|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2020 8:43:32 GMT
Whilst we should do everything that is possible to keep the earth “green” there are still cyclic events which change our climate But the alarmists can’t allow a good crisis to go to waste so every weather event is now due to climate change. Worth noting that way fewer people are dying from weather events than any other time in human history. Worth noting that technological advances are head and shoulders above any other time in history. Flood defences, buildings built specifically to combat high winds, earthquakes etc......
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 8:47:07 GMT
But the alarmists can’t allow a good crisis to go to waste so every weather event is now due to climate change. Worth noting that way fewer people are dying from weather events than any other time in human history. Worth noting that technological advances are head and shoulders above any other time in history. Flood defences, buildings built specifically to combat high winds, earthquakes etc...... And those technological advancements have been made possible by fossil fuel.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2020 9:02:07 GMT
Worth noting that technological advances are head and shoulders above any other time in history. Flood defences, buildings built specifically to combat high winds, earthquakes etc...... And those technological advancements have been made possible by fossil fuel. And because of those technological advancements the need for fossil fuel can now be reduced for cleaner, more efficient ways of working. Knowledge is power. That's what we do, with the help of science and technology we evolve. Otherwise we'd still be shitting in a hole in the ground and eating out of our hands......
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 14, 2020 9:13:00 GMT
And those technological advancements have been made possible by fossil fuel. And because of those technological advancements the need for fossil fuel can now be reduced for cleaner, more efficient ways of working. Knowledge is power. That's what we do, with the help of science and technology we evolve. Otherwise we'd still be shitting in a hole in the ground and eating out of our hands...... No need to throw the baby out with the bath water though, there’s no doubt the climate is changing but imo the catastrophising about it’s impact has got way out of hand.
|
|
|
Post by harveyworld on Jan 15, 2020 9:15:40 GMT
Just seen this thread and thought I would post an email I sent back to friends and family a week or so ago...
Its a bit long but for those who are genuinely interested then here you go...
Hi Guys,
Happy New Year and hope you are keeping well.
I write the email below in response to several recent messages asking if we are OK given the fires seen on TV.
Firstly we are fine and relatively unaffected as we are located more in the suburbs, but there is no doubt that the overall situation is pretty dire… My in-laws live in a small country town called Bairnsdale which is on the edge of the fires and it's where the authorities have set up the emergency centre for the coordination of all the services in Victoria. They spent Christmas with us and returned home on the 27th December when all was OK. However, since the 29th December the temperatures have gotten worse, the winds have gotten stronger and the fires have spread so quickly. The whole area is just covered in smoke and the sky is a very eerie orange colour in the day and dark red colour at night. The air pollution has been bad that many have been advised to stay indoors. This situation has shaken my Mother in law up quite a bit as it’s all happened so quickly. You also have to remember that it’s the main holiday season here so the whole country effectively stops from Christmas to the end of January with school holidays and families using the additional public holidays to take extended holiday leave. It's like August in Europe and many have taken the opportunity to travel within the country and go on holiday.
Bush Fires occur every year and there were certainly plenty of warnings that this was going to be a big one. However, saying that, much of this (like everything else these days) was partly considered ‘over hype’ typically dished out by the media to scare the living daylights out of everyone. We all predict when they say that the next winter will be colder than the last one and next summer will be hotter and drier than this one. But as they say – a clock is right at least twice a day – and this time it has been as every bit as bad as predicted. I believe that this is what has caught many people out as many were relaxing on holiday and initially chose to ignore the text warnings as no doubt they have saved all year for their annual holiday and being honest we all think that it usually affects someone else in a different area. But the fires have spread so quickly in many separate areas as everything is tinder dry. Before Christmas both Queensland and New South Wales had unprecedented fires, which was extremely rare as it usually quite tropical with high moisture levels. The fires in Victoria were predicted to happen in January and February as that is when we have our extreme heat and lack of rain, but the speed that these fires have taken hold as taken everyone by surprise. It was reported that out of control bush fires are currently burning in every state within Australia. Usually these are in rural areas and are natural occurrence but this year everything seems to be coming together to create one huge inferno.
Australia has a huge fire service made up of paid professional and lots of community volunteer workers. I think the difference this time is the spread of the fires, the volume of the fuel loads and the weather patterns leading up to the start of the ‘fire season’ which have made for a very unique set of circumstances. The military were called in when fatigue was setting in with the fire fighters, communities were getting cut off and the disaster was spreading quicker than any containment of the fires. The military in any circumstance is usually a last resort and I assume the government didn’t want to admit that this was getting out of hand. The military have been brought in as additional hands and are helping with evacuations, humanitarian services in remote communities, help with cattle and clearing blocked roads of fallen trees. They are not fighting the fires just additional hands given the wide spread of the devastation.
Not only is the ground very dry (we've hardly any rain for weeks) but many of the native trees in the forests are eucalyptus and these are full of oil. Hence when a fire occurs, they set alight and just explode outwards 360 degrees scattering more of their red-hot embers everywhere further spreading the fires. In fact it’s the strong winds carrying these embers from many miles away that is the most dangerous situation as you are ok one minute and then trying to put them out in the next minute as they instantly ignite the dry bush land and start new fires in new areas. The hot winds fan these so quickly and within seconds you have an out of control fire on your door step. The fire services usually do lots of back burning to set up containment lines, but this hasn't happened to the same extent this year as the fire containment season is getting shorter due to changes in weather patterns and opposition from environmentalists who don't like it.
