were brought up in, created by the generations previous, has caused so much harm in the world that we're heading for a genuinely global catastrophe. The world is better in a lot of ways, but the generations before always seem to feel that they had it worse and therefore the younger lot shouldn't complain about their issues. It's more than a bit petty to be honest. Both my kids own their own home , 1 is 36 the other 26 , both have great jobs . Maybe I could teach you how to educate kids^. It's not all about qualifications, half of it is pointing the way to their future. 23 GCSE s the daughter got followed by 2 years at Newcastle college and the Uni for her degree. She's still learning doing accountancy now. That's what I instilled in them to learn and keep learning, keep reaching for the stars. Like I said son Manages a computer shop he's mustard with pcs always has been. Then again I worked overtime so he could get extra lessons from a family friend when he was at school. Find their ability and run with it, that's what I did. I'm proud of what I did along with their mother and I'm very proud of how they have reached their potential. Not to shabby for two kids from a Blurton Council estate and a Dad who was on the streets at 15. Maybe that's the key, maybe having nothing breads desire.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 8:45:02 GMT
Okay, so why refuse to change it for the next generation? You gave them a lot, but as a part of that you gave them a world crisis because of exponential growth based capitalism. You gave them a society whereby wealth inequality is rising and rising, and where millennials are only half as likely to own their own home by the age of 30 as Boomers. They're 4 times more likely to be renting, they have near-zero interest rates, far more likely to be forced into zero-hours contracts, and far more likely to be in debt, using food banks, or overqualified for the position they are in. They are also the first generation to have a lower life expectancy than their parents. The throwaway culture that they were brought up in, created by the generations previous, has caused so much harm in the world that we're heading for a genuinely global catastrophe. The world is better in a lot of ways, but the generations before always seem to feel that they had it worse and therefore the younger lot shouldn't complain about their issues. It's more than a bit petty to be honest. Both my kids own their own home , 1 is 36 the other 26 , both have great jobs . Maybe I could teach you how to educate kids^. It's not all about qualifications, half of it is pointing the way to their future. 23 GCSE s the daughter got followed by 2 years at Newcastle college and the Uni for her degree. She's still learning doing accountancy now. That's what I instilled in them to learn and keep learning, keep reaching for the stars. Like I said son Manages a computer shop he's mustard with pcs always has been. Then again I worked overtime so he could get extra lessons from a family friend when he was at school. Find their ability and run with it, that's what I did. I'm proud of what I did along with their mother and I'm very proud of how they have reached their potential. Not to shabby for two kids from a Blurton Council estate and a Dad who was on the streets at 15. Maybe that's the key, maybe having nothing breads desire. It probably does. But the fact that most people in high earning jobs are from rich backgrounds shows that desire doesn't get you everything. Being rich gets it for you without desire a lot of the time.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Sept 23, 2019 14:01:33 GMT
You are wrong about solar and wind They're not good enough to be used on their own but you replace the base energy level of coal with nuclear, replace the quicker 'reactive' energies of oil and gas with things like Solar, wind and HE. I was advising how you said no one can be arsed to pay the costs. There's a heck a lot of investment in these 2 types of RE at the moment
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2019 15:12:02 GMT
They're not good enough to be used on their own but you replace the base energy level of coal with nuclear, replace the quicker 'reactive' energies of oil and gas with things like Solar, wind and HE. I was advising how you said no one can be arsed to pay the costs. There's a heck a lot of investment in these 2 types of RE at the moment Ah my bad! Misread! More that no-one will pay the costs of stepping all of these up in the next decade to take over 100% from fossil fuels, but your point is very true.
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Sept 23, 2019 15:17:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by musik on Sept 23, 2019 15:42:50 GMT
I better get the ordered book by David Wallace-Wells now. It has arrived to the Library and the waiting queue for the book after me is 39 persons ...
The libraries better buy some more copies.
In this whole debate about the climate goes a line from A Good to A Bad situation. On one hand we have the people saying there's no existing environmental problem at all and the ice is not melting, and the amazonas have never been better, and the deserts are fewer and fewer on this planet, and no species are really dying, 'cause if it's a bit warmer in general it's only good for them, they don't have to hunt for food or freeze - in fact I get messages from friends and so on saying this to me each week. And at the other end of the line we have the ones who demonstrates and fight for our waters and air quality. I have always considered myself as a bit skeptical, logical and realistic. So I won't agree with the fact deniers on one side of the field and not totally with the others saying the world will end in 10 years because of pollution.
But this David Wallace-Wells, where do we find him on the scale? In fact, he's saying the climate demonstraters take it too easy. It's even worse, he says.
