People jaded by 'Green' issues

RobAMerc · 02-09-2008 1:28pm #1

Is it me or are people starting to get tired of the whole Green issues, global warming, climate change etc ?

djpbarry · 02-09-2008 1:31pm

RobAMerc wrote: »

Is it me or are people starting to get tired of the whole Green issues, global warming, climate change etc ?

Yes, it would be so much easier if we didn't have to deal with these problems, wouldn't it?

RobAMerc · 02-09-2008 2:59pm

What I mean is - people are getting jaded by the greens constantly nagging on that everything we do is incorrect and not green. I am sorry to say, of the people I talk to, most couldn't give a damn and wish the naggers would just go away.

Few people in my opinion, deny climate change is happening.
Few people believe everything is a sign of climate change, as the Greens would have us believe.
And few people believe we have any impact on climate change at all.

As far as I am concerned I have already lived through :

The new ice age, in the 70's
The hole in the Ozone layer 80 - 90's
The millennium bug.
Global Warming and now Climate Change.

How many more of these Fads can go on before people realize they are being sold a pup to the benefit of a few to the tune of millions ?

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 3:24pm

RobAMerc wrote: »

The millennium bug.

Going to take you up on this point, as it's one I'm very well placed to comment on.

There's a widespread perception that the millennium bug was a hoax, was exaggerated, was whatever - basically that it wasn't the major problem it was made out to be.

Trust me on this: it was. So why didn't the world grind to a halt on the evening of 1999-12-31?

Because we fixed the bug.

More accurately, we fixed the thousands upon thousands of similar bugs which would otherwise have plagued computer systems the world over. We (meaning the project team of which I was a member, and the thousands of similar teams worldwide) spent much of our time - and, in the last couple of months, pretty much all our time - over the previous couple of years finding, fixing, testing and deploying.

Most people don't realise that. Most people looked at the issue without the requisite knowledge to make a reasoned judgement, and decided that there had never been a problem or that the problem had been exaggerated. Ask anyone who actually understands the issues, and you'll get a different picture.

Celticfire · 02-09-2008 4:08pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Going to take you up on this point, as it's one I'm very well placed to comment on.

There's a widespread perception that the millennium bug was a hoax, was exaggerated, was whatever - basically that it wasn't the major problem it was made out to be.

Trust me on this: it was. So why didn't the world grind to a halt on the evening of 1999-12-31?

Because we fixed the bug.

More accurately, we fixed the thousands upon thousands of similar bugs which would otherwise have plagued computer systems the world over. We (meaning the project team of which I was a member, and the thousands of similar teams worldwide) spent much of our time - and, in the last couple of months, pretty much all our time - over the previous couple of years finding, fixing, testing and deploying.

Most people don't realise that. Most people looked at the issue without the requisite knowledge to make a reasoned judgement, and decided that there had never been a problem or that the problem had been exaggerated. Ask anyone who actually understands the issues, and you'll get a different picture.

I don't remember changing my pc, fridge, microwave, washing machine , tv , vcr, or car for a new model to avoid the millennium bug just as I'm sure millions of other people around the world didn't either and I can honestly say that I didn't heard of anything failing at midnight.

There was a shed load of money to be made on the back of the millennium bug scare.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 4:26pm

Celticfire wrote: »

I don't remember changing my pc, fridge, microwave, washing machine , tv , vcr, or car for a new model to avoid the millennium bug just as I'm sure millions of other people around the world didn't either and I can honestly say that I didn't heard of anything failing at midnight.

Way to prove my point.

There was a shed load of money to be made on the back of the millennium bug scare.

Who made money, and how?

Celticfire · 02-09-2008 4:34pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Way to prove my point.

My point was that I along with plenty of people didn't change or update a lot of items that were supposed to fail and they didn't.

Who made money, and how?

You for a start, you didn't work for free did you?

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 4:47pm

Celticfire wrote: »

My point was that I along with plenty of people didn't change or update a lot of items that were supposed to fail and they didn't.

Nobody who knew what they were talking about claimed that fridges, microwaves etc were vulnerable to the bug. Such claims were made either through ignorance or sensationalism, or in an attempt to create straw men.

The problem was always much more one of mainframe and midrange business systems. Left unfixed, the bugs would have manifested in banking systems, corporate invoicing and accounting systems and so on. Not nearly as sexy an image as your toaster suddenly not working after midnight, but a much bigger problem in the long run.

You for a start, you didn't work for free did you?

No, I did my job and got paid for it. My job largely consisted of making sure our software continued to run without interruption from one day to the next, which it wouldn't have over the millennium if the y2k bugs hadn't been fixed.

Now, when you said "there was a shed load of money to be made on the back of the millennium bug scare", it seemed to me that you were implying that such money was made dishonestly, and that the predicted problems wouldn't have materialised if I and others hadn't been paid to fix them. Did I misunderstand you?

Celticfire · 