A couple of days ago several of these fires merged together and it was said that the size of the area of fire was equivalent to the entire country of Belgium being alight. It has also been reported that the 2018 Californian wildfires burnt 1.8 million hectares and last year's amazon rain forest fires burned 900k hectares. So far Australia has lost over 7 million hectares to the fires which is just unprecedented. This includes the loss of 1000's of properties, dozens of deaths, livestock, crops and of course the native wildlife such as Koalas and Kangaroos. In fact the devastation to the wildlife is still being evaluated but it is predicted to be catastrophic. Whole chains of food supply from insects to birds, plants and animals have virtually been wiped out in some areas. There is talk that Koalas will now be deemed to be endangered as so many have been killed. Many unique species on Kangaroo Island have been lost with over a third of the small native island being completely burned. It is quite tragic.
As it is today, we have had some rain but they predict the fires will burn for several more months. There is reports of significant rain on Thursday which may help with the fires. However, this is a double edged sword as it is feared that these storms come with lots of thunder and lightning which could start more fires, and if the rain comes in the predicted volume this could help to put out the fires BUT this could also effectively flood certain areas and cause landslides as the ground is so dry and would not absorb huge volumes of moisture. There is also a further fear that this excess water may find its way into small streams and rivers thus causing further contamination to the water supply as well as to any fish or wildlife drinking from these waters. I think everyone has their fingers crossed that this does not materialise.
Many of the fires cannot be reached because of the terrain, so the best they hope for is containment away from any human habitat. I am not sure what all this burning and loss of trees will do for the environment and the future of these areas but there are lots of people who are obviously very angry that this situation was allowed to happen and who have now lost everything. I am not sure what more could have been done as everyone is quick to blame climate change as the only possible cause as if the pressing of some magic button would have instantly prevented it all. I am sure that this will be an ongoing political argument both here and around the world for a long time to come as weather patterns and subsequent disasters become more extreme. It is going to be a very slow and long process, and one which will probably change the course of history in one way or another.
Take care
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2020 11:59:29 GMT
Just seen this thread and thought I would post an email I sent back to friends and family a week or so ago... Its a bit long but for those who are genuinely interested then here you go... Hi Guys, Happy New Year and hope you are keeping well. I write the email below in response to several recent messages asking if we are OK given the fires seen on TV. Firstly we are fine and relatively unaffected as we are located more in the suburbs, but there is no doubt that the overall situation is pretty dire… My in-laws live in a small country town called Bairnsdale which is on the edge of the fires and it's where the authorities have set up the emergency centre for the coordination of all the services in Victoria. They spent Christmas with us and returned home on the 27th December when all was OK. However, since the 29th December the temperatures have gotten worse, the winds have gotten stronger and the fires have spread so quickly. The whole area is just covered in smoke and the sky is a very eerie orange colour in the day and dark red colour at night. The air pollution has been bad that many have been advised to stay indoors. This situation has shaken my Mother in law up quite a bit as it’s all happened so quickly. You also have to remember that it’s the main holiday season here so the whole country effectively stops from Christmas to the end of January with school holidays and families using the additional public holidays to take extended holiday leave. It's like August in Europe and many have taken the opportunity to travel within the country and go on holiday. Bush Fires occur every year and there were certainly plenty of warnings that this was going to be a big one. However, saying that, much of this (like everything else these days) was partly considered ‘over hype’ typically dished out by the media to scare the living daylights out of everyone. We all predict when they say that the next winter will be colder than the last one and next summer will be hotter and drier than this one. But as they say – a clock is right at least twice a day – and this time it has been as every bit as bad as predicted. I believe that this is what has caught many people out as many were relaxing on holiday and initially chose to ignore the text warnings as no doubt they have saved all year for their annual holiday and being honest we all think that it usually affects someone else in a different area. But the fires have spread so quickly in many separate areas as everything is tinder dry. Before Christmas both Queensland and New South Wales had unprecedented fires, which was extremely rare as it usually quite tropical with high moisture levels. The fires in Victoria were predicted to happen in January and February as that is when we have our extreme heat and lack of rain, but the speed that these fires have taken hold as taken everyone by surprise. It was reported that out of control bush fires are currently burning in every state within Australia. Usually these are in rural areas and are natural occurrence but this year everything seems to be coming together to create one huge inferno. Australia has a huge fire service made up of paid professional and lots of community volunteer workers. I think the difference this time is the spread of the fires, the volume of the fuel loads and the weather patterns leading up to the start of the ‘fire season’ which have made for a very unique set of circumstances. The military were called in when fatigue was setting in with the fire fighters, communities were getting cut off and the disaster was spreading quicker than any containment of the fires. The military in any circumstance is usually a last resort and I assume the government didn’t want to admit that this was getting out of hand. The military have been brought in as additional hands and are helping with evacuations, humanitarian services in remote communities, help with cattle and clearing blocked roads of fallen trees. They are not fighting the fires just additional hands given the wide spread of the devastation. Not only is the ground very dry (we've hardly any rain for weeks) but many of the native trees in the forests are eucalyptus and these are full of oil. Hence when a fire occurs, they set alight and just explode outwards 360 degrees scattering more of their red-hot embers everywhere further spreading the fires. In fact it’s