So it will be really interesting to read his book.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Sept 23, 2019 15:45:32 GMT
I was advising how you said no one can be arsed to pay the costs. There's a heck a lot of investment in these 2 types of RE at the moment Ah my bad! Misread! More that no-one will pay the costs of stepping all of these up in the next decade to take over 100% from fossil fuels, but your point is very true. There's about 3 gigawatt of offshore wind in the planning pipeline, its now as cheap to buy solar power as conventional power, its heading in the right direction. We went 2 weeks without using coal power in the summer.
|
|
|
Post by rivival on Sept 25, 2019 1:29:31 GMT
No they don't have to accept it because WE changed it for them. WE gave them the world on a plate. My Daughter was put through Uni got a degree and a great job, my son is manager of a computer shop. WE gave them that. I gave them that so forgive me if I don't feel sorry for them. I envy them the world is their oyster and all they have to do is reach out and grab it. NEVER have the young had such opportunities. It's not vindictive at all. It's the reality of what they have compared to the people who gave it to them and what is more I am well aware of the sacrifices my family made so I could have a better life than they had. After all half of them died in the war. That is the whole point of being a parent . To give your children better than what you had and by God I have done that. So get the F**k off my back I've done my job and done it well. Okay, so why refuse to change it for the next generation? You gave them a lot, but as a part of that you gave them a world crisis because of exponential growth based capitalism. You gave them a society whereby wealth inequality is rising and rising, and where millennials are only half as likely to own their own home by the age of 30 as Boomers. They're 4 times more likely to be renting, they have near-zero interest rates, far more likely to be forced into zero-hours contracts, and far more likely to be in debt, using food banks, or overqualified for the position they are in. They are also the first generation to have a lower life expectancy than their parents. The throwaway culture that they were brought up in, created by the generations previous, has caused so much harm in the world that we're heading for a genuinely global catastrophe. The world is better in a lot of ways, but the generations before always seem to feel that they had it worse and therefore the younger lot shouldn't complain about their issues. It's more than a bit petty to be honest. The wife just got made redundant she's 56. She refused to accept a zero hours contract again and as a result and the age factor it took her 3 weeks to get a job. Work is there for those who want it. You are right in the fact were heading for a disaster. After all most under 30's can't look after themselves never mind raise children. Poor diet, poor exercise regime, total lack of social ability brought up in a Fast n Furious world, raised to think the world owes them a living. The bloody Mcdonalds shit and other takeaway foods is what has lowered their life expectancy. We had home cooking and fresh veg from the allotment. Chopped sticks, made fires and carried a knife from the age of 9 in the cubs, Yet we did not go around stabbing people with them, they were a tool and that's all and we did not set fire to every empty building or it would have been borstal for certain. So it's not the knives that is at fault for the current crisis in crime or the matches it's the education and the discipline, or rather the lack of it. Exactly the same can be said when we talk about rubbish being dumped on the streets. Find a bin and pop it in was the motto we were raised with. Piss poor parents that were just as bad themselves is what is to blame. That and the fact that those same parents are NEVER held to account for the nightmare children they raise. Instead of supporting the schools they threaten the schools with a lawyer when their children are disciplined. My house is my world, I still have old fashioned values in it. Many say I'm a dinosaur and you can never turn back the clock to what was a better world. That may be true but since when did we lie down and stop trying, stop caring and give up on our kids?
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Oct 11, 2019 17:47:32 GMT
This is a bit old but worth sharing...
|
|
|
Post by pearo on Oct 11, 2019 20:40:22 GMT
The Sun will eventually burn itself out and implode, the suffering to mankind in those final centuries will be unbearable. So lets wallow in the warmth of the situation we have created, wear sunscreen and accept that we will all die at some time.
|
|
|
Post by murphthesurf on Oct 11, 2019 21:33:45 GMT
Okay, so why refuse to change it for the next generation? The wife just got made redundant she's 56. She refused to accept a zero hours contract again and as a result and the age factor it took her 3 weeks to get a job. Work is there for those who want it. You are right in the fact were heading for a disaster. After all most under 30's can't look after themselves never mind raise children. Poor diet, poor exercise regime, total lack of social ability brought up in a Fast n Furious world, raised to think the world owes them a living. The bloody Mcdonalds shit and other takeaway foods is what has lowered their life expectancy. We had home cooking and fresh veg from the allotment. Chopped sticks, made fires and carried a knife from the age of 9 in the cubs, Yet we did not go around stabbing people with them, they were a tool and that's all and we did not set fire to every empty building or it would have been borstal for certain. So it's not the knives that is at fault for the current crisis in crime or the matches it's the education and the discipline, or rather the lack of it. Exactly the same can be said when we talk about rubbish being dumped on the streets. Find a bin and pop it in was the motto we were raised with. Piss poor parents that were just as bad themselves is what is to blame. That and the fact that those same parents are NEVER held to account for the nightmare children they raise. Instead of supporting the schools they threaten the schools with a lawyer when their children are disciplined. My house is my world, I still have old fashioned values in it. Many say I'm a dinosaur and you can never turn back the clock to what was a better world. That may be true but since when did we lie down and stop trying, stop caring and give up on our kids? Great post and great values, Riv - I agree all the way. Also applause for your post further up the page, on 23rd September.
|
|
|
Post by Billy the kid on Oct 11, 2019 23:07:16 GMT
And do we need to upgrade our cars on a regular basis...." Perpetuating capitalism"?.... even if the excuse is....they are now more environmentally friendly. Is the move to electric cars simply the next marketing technique to stimulate the market. In years to come will the movement to efficient batteries ( which i think is brilliant by the way.... just using a Ryobi extended chain saw) be criticised in terms of production of the batteries and disposal? I've listened to the criticism of the move to electric cars a few times recently by people who believe in walking, cycling and using public transport. The problem is for huge swathes of rural Britain there is no public transport to speak of. The only bus I see is school bus. They cant get a reliable and decent bus service from leek
|
|
|
Post by mattyd on Oct 11, 2019 23:16:09 GMT
This is a bit old but worth sharing... All that electricity he wasted triggering the door, at least 5 times, when it actually says " AUTOMATIC DOORS " on the buggering things.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Oct 11, 2019 23:28:56 GMT
This is a bit old but worth sharing... Are you still worth watching...
