The Environmental thread + Conventional (HI-FI) wisdom is almost always invariably wrong

[semente]

2 hours ago, Jud said:

We got into this mess being the vastly imperfect humans we are, and in the increasingly unlikely event we get out of it,  it will have to be via methods this same vastly imperfect humanity can utilize.

Perhaps got into this mess being the vastly greedy humans we are. Or am I the only one to see a correlation between profit and environmental disaster? Deregulation and weak governance got us here, mostly driven by corruption but also by ideology. It wouldn’t be so bad if we all had profited more fairly but that is not the case.

In my view savage capitalism is incompatible with any solution.

[semente]

2 hours ago, Jud said:

The Internet is only the latest of a long line of technologies and institutions that were supposed to make us better educated, better off, and better behaved.  In general we do seem to be making slow, incremental progress on the first two.  But I doubt that better education has actually made us smarter or our decisions better, and I don't think human behavior has changed much if at all as a result.

I do agree with this.

I often say that one of the biggest failures of modern civilisation is the belief that school is enough to make an honest, hard working and sensible human being out of most people. What better illustrates this than the current rise in populist governments?

[semente]

On 9/24/2021 at 8:50 PM, sphinxsix said:

A couple of words by Greta Thunberg from Berlin on the occasion of 'Fridays for Future' kick off.

 

She hits the nail in the head. Covid proved that (most) people are willing to accept change in an emergency situation.

 

The change must come from the gorvernments, and it is a matter of politics and economic ideology whether or not governments are willing to make new rules. But governments in democratic countries are elected by people so ultimately it's down to voters to make change happen.

[semente]

32 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

It is eye opening to see that so many have so much faith in governments to fix problems they largely created and are never held accountable for. By no means am I naively supporting unregulated corporate entities to fix things, as our latest richest companies such as FB, AAPL, NVDA, GOOG, AMZN, etc. demonstrate by not only their reliance and desire to engage and support the biggest polluters in the world BUT that being said, it is like blaming the current healthcare issues on United Health, etc. who just followed the trail of money government lays out for them.

 

Governments are elected to serve the people but abide to the will of big money corporations.

So we need different, honest, competent people in Government. But many voters seem too irrationally attached to parties (as if they were football clubs), and quite a few are suspicious of coalitions.

 

After the most recent financial crisis Icelanders arrested the bankers and the government and took control of country. It may not have had the perfect outcome but it could be a way of balancing the powers. But it requires civilized and educated populations and competent and honest people willing to come forth and occupy the leading roles. Not many countries would survive such a revolution and the result would be chaos.

[semente]

2 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

As far as companies NOT wanting to cooperate, who are they? Companies such as Apple, etc. who want to increase margins to save you a couple of bucks on their iPhones while doing so at the expense of the environment by manufacturing their stuff by the biggest polluters and then using CO2 spewing transportation to deliver their goods?  Those companies or are we going to to pigeonhole companies like Haliburton and the rest.

 

Ok so we now have a couple of tools we can use:

 

- our vote

 

- our buying choices

 

Perhaps the answer is to stop buying from Apple. In fact the answer may have to come to reducing consumption and increasing corporate profit tax and hunt down tax evasion and shut down tax heavens to re-balance the scales.

US and European governments have been invading countries and toppling regimes for the good of their patrons, the big corporations. Perhaps, through the UN, they should instead be imposing sanctions on regimes/states that harbour money laundry and tax evasion.

[semente]

3 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

That is what you got out of my rant?  LMAO. 

 

No, what my comments claim is that the current corrupt government can and will not fix it. When the leader of the free world admits that there is 15% fraud in abuse in the largest social program they oversee, I think there is a problem. When laws are passed that benefit some at the expense of most there is a problem. When laws that others have to abide by, like insider trading or failure to pay taxes weaponized against some while those in power skate free, there is something wrong. When a 2 trillion dollar company can buy off a politician with just a couple of hundred grand worth of influence there is something wrong. 