the strong winds carrying these embers from many miles away that is the most dangerous situation as you are ok one minute and then trying to put them out in the next minute as they instantly ignite the dry bush land and start new fires in new areas. The hot winds fan these so quickly and within seconds you have an out of control fire on your door step. The fire services usually do lots of back burning to set up containment lines, but this hasn't happened to the same extent this year as the fire containment season is getting shorter due to changes in weather patterns and opposition from environmentalists who don't like it. A couple of days ago several of these fires merged together and it was said that the size of the area of fire was equivalent to the entire country of Belgium being alight. It has also been reported that the 2018 Californian wildfires burnt 1.8 million hectares and last year's amazon rain forest fires burned 900k hectares. So far Australia has lost over 7 million hectares to the fires which is just unprecedented. This includes the loss of 1000's of properties, dozens of deaths, livestock, crops and of course the native wildlife such as Koalas and Kangaroos. In fact the devastation to the wildlife is still being evaluated but it is predicted to be catastrophic. Whole chains of food supply from insects to birds, plants and animals have virtually been wiped out in some areas. There is talk that Koalas will now be deemed to be endangered as so many have been killed. Many unique species on Kangaroo Island have been lost with over a third of the small native island being completely burned. It is quite tragic. As it is today, we have had some rain but they predict the fires will burn for several more months. There is reports of significant rain on Thursday which may help with the fires. However, this is a double edged sword as it is feared that these storms come with lots of thunder and lightning which could start more fires, and if the rain comes in the predicted volume this could help to put out the fires BUT this could also effectively flood certain areas and cause landslides as the ground is so dry and would not absorb huge volumes of moisture. There is also a further fear that this excess water may find its way into small streams and rivers thus causing further contamination to the water supply as well as to any fish or wildlife drinking from these waters. I think everyone has their fingers crossed that this does not materialise. Many of the fires cannot be reached because of the terrain, so the best they hope for is containment away from any human habitat. I am not sure what all this burning and loss of trees will do for the environment and the future of these areas but there are lots of people who are obviously very angry that this situation was allowed to happen and who have now lost everything. I am not sure what more could have been done as everyone is quick to blame climate change as the only possible cause as if the pressing of some magic button would have instantly prevented it all. I am sure that this will be an ongoing political argument both here and around the world for a long time to come as weather patterns and subsequent disasters become more extreme. It is going to be a very slow and long process, and one which will probably change the course of history in one way or another. Take care Just been watching a TV program that had back feature on the Koalas on Kangaroo Island. It was heartbreaking, and as much as I feel for the people who have been affected by all this devastation, it's seeing the wildlife suffering that has the biggest impact on me. We, as humans know exactly what is going on and can rebuild our homes as tragic as it is, but these poor animals haven't gotn the first clue what is happening and the suffering they must be going through is horrible to see.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2020 14:54:17 GMT
And because of those technological advancements the need for fossil fuel can now be reduced for cleaner, more efficient ways of working. Knowledge is power. That's what we do, with the help of science and technology we evolve. Otherwise we'd still be shitting in a hole in the ground and eating out of our hands...... No need to throw the baby out with the bath water though, there’s no doubt the climate is changing but imo the catastrophising about it’s impact has got way out of hand. 'IMO' doesn't come into it. This isn't an opinion based thing. It's fact. An area the size of the Netherlands has been literally on fire in Australia. Billions of animals have died. There is no nuance to this, it's a crisis. We have very little time to get rid of fossil fuels and bin off this weird obsession with exponential growth.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 18, 2020 15:08:31 GMT
No need to throw the baby out with the bath water though, there’s no doubt the climate is changing but imo the catastrophising about it’s impact has got way out of hand. 'IMO' doesn't come into it. This isn't an opinion based thing. It's fact. An area the size of the Netherlands has been literally on fire in Australia. Billions of animals have died. There is no nuance to this, it's a crisis. We have very little time to get rid of fossil fuels and bin off this weird obsession with exponential growth. Yes it is a a global emergency, irrespective of causes, first world/ third world issues.....we should use International aid budget for such emergencies rather than giving it to rich CEOs of NGOs and to countries that have their own wealth and capabilities( equally ridiculous to give money away when we have vulnerable homeless people right on our doorstep ( literally)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2020 15:11:01 GMT
'IMO' doesn't come into it. This isn't an opinion based thing. It's fact. An area the size of the Netherlands has been literally on fire in Australia. Billions of animals have died. There is no nuance to this, it's a crisis. We have very little time to get rid of fossil fuels and bin off this weird obsession with exponential growth. Yes it is a a global emergency, irrespective of causes, first world/ third world issues.....we should use International aid budget for such emergencies rather than giving it to rich CEOs of NGOs and to countries that have their own wealth and capabilities( equally ridiculous to give money away when we have vulnerable homeless people right on our doorstep ( literally) International aid money isn't enough. And fixing our own problems or helping others is not a binary thing. We can do both. We should be decarbonising by 2030, and forcing business and govt into renewables.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 18, 2020 15:34:17 GMT