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 11, 2019 23:48:07 GMT
Okay, so why refuse to change it for the next generation? You gave them a lot, but as a part of that you gave them a world crisis because of exponential growth based capitalism. You gave them a society whereby wealth inequality is rising and rising, and where millennials are only half as likely to own their own home by the age of 30 as Boomers. They're 4 times more likely to be renting, they have near-zero interest rates, far more likely to be forced into zero-hours contracts, and far more likely to be in debt, using food banks, or overqualified for the position they are in. They are also the first generation to have a lower life expectancy than their parents. The throwaway culture that they were brought up in, created by the generations previous, has caused so much harm in the world that we're heading for a genuinely global catastrophe. The world is better in a lot of ways, but the generations before always seem to feel that they had it worse and therefore the younger lot shouldn't complain about their issues. It's more than a bit petty to be honest. The wife just got made redundant she's 56. She refused to accept a zero hours contract again and as a result and the age factor it took her 3 weeks to get a job. Work is there for those who want it. You are right in the fact were heading for a disaster. After all most under 30's can't look after themselves never mind raise children. Poor diet, poor exercise regime, total lack of social ability brought up in a Fast n Furious world, raised to think the world owes them a living. The bloody Mcdonalds shit and other takeaway foods is what has lowered their life expectancy. We had home cooking and fresh veg from the allotment. Chopped sticks, made fires and carried a knife from the age of 9 in the cubs, Yet we did not go around stabbing people with them, they were a tool and that's all and we did not set fire to every empty building or it would have been borstal for certain. So it's not the knives that is at fault for the current crisis in crime or the matches it's the education and the discipline, or rather the lack of it. Exactly the same can be said when we talk about rubbish being dumped on the streets. Find a bin and pop it in was the motto we were raised with. Piss poor parents that were just as bad themselves is what is to blame. That and the fact that those same parents are NEVER held to account for the nightmare children they raise. Instead of supporting the schools they threaten the schools with a lawyer when their children are disciplined. My house is my world, I still have old fashioned values in it. Many say I'm a dinosaur and you can never turn back the clock to what was a better world. That may be true but since when did we lie down and stop trying, stop caring and give up on our kids? I agree with 95% of what you say there Riv. There's nothing more important to me than my children's future. The answer isn't to give 16 year olds the vote ( where do we go next, 14 year olds, 12 year olds)....the answer is for 40 year olds who have some power and influence to make decisions for the good of everyone.... particularly those who are on the fringes of society.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Oct 12, 2019 6:00:46 GMT
This is a bit old but worth sharing... Are you still worth watching... Are you still stalking?
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on Oct 12, 2019 6:39:06 GMT
I’m wondering why XR protestors aren’t targeting the Indian, Chinese and Brazilian embassies for example. The Guardian this week told us that 20 firms are behind a third of all carbon emissions. Again, why aren’t these companies being targeted instead of pissing off the general public at large? I know there are a hard core of true environmentalists protesting but I’m certain the majority will have lives of conspicuous middle class consumption. Do as I say not as I do. All this is probably doing Boris Johnson a favour as the professional protesting classes will be taking their eye off the Brexit ball.
|
|
|
Post by zerps on Oct 12, 2019 6:47:35 GMT
I’m wondering why XR protestors aren’t targeting the Indian, Chinese and Brazilian embassies for example. The Guardian this week told us that 20 firms are behind a third of all carbon emissions. Again, why aren’t these companies being targeted instead of pissing off the general public at large? I know there are a hard core of true environmentalists protesting but I’m certain the majority will have lives of conspicuous middle class consumption. Do as I say not as I do. All this is probably doing Boris Johnson a favour as the professional protesting classes will be taking their eye off the Brexit ball. Also, why don’t they get jobs and start bathing like normal people 👀
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Oct 12, 2019 8:50:12 GMT
I’m wondering why XR protestors aren’t targeting the Indian, Chinese and Brazilian embassies for example. The Guardian this week told us that 20 firms are behind a third of all carbon emissions. Again, why aren’t these companies being targeted instead of pissing off the general public at large? I know there are a hard core of true environmentalists protesting but I’m certain the majority will have lives of conspicuous middle class consumption. Do as I say not as I do. All this is probably doing Boris Johnson a favour as the professional protesting classes will be taking their eye off the Brexit ball. Also, why don’t they get jobs and start bathing like normal people 👀 “Get your hair cut!”
|
|