 

Lastly, when, like in American, we have these appointed bodies failing to really be held accountable under the Delegation of Powers clause, it is literally a setup for fraud and abuse which has literally spiraled out of control with ZERO accountability except for some scam hearing for the clapping seals in front of the computers while nothing is ever done. 

 

Outdated or practically inexistent (in the case of the UK) constitutions might need a rethink. And they should strive for accountability.

[semente]

2 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

Yeah, Iceland did do some good. Agree. America has become a joke politically as has most of the world. The internet has made people dumb not smarter. They have become the copy and paste fact checkers rather than doing some primary research into the aspects of what they claim to be experts in. 

 

One thing Iceland is NOW facing though, ironically, is the potential total instability of their infrastructure and environment as these trillion dollar corporations try to manipulate their government and people with the big $$ of large cloud warehouses that Iceland appears to be "perfect" for. 

 

It is a time when democratic governments should stick together and face the money. (but corruption...and nationalist populism)

[semente]

39 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

Biggest problems with laws and the Constitution as I see it is the justification and rationalization by some to ignore them with ZERO accountability. The problem with replacing or amending a Constitution is what makes you think those who break the laws now will follow them in the future when no one is held accountable now? Or when a precedent is set that it is OK for some to ignore the laws why others with new laws won't justify the breaking of new laws or Constitutions. 

 

A Constitution, new or old, doesn't not warrant law abiding. But any constitution can be updated and improved to reflect the modern requirements and promote a more cohesive and just society.

[semente]

33 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

Well you can't just pigeon hole one POV regarding populism. I don't know, if I look at "nationalist populism" on face value, there is something to be said about the national populist (here in the US)  wanting to bring manufacturing to a cleaner manufacturer like the USA compared to China (and others). There may be no bigger "national populist" than China despite what the mainstream media would have you ignore.

 

The point being terms and tags are just that. We have manipulated the term to mean all bad when in fact, there may be "some" good. Of course, is not the first requirement of a Country's government to look out for the benefit of their citizens? We can tag that as some egregious "national populist" movement but there is room for looking out for the citizens of one's countries as well as to have a cogent, respectable and economically rational world stage approach without the pigeon holing. 

 

If we particularise then it becomes a thesis or treaty, not a forum chat over a cup of tea.

 

Nationalism and patriotism are not the same in my view. And even though the goal of a government is to zeal and provide for its citizens I find it morally debatable that such goals can be achieve at any cost (ecological or for example at the demise of citizens of another nation). The US is too powerful for the good of us Earth dwellers, particularly when a nationalist populism takes control of the helm.

[semente]

Interesting results.

The Greens, which were touted as the winners some 6 months ago, ended up third but got most votes in half of Berlin's constituencies, Frankfurt, Bonn, Stuttgard, Munich, Heidelberg... Apparently voting outside of the 2 main parties is still predominantly an urbanite thing (small Heidelberg is a university/research town so it was to be expected), except for east-southeast Germany which is predominantly far-right leaning, with a massive >30% of the votes around Dresden.

The good news is that looks as though the far-right is on the decline in the west and south (old FDR).

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2021/sep/26/german-election-results-exit-poll-and-possible-coalitions

 

[semente]

Want to save the Earth? Then don’t buy that shiny new iPhone

Apple has just unveiled the latest all-singing, all-dancing iteration of its handset, but perhaps you should resist the hype

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/18/want-to-save-the-earth-then-dont-buy-that-shiny-new-iphone

[semente]

On 10/2/2021 at 7:56 PM, Priaptor said:

inertia

 

"Inertia" is not a word I would use to characterise most governments... Let's say that they been kept busy with other affairs.

What about "corruption"?

Revealed: Pandora papers unmask owners of offshore-held UK property worth £4bn

Analysis of leak identifies 600 previously anonymous owners from world leaders to monarchs and oligarchs

 

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/05/pandora-papers-reveal-true-owners-offshore-held-uk-property-london

[semente]

BBC podcast

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct2dr5

 

Putin and the planet

The Climate Question

 

Russia is the world’s fourth-largest emitter of greenhouse gasses. Any talk of changing that needs to focus on President Vladimir Putin. Under his leadership, Russia has become a fossil fuel powerhouse. Since he took office in 2000, Russian oil production has risen by 70%. Today, the state is dependent on its revenues. Four in every ten dollars Moscow spends comes from fossil fuels. So the idea that Russia needs to shift away from fossil fuels to prevent the worst effects of climate change strikes at the very heart of Mr Putin’s power. 