Yes it is a a global emergency, irrespective of causes, first world/ third world issues.....we should use International aid budget for such emergencies rather than giving it to rich CEOs of NGOs and to countries that have their own wealth and capabilities( equally ridiculous to give money away when we have vulnerable homeless people right on our doorstep ( literally) International aid money isn't enough. And fixing our own problems or helping others is not a binary thing. We can do both. We should be decarbonising by 2030, and forcing business and govt into renewables. We could do both....but we are not. The problem of street homelessness is close by, solvable it just needs the will. In reality we are not doing both....but SOME of the overseas budget is being misused. The Australian fires are also an indisputable visible immediate problem to which we can direct resources....but we are not. Emergency situations don't just need long term solutions
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2020 15:37:47 GMT
International aid money isn't enough. And fixing our own problems or helping others is not a binary thing. We can do both. We should be decarbonising by 2030, and forcing business and govt into renewables. We could do both....but we are not. The problem of street homelessness is close by, solvable it just needs the will. In reality we are not doing both....but SOME of the overseas budget is being misused. The Australian fires are also an indisputable visible immediate problem to which we can direct resources....but we are not. Emergency situations don't just need long term solutions Both overseas and domestic budgets are being misused, but currently we are giving nothing at all to long term solutions. There is almost no sanction for heavily polluting industries, in fact, they get subsidies. Whatever we spend to slow climate change is preferable to the cost we'll see if we do nothing. We will have to force businesses to lose money.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 18, 2020 15:40:19 GMT
Yes it is a a global emergency, irrespective of causes, first world/ third world issues.....we should use International aid budget for such emergencies rather than giving it to rich CEOs of NGOs and to countries that have their own wealth and capabilities( equally ridiculous to give money away when we have vulnerable homeless people right on our doorstep ( literally) International aid money isn't enough. And fixing our own problems or helping others is not a binary thing. We can do both. We should be decarbonising by 2030, and forcing business and govt into renewables. One question I have for you Lil,and I don't mean this to try to be clever or awkward...I've asked myself the same question...what level of overseas aid is acceptable? ( Not facetious)....should we be taxed at 80% and the money sent abroad....there will always be a need and probably the west will always be rich in the foreseeable future. Where do you draw your line and why?( and I am not asking this as an ' excuse' to do nothing
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 18, 2020 15:43:13 GMT
We could do both....but we are not. The problem of street homelessness is close by, solvable it just needs the will. In reality we are not doing both....but SOME of the overseas budget is being misused. The Australian fires are also an indisputable visible immediate problem to which we can direct resources....but we are not. Emergency situations don't just need long term solutions Both overseas and domestic budgets are being misused, but currently we are giving nothing at all to long term solutions. There is almost no sanction for heavily polluting industries, in fact, they get subsidies. Whatever we spend to slow climate change is preferable to the cost we'll see if we do nothing. We will have to force businesses to lose money. My point is ...both the homeless on our streets and the Australian fires are visible emergencies.....and I take the point that the climate change argument is classed by many as an emergency ( it's relative).....but if your house is burning down it,s not the time to start discussing better strategies for fire prevention
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2020 15:46:11 GMT
International aid money isn't enough. And fixing our own problems or helping others is not a binary thing. We can do both. We should be decarbonising by 2030, and forcing business and govt into renewables. One question I have for you Lil,and I don't mean this to try to be clever or awkward...I've asked myself the same question...what level of overseas aid is acceptable? ( Not facetious)....should we be taxed at 80% and the money sent abroad....there will always be a need and probably the west will always be rich in the foreseeable future. Where do you draw your line and why?( and I am not asking this as an ' excuse' to do nothing I honestly don't know! I think it depends, but we certainly owe a debt to a lot of countries from which we plundered a significant amount of resources and wealth. It depends what we're doing really, I think the cost of ensuring that the vast majority of people on Earth have food, water, and shelter is a lot lower than people might think. Certainly affordable and doable.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2020 15:47:16 GMT
Both overseas and domestic budgets are being misused, but currently we are giving nothing at all to long term solutions. There is almost no sanction for heavily polluting industries, in fact, they get subsidies. Whatever we spend to slow climate change is preferable to the cost we'll see if we do nothing. We will have to force businesses to lose money. My point is ...both the home lesson our streets and the Australian fires are visible emergencies.....and I take the point that the climate change argument is classed by many as an emergency ( it's relative).....but if your house is burning down it,s not the time to start discussing better strategies for fire prevention Well of course we should send money to help those fires, but it's the perfect time to start to shit yourself and put in place genuine plans for a sustainable economy instead of a growth based one.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 18, 2020 15:59:24 GMT
My point is ...both the home lesson our streets and the Australian fires are visible emergencies.....and I take the point that the climate change argument is classed by many as an emergency ( it's relative).....but if your house is burning down it,s not the time to start discussing better strategies for fire prevention Well of course we should send money to help those fires, but it's the perfect time to start to shit yourself and put in place genuine plans for a sustainable economy instead of a growth based one. We could do both....I'm not saying just to send money....equipment/ personnel may ( or may not ) be needed
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 18, 2020 16:01:15 GMT
One question I have for you Lil,and I don't mean this to try to be clever or awkward...I've asked myself the same question...what level of overseas aid is acceptable? ( Not facetious)....should we be taxed at 80% and the money sent abroad....there will always be a need and probably the west will always be rich in the foreseeable future. Where do you draw your line and why?( and I am not asking this as an ' excuse' to do nothing I honestly don't know! I think it depends, but we certainly owe a debt to a lot of countries from which we plundered a significant amount of resources and wealth. It depends what we're doing really, I think the cost of ensuring that the vast majority of people on Earth have food, water, and shelter is a lot lower than people might think. Certainly affordable and doable. Perhaps the old adage (fair)" trade not aid " is the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 18, 2020 16:05:03 GMT
