Yup. Same goes for racism, feminism, homophobia, terrorism, etc. Typical, predictable, "whipping boys," or the "enemy du jour." Governments can't function without an enemy, real or imagined. " . . . the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken, 1918 LOL, he wrote that ^ nearly a hundred years ago and Americans still believe everything their politicians tell them. Who dares oppose any of the horrid "-isms"? Now shut the fuck up while we pass whatever new laws we want to. I did read your PM, but didn't respond although I may yet. How are things?
Its about control..once you pass this crap then they can be the puppet masters in a new manner. Thank god only a few live under this utter bull crap Literally though everyone I have met that loves this BS lives far from a life that is conductive to what they believe in.
it's not all about governments. it's a battle of profits. new vs old. battle of technologies. look at who is paying this guy to think: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00005582&type=I no big secret there actually. you either play on one side of the energy source or the other. one thing that is not going to change is progress, so once the politicians are backed by the purveyors of new energy sources we will see a different political landscape. and it will take place, slowly but surely over the next few decades. politicians are the true puppets.
There is always some reason people think the world is going to end. Doomsayers never sleep. Global warming is just another hysteria. We have made great progress in green technology and we continue to do so. Once solar energy becomes more profitable than oil, (which it eventually will) society will quickly swich to solar. Money makes the world go around. Not fear and paranoia. If what they say is true about global warming, I don't think its preventable. The only thing we can do is trust the scientists that are still working out more and more green technologies and hope the come in time. Government regulation will just slow the process. Just look at Obama's failed solar plans. Its because it was not a cost effective idea. -yuri
Yup. Not to mention the government-mandated insane distortions to the feed corn market by converting it to alcohol to add to gasoline.
a healthy dose of anxiety is a good thing in this case. (if this whole thing is a hoax) then it pushes the progress in the right direction. likely, it makes more people think creatively (look at many successful, innovating and emerging companies in the renewable energy sector or EVs). so on the flip-side you have "climate deniers", which try to push their political agenda (i.e. building of an oil pipe) by hanging to the old profits of old technologies. so despite the "controversial" nature of the global warming trend we are currently experiencing, whatever is done to lessen our use of fossils and promote the switch to clean energy, i see it all as a positive agenda.
this is true; however there is such thing as overreacting. There are those who use climate change as an exscuse to infringe upon our freedoms. Is it really worth it? -yuri
Put it this way: it is at least as acceptable as infringing upon freedoms in the name of economic development In fact, I'm surprised that more members in this thread have no chimed into the potential for market liberalization associated with environmental management.
The two are diametrically-opposed to each other -- if, as I'm assuming, you mean "management" by government. Government "management" results in restricted (un-free) markets. Thomas Jefferson understood this quite well: "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." -- Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, Paris, May 27, 1788
Well, I'm definitely inclined to agree - especially ideologically - but what I'm suggesting is that there is a link between the two, via the non-excludability of ecosystem services and how industry relies on free access to externalize those costs. The current market function is to essentially *steal* those ecosystem services from the soverign. No, I specifically did not reference government, because I didn't intend to invoke it. Management can and does occur through market forces. I didn't invoke government, because the OP demonstrates why that doesn't work. The centralization of power in government is what enabled these costs to be avoided by industry. It's a really neo-liberal argument, which is why I'm kind of surprised you guys are not familiar with it. Any industry that expects consistent growth must manage their resources; renewable or not.
I am still pondering. Half of me wants to say screw it, tax the transport. You want commerce or cheap labor in some Countries to then sell to other Countries? Pay for the damage you are doing to all of the Earth. You want to set a fair price market and make a decent profit? Manufacture, train, develop and sell in that Country. You already see prices set for the local markets, extend that to account for all factors. I don't need your cheap shit that lines your pocket, while bankrupting the consumers by removing their manufacturing base. You can't really sustain a Nation of consumers if your not a Nation of production. /Rant Back to