But Russia is already suffering more than most from the effects of climate change. Arctic temperatures are rising faster than the global average, forests the size of countries are going up in smoke. Two thirds of the country’s permafrost - permanently frozen ground - has roads, homes, schools, oil and pipelines and even nuclear reactors are built on it. And the permafrost is starting to melt. 
Putin’s latest national security document for the first time mentions climate change as a risk. But can he do what is necessary to prevent things from getting worse?

Contributors -
Angelina Davydova - Environmental Journalist 
Chris Miller - Director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute’s Eurasia Program
Vladimir Chuprov - Director of the Energy Program, Greenpeace Russia

 

[semente]

Haven't listened to this podcast yet but the summary is depressing enough...

Manchin thwarts Biden’s climate plan: Politics Weekly Extra

As Joe Biden gears up for his trip to Glasgow for the Cop26 summit, Senator Joe Manchin continues to try to water down the reconciliation bill, which as it stands includes transformational provisions to stem the adverse affects of the climate crisis. Joan Greve and Oliver Milman look at the potential fallout for the world if Manchin gets his way

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/audio/2021/oct/22/manchin-thwarts-bidens-climate-plan-politics-weekly-extra

[semente]

On 10/22/2021 at 10:59 PM, sphinxsix said:

I wasn't comparing the NL to the USA, I just wanted to show you how miserable country with high taxes, developed social system and broad state control in many fields can be (there are of course more miserable countries like that - eg Sweden, Norway, Iceland or Denmark, full of unhappy people who are not even allowed to own a gun, and guess what.. I must admit I'm to some degree a fan of such social democratic model, at the same time, guess what again.. I think and hope we can do better).

But there is actually one field where the NL can be compared to the US. This country with population only slightly (and also area) bigger than NYC is the second biggest exporter of food and agricultural goods in the world after the US with only 3% of people working in the agriculture.

In addition its pension funds have gathered the amount of money equal half of the rest of Europe's funds.

I hope I have shown clearly enough now how miserably end the countries which use diametrically different political and economic model from the one you support..

Will you try to convince me.?

If so, I wish you good luck..

AFAIK you care for environmental stuff.. How would you compare the attitude of towards the environmental problems in the above mentioned miserable countries with what your candidate for president in recent elections did.?

Again - good luck with your answer..

 

 

 

 

I would add that The Netherlands has the best healthcare system in Europe and primary care is free for all.

[semente]

 

The US system looks, to my European eyes, like little more than a modernised version of what I remember seeing in cowboys films growing up, the lawless Wild West.

The political system was designed to keep rich white men in power and to favour the interests of the few over the needs and wellbeing of the many. It's undemocratic, unequal and unfair.

Such a system, steered solely by greedy commercial interest, has little chance of addressing the climate issue which requires a completely change in paradigm: on the one hand infinite growth is not sustainable, and on the other assymetries in wealth distribution will have a massive disproportionate impact on the population with the poorest getting hit the hardest by the measures needed to control heating and waste, and those who profited from destroying the planet will go through the change almost unsacthed.

[semente]

We can try to leave politics out of the discussion as much as possible but unfortunately the fate of the environment depends on politics.

[semente]

15 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

In a country like the USA, lifespans, premature births, death at birth, etc. is hardly a metric for our healthcare system and more a metric of our socioeconomic diversities with all its inherent negatives. 

 

In my view it's a metric of ineffective policies. There are countries with 1/50 or 1/60 the GDP of the USA which perform much better, which is another way of saying that they take better care of their citizens.

You can't seriously judge a healthcare system by looking at only the top performers serving only a small part of the population.