No need to throw the baby out with the bath water though, there’s no doubt the climate is changing but imo the catastrophising about it’s impact has got way out of hand. 'IMO' doesn't come into it. This isn't an opinion based thing. It's fact. An area the size of the Netherlands has been literally on fire in Australia. Billions of animals have died. There is no nuance to this, it's a crisis. We have very little time to get rid of fossil fuels and bin off this weird obsession with exponential growth. There Is no scientific basis behind these apocalyptic claims, non whatsoever. Australia is a very hot country, it’s always had bush fires, yes this one is particularly bad but it’s not necessarily due to climate change.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Jan 18, 2020 16:10:31 GMT
My point is ...both the home lesson our streets and the Australian fires are visible emergencies.....and I take the point that the climate change argument is classed by many as an emergency ( it's relative).....but if your house is burning down it,s not the time to start discussing better strategies for fire prevention Well of course we should send money to help those fires, but it's the perfect time to start to shit yourself and put in place genuine plans for a stagnant economy instead of a growth based one. I fixed it for littleun 😉
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2020 18:50:32 GMT
'IMO' doesn't come into it. This isn't an opinion based thing. It's fact. An area the size of the Netherlands has been literally on fire in Australia. Billions of animals have died. There is no nuance to this, it's a crisis. We have very little time to get rid of fossil fuels and bin off this weird obsession with exponential growth. There Is no scientific basis behind these apocalyptic claims, non whatsoever. Australia is a very hot country, it’s always had bush fires, yes this one is particularly bad but it’s not necessarily due to climate change. I'm a physicist who has worked in renewables, the increase in frequency and severity of these catastrophic weather events has been a predicted consequence of the rise in temperatures we've seen. They predicted it years ago, it is now happening, and yet you still pretend it isn't necessarily climate change? These 'claims' are literally solely based on scientific evidence.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2020 18:51:19 GMT
Well of course we should send money to help those fires, but it's the perfect time to start to shit yourself and put in place genuine plans for a stagnant economy instead of a growth based one. I fixed it for littleun 😉 Better stagnant than non-existent! Exponential growth doesn't work on a finite planet!
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 19, 2020 13:16:09 GMT
Yes it is a a global emergency, irrespective of causes, first world/ third world issues.....we should use International aid budget for such emergencies rather than giving it to rich CEOs of NGOs and to countries that have their own wealth and capabilities( equally ridiculous to give money away when we have vulnerable homeless people right on our doorstep ( literally) International aid money isn't enough. And fixing our own problems or helping others is not a binary thing. We can do both. We should be decarbonising by 2030, and forcing business and govt into renewables. Lil, just some random thoughts, not necessarily aimed at you.. If we have a finite amount of money or resource, set aside as " aid" , then it is a binary question, or a pragmatic question....you can spend it on this OR that, but you can't spend it twice. To increase "aid" asks some difficult questions and there are some difficult obstacles. I'm not saying that they should not be asked. I would agree that the divide between the rich and poor in the UK/ world is too much.......not an easy thing to address ...." bankers should pay more, multi nationals should pay more, The high earners earners should pay more"......all possibly true....I don't know enough about the economy as a whole to know the implications of manipulating the "free" market as much as it is "free".....if "we" don't like multinationals ...don't have sky, don't buy Apple phones, don't go to Costa etc, if we don't like the wage divide, stop watching football to reduce ridiculous wages of footballers......I know it's not that simple.. .. .. You could argue that one entrepreneur who has created one job for one other person has done more for humanity than many of us can hope to..... Politicians are good at talking. Structural change is difficult. One common thing though.......it is always " others" who have to change their behaviour and/ or income not " me" So, for example, would 70% income tax for those earning more than £30,000 be ok? You would still be relatively rich. " It would have no impact if I did it alone "( actually it COULD make a difference to ONE life if it was specifically targeted) ...so let's do it through the caring party....the Labour party......hang on a minute....there's quite a few millionaires here ( Blairs, Kinnocks etc..funnily enough they have been very good at telling others how they should live and think....whilst amassing millions for their own), so we can't be having that. I believe that most of us would want a fairer society/ world if asked. No matter how much money we throw at it , there will always be a gulf and injustice between rich or poor...which is not an excuse to do nothing....but perhaps talking about it makes us ( me) feel better. And perhaps we do owe an historical debt, many countries and individuals do.....but in my opinion just to keep saying this doesn't get us anywhere pragmatically...."Germany" owes much to individual families and countries following much of what they were responsible for in the 20 century.....(and they generally are regarded as a clever race)...it does make people feel better though to keep saying how guilty we are......In my opinion we need some optimism and positivity moving forward...this generation/ any generation cannot be held responsible in perpetuity for past " debt" Reminds me of " the Rich young ruler" ( The whole history of the British labour movement is intertwined with Christianity. As Harold Wilson said, it owed more to Methodism than to Marx. The Tolpuddle martyrs, for example, who were transported to Australia for forming an early trade union, were Methodists, led by a Methodist lay preacher, George Loveless. Keir Hardie, the first leader of the Labour party, was also a lay preacher, driven into political activism, and sustained in it, by his faith. He learned his debating and campaigning skills in the evangelical temperance movement. William Beveridge was another pioneering British socialist impelled by his Christian faith www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/apr/09/christianity-politics). A certain ruler asked him, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" [19] "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good -- except God alone. [20] You know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'" [21] "All these I have kept since I was a boy," he said. [22] When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." [23] When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth. [24] Jesus looked at him and said, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! [25] Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 14:03:21 GMT
International aid money isn't enough. And fixing our own problems or helping others is not a binary thing. We can do both. We should be decarbonising by 2030, and forcing business and govt into renewables. Lil, just some random thoughts, not necessarily aimed at you.. If we have a finite amount of money or resource, set aside as " aid" , then it is a binary question, or a pragmatic question....you can spend it on this OR that, but you can't spend it twice. To increase "aid" asks some difficult questions and there are some difficult obstacles. I'm not saying that they should not be asked. I would agree that the divide between the rich and poor in the UK/ world is too much.......not an easy thing to address ...." bankers should pay more, multi nationals should pay more, The high earners earners should pay more"......all possibly true....I don't know enough about the economy as a whole to know the implications of manipulating the "free" market as much as it is "free".....if "we" don't like multinationals ...don't have sky, don't buy Apple phones, don't go to Costa etc, if we don't like the wage divide, stop watching football to reduce ridiculous wages of footballers......I know it's not that simple.. .. .. You could argue that one entrepreneur who has created one job for one other person has done more for humanity than many of us can hope to..... Politicians are good at talking. Structural change is difficult. One common thing though.......it is always " others" who have to change their behaviour and/ or income not " me" So, for example, would 70% income tax for those earning more than £30,000 be ok? You would still be relatively rich. " It would have no impact if I did it alone "( actually it COULD make a difference to ONE life if it was specifically targeted) ...so let's do it through the caring party....the Labour party......hang on a minute....there's quite a few millionaires here ( Blairs, Kinnocks etc..funnily enough they have been very good at telling others how they should live and think....whilst amassing millions for their own), so we can't be having that. I believe that most of us would want a fairer society/ world if asked. No matter how much money we throw at it , there will always be a gulf and injustice between rich or poor...which is not an excuse to do nothing....but perhaps talking about it makes us ( me) feel better. And perhaps we do owe an historical debt, many countries and individuals do.....but in my opinion just to keep saying this doesn't get us anywhere pragmatically...."Germany" owes much to individual families and countries following much of what they were responsible for in the 20 century.....(and they generally are regarded as a clever race)...it does make people feel better though to keep saying how guilty we are......In my opinion we need some optimism and positivity moving forward...this generation/ any generation cannot be held responsible in perpetuity for past " debt" Reminds me of " the Rich young ruler" ( The whole history of the British labour movement is intertwined with Christianity. As Harold Wilson said, it owed more to Methodism than to Marx. The Tolpuddle martyrs, for example, who were transported to Australia for forming an early trade union, were Methodists, led by a Methodist lay preacher, George Loveless. Keir Hardie, the first leader of the Labour party, was also a lay preacher, driven into political activism, and sustained in it, by his faith. He learned his debating and campaigning skills in the evangelical temperance movement. William Beveridge was another pioneering British socialist impelled by his Christian faith www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/apr/09/christianity-politics). A certain ruler asked him, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" [19] "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good -- except God alone. [20] You know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'" [21] "All these I have kept since I was a boy," he said. [22] When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." [23] When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth. [24] Jesus looked at him and said, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! [25] Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." It's definitely a difficult thing to make those structural changes, but it has happened before, revolution is not an unusual thing, and slower transitions, such as the transition towards socialised capitalism from 1800s to 2000s, happen often. The point about 'it has to be other people changing' is more that other people must make people change. As you mentioned, you won't stop people using amazon, apple, petrol etc. without making it difficult for them to do so. This comes from making it harder for businesses to sell damaging/unsustainable things to the public. It seems a lot more difficult because we're used to these benefits we have now, but I think the main issue is that our society leads us to define our lives by the wealth/material 'success' we have. The ultimate aim is to have a society where basic needs are provided for (we could already do this), and people are able to give definition to their lives through their passions, their hobbies, and their enjoyment (this is further away). But the first part is the most important. We have fostered and groomed a huge amount of inequality simply by living in a society that prioritises wealth over people. Losing jobs, making decisions that leave workers worse off, all of those things are seen as 'just business'. But what is the point of societal systems if not to protect the people that live within them? We must, simply must, transition to something that gives much more credence to sustainability over growth. This fetishised 'exponential growth' is not a normal thing, and we have to rewire our brains to think differently. Huge societal shift needed over the next 50-100 years.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 19, 2020 14:17:20 GMT