 

Here in the UK there's a significant slice of the population holding a profound dislike for what they call "Nanny State".

Yet it is through rules and regulations that we become (more) civilized, compassionate, respectful of others and of the environment. The extreme opposite is anarchy, another word for boundless personal freedom.

[semente]

Who's interests is this 74 year old white male Democrat businessman serving?

 

Manchin responds to AOC’s criticism of fossil fuel lobby’s access to senator

Manchin rejects $3.5 trillion budget bill to combat climate crisis as he dismisses ties to oil and gas lobbyists

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/joe-manchin-aoc-fossil-fuels-b1918816.html

 

(you can bypass many paywalls by using your browser's Reader View)

[semente]

53 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

Yeah, let's pick and choose the issues near and dear.

 

So Manchin rejects the ludicrous 3.5 trillion dollar spending which "they" claim fix stuff with no proof and it must be because of his fossil fuel lobby. Of course the fact that he represents a state, WV, whose economy is pretty much dependent on fossil fuel has no importance as in typical hypocritical liberal argument, why should Manchin represent the people who vote for him. So on the one hand, this thread criticizes politicians when they don't represent their constituency and now because of some tortuous argument suggesting that this absurd 3.5 billion bill actually has something to do with climate change, Manchin is bad for opposing it and supporting the voters who voted him in to office. Of course, as the incredibly adept mathematician AOC puts it, "IT'S ONLY 350 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR", of course ignoring the staggering amount on a bill that will do nothing as well as ignoring the cost of interest in financing the 3.5 Trillion boondoggle. 

 

Of course, the REAL issue is, that artificial demand created by Biden. I posted on this thread a FACTUAL link to the now increased demand, up 22% for coal as a result of Biden's crackdown on pipelines, eliminating fracking and natural gas supplies. What me worry, Machin is the bad guy. 

 

China, faces their worst fuel shortages in years so coal importing has increased 2x since same time last year. What me worry, Manchin opposes some hairbrained 3.5 million dollar socialists agenda that has nothing to do with climate. 

 

They tortuosity and hypocrisy of the MSM and those who buy into it is mindboggling 

 

So the fact that he has made "millions at a coal brokerage firm" is not biasing his judgement?

Is he serving the electorate or the coal industry?

[semente]

• Sen. Joe Manchin earned $500,000 in 2020 from his son's energy firm, which Manchin founded in 1998.

• He's also the chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which regulates the industry.

• He's received thousands from Exxon lobbyists and Republican oil and gas titans.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/senator-joe-manchin-half-million-year-coal-stocks-climate-crisis-2021-9?r=US&IR=T

[semente]

I took my youngest to the local football stadium for vaccination yesterday after lunch.
An anti-vaxxer mob was rallying by the entrance and I was offered this free "newspaper"...

 

[semente]

Coca-Cola’s 100 Billion Bottle Problem

Coca-Cola sells more than 100 billion throwaway plastic bottles each year. Panorama investigates their promises to crack down on plastic waste. Globally, more of Coke's plastic packaging is found littered than any other brand. Filming on the ground in Samoa, the Philippines and Uganda, this film asks if Coca-Cola is on track to achieve its pledge to create a world without waste.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010zxs

[semente]

10 hours ago, firedog said:

Pretty much everyone in the Senate and House gets money from all types of lobbyists/industries. Many are  weathy and so have all sorts of financial interests. Manchin isn't unique.

Priaptor made a good point: he represents a state dependent on coal and fossil fuel industries. His role is to represent his constituents. 

One could argue he should be helping his state by leading an orderly transition away from fossil fuels. But that is sort of a different argument.

 

But is he representing the constituents or the industry and his own interests?

 

I understand that Manchin is not unique, Lobbying and corruotion are one of the problems of the US system and perhaps to a lesser extent of European democracies.

[semente]

Guess who's in the list?

 

The dirty dozen: meet America’s top climate villains

Few are household names, yet these 12 enablers and profiteers have an unimaginable sway over the fate of humanity

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/27/climate-crisis-villains-americas-dirty-dozen