Lil, just some random thoughts, not necessarily aimed at you.. If we have a finite amount of money or resource, set aside as " aid" , then it is a binary question, or a pragmatic question....you can spend it on this OR that, but you can't spend it twice. To increase "aid" asks some difficult questions and there are some difficult obstacles. I'm not saying that they should not be asked. I would agree that the divide between the rich and poor in the UK/ world is too much.......not an easy thing to address ...." bankers should pay more, multi nationals should pay more, The high earners earners should pay more"......all possibly true....I don't know enough about the economy as a whole to know the implications of manipulating the "free" market as much as it is "free".....if "we" don't like multinationals ...don't have sky, don't buy Apple phones, don't go to Costa etc, if we don't like the wage divide, stop watching football to reduce ridiculous wages of footballers......I know it's not that simple.. .. .. You could argue that one entrepreneur who has created one job for one other person has done more for humanity than many of us can hope to..... Politicians are good at talking. Structural change is difficult. One common thing though.......it is always " others" who have to change their behaviour and/ or income not " me" So, for example, would 70% income tax for those earning more than £30,000 be ok? You would still be relatively rich. " It would have no impact if I did it alone "( actually it COULD make a difference to ONE life if it was specifically targeted) ...so let's do it through the caring party....the Labour party......hang on a minute....there's quite a few millionaires here ( Blairs, Kinnocks etc..funnily enough they have been very good at telling others how they should live and think....whilst amassing millions for their own), so we can't be having that. I believe that most of us would want a fairer society/ world if asked. No matter how much money we throw at it , there will always be a gulf and injustice between rich or poor...which is not an excuse to do nothing....but perhaps talking about it makes us ( me) feel better. And perhaps we do owe an historical debt, many countries and individuals do.....but in my opinion just to keep saying this doesn't get us anywhere pragmatically...."Germany" owes much to individual families and countries following much of what they were responsible for in the 20 century.....(and they generally are regarded as a clever race)...it does make people feel better though to keep saying how guilty we are......In my opinion we need some optimism and positivity moving forward...this generation/ any generation cannot be held responsible in perpetuity for past " debt" Reminds me of " the Rich young ruler" ( The whole history of the British labour movement is intertwined with Christianity. As Harold Wilson said, it owed more to Methodism than to Marx. The Tolpuddle martyrs, for example, who were transported to Australia for forming an early trade union, were Methodists, led by a Methodist lay preacher, George Loveless. Keir Hardie, the first leader of the Labour party, was also a lay preacher, driven into political activism, and sustained in it, by his faith. He learned his debating and campaigning skills in the evangelical temperance movement. William Beveridge was another pioneering British socialist impelled by his Christian faith www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/apr/09/christianity-politics). A certain ruler asked him, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" [19] "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good -- except God alone. [20] You know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'" [21] "All these I have kept since I was a boy," he said. [22] When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." [23] When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth. [24] Jesus looked at him and said, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! [25] Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." It's definitely a difficult thing to make those structural changes, but it has happened before, revolution is not an unusual thing, and slower transitions, such as the transition towards socialised capitalism from 1800s to 2000s, happen often. The point about 'it has to be other people changing' is more that other people must make people change. As you mentioned, you won't stop people using amazon, apple, petrol etc. without making it difficult for them to do so. This comes from making it harder for businesses to sell damaging/unsustainable things to the public. It seems a lot more difficult because we're used to these benefits we have now, but I think the main issue is that our society leads us to define our lives by the wealth/material 'success' we have. The ultimate aim is to have a society where basic needs are provided for (we could already do this), and people are able to give definition to their lives through their passions, their hobbies, and their enjoyment (this is further away). But the first part is the most important. We have fostered and groomed a huge amount of inequality simply by living in a society that prioritises wealth over people. Losing jobs, making decisions that leave workers worse off, all of those things are seen as 'just business'. But what is the point of societal systems if not to protect the people that live within them? We must, simply must, transition to something that gives much more credence to sustainability over growth. This fetishised 'exponential growth' is not a normal thing, and we have to rewire our brains to think differently. Huge societal shift needed over the next 50-100 years. I don't think that contradicts my fundamental point that it is usually a certain group of people who feel they have the answers and the right to tell us all how to live....but it always seems to be directed at others and then becomes uncomfortable when it involves real sacrifice. As much as we need idealogy and theory , for me , we need to be realistic. If anything my philosophy is that of a pragmatist.....I simply question if most of the " talk" and argument simply makes us feel better?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 14:23:42 GMT
It's definitely a difficult thing to make those structural changes, but it has happened before, revolution is not an unusual thing, and slower transitions, such as the transition towards socialised capitalism from 1800s to 2000s, happen often. The point about 'it has to be other people changing' is more that other people must make people change. As you mentioned, you won't stop people using amazon, apple, petrol etc. without making it difficult for them to do so. This comes from making it harder for businesses to sell damaging/unsustainable things to the public. It seems a lot more difficult because we're used to these benefits we have now, but I think the main issue is that our society leads us to define our lives by the wealth/material 'success' we have. The ultimate aim is to have a society where basic needs are provided for (we could already do this), and people are able to give definition to their lives through their passions, their hobbies, and their enjoyment (this is further away). But the first part is the most important. We have fostered and groomed a huge amount of inequality simply by living in a society that prioritises wealth over people. Losing jobs, making decisions that leave workers worse off, all of those things are seen as 'just business'. But what is the point of societal systems if not to protect the people that live within them? We must, simply must, transition to something that gives much more credence to sustainability over growth. This fetishised 'exponential growth' is not a normal thing, and we have to rewire our brains to think differently. Huge societal shift needed over the next 50-100 years. I don't think that contradicts my fundamental point that it is usually a certain group of people who feel they have the answers and the right to tell us all how to live....but it always seems to be directed at others and then becomes uncomfortable when it involves real sacrifice. As much as we need idealogy and theory , for me , we need to be realistic. If anything my philosophy is that of a pragmatist.....I simply question if most of the " talk" and argument simply makes us feel better? I think everyone needs to be made to make that change to be honest. I agree most politicians tend to talk about helping the poor then pretend that trickle down economics is helpful. We don't have a choice now though. We've spent 150 years living beyond our means in terms of resources, and now we have to pay the price. But separate from climate change, our basic rights and needs should be the first thing society caters for, and unfortunately, we've got a society where we have some people who can afford to buy nations and others who cannot eat a meal a week.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 19, 2020 14:34:39 GMT
I don't think that contradicts my fundamental point that it is usually a certain group of people who feel they have the answers and the right to tell us all how to live....but it always seems to be directed at others and then becomes uncomfortable when it involves real sacrifice. As much as we need idealogy and theory , for me , we need to be realistic. If anything my philosophy is that of a pragmatist.....I simply question if most of the " talk" and argument simply makes us feel better? I think everyone needs to be made to make that change to be honest. I agree most politicians tend to talk about helping the poor then pretend that trickle down economics is helpful. We don't have a choice now though. We've spent 150 years living beyond our means in terms of resources, and now we have to pay the price. But separate from climate change, our basic rights and needs should be the first thing society caters for, and unfortunately, we've got a society where we have some people who can afford to buy nations and others who cannot eat a meal a week. As I've said earlier there is a great divide between rich and poor. The story of Jesus that I've posted has been retold for 2000 years. Blair a millionaire Christian socialist ( not for us to judge) supports the system. Unfortunately lil I think your ideals will get much airing in the socialist chattering class arena but have little pragmatic value other than making people feel better. The price is too high. Nothing wrong with having them though.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 14:48:47 GMT
I think everyone needs to be made to make that change to be honest. I agree most politicians tend to talk about helping the poor then pretend that trickle down economics is helpful. We don't have a choice now though. We've spent 150 years living beyond our means in terms of resources, and now we have to pay the price. But separate from climate change, our basic rights and needs should be the first thing society caters for, and unfortunately, we've got a society where we have some people who can afford to buy nations and others who cannot eat a meal a week. As I've said earlier there is a great divide between rich and poor. The story of Jesus that I've posted has been retold for 2000 years. Blair a millionaire Christian socialist ( not for us to judge) supports the system. Unfortunately lil I think your ideals will get much airing in the socialist chattering class arena but have little pragmatic value other than making people feel better. The price is too high. Nothing wrong with having them though. Blair is not a socialist. I think too much is made of socialism and millionaires though. Socialism has no innate issue with rich people, more that there should be priority to ensure people without enough to live get the money first. There is no price, beyond removing material goods and 'non-necessary' (although I admit that part is slightly subjective) wealth to make sure humans aren't dying from lack of basic needs.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 19, 2020 15:20:02 GMT
There Is no scientific basis behind these apocalyptic claims, non whatsoever. Australia is a very hot country, it’s always had bush fires, yes this one is particularly bad but it’s not necessarily due to climate change. I'm a physicist who has worked in renewables, the increase in frequency and severity of these catastrophic weather events has been a predicted consequence of the rise in temperatures we've seen. They predicted it years ago, it is now happening, and yet you still pretend it isn't necessarily climate change? These 'claims' are literally solely based on scientific evidence. There is no scientific basis behind the apocalyptic theories that the world is going to end, or begin to end in 8-12 years as pushed by leading warmists like the people behind Thunberg and groups like extinction rebellion, it’s just pure scaremongering.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jan 19, 2020 15:20:41 GMT
As I've said earlier there is a great divide between rich and poor. The story of Jesus that I've posted has been retold for 2000 years. Blair a millionaire Christian socialist ( not for us to judge) supports the system. Unfortunately lil I think your ideals will get much airing in the socialist chattering class arena but have little pragmatic value other than making people feel better. The price is too high. Nothing wrong with having them though. Blair is not a socialist. I think too much is made of socialism and millionaires though. Socialism has no innate issue with rich people, more that there should be priority to ensure people without enough to live get the money first. There is no price, beyond removing material goods and 'non-necessary' (although I admit that part is slightly subjective) wealth to make sure humans aren't dying from lack of basic needs. I think therein lies your problem
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Jan 19, 2020 16:19:50 GMT
It just seems to me this climate change stuff is the latest in a long line of apocalyptic predictions that we’ve heard before, ie the ozone layer, acid rain, the ice age etc etc I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, it surely does, but what wil it’s impact be ? It will Almost certainly not match what the alarmists are pushing. On top of this is the fact the climate has always changed and always will, no matter what we do or don’t do.
People have been pushing these doomsday theories for centuries, yet we’re still here, thriving better than ever before, some of these climate alarmists are on par with those people who go around with “the end isn’t nigh” sandwich boards.
Of course much of it is motivated by politics, if you’re lefty then the odds are you’re going to blindly believe anything that gives industry and capitalism a bad name, linking every event to climate change is just confirmation bias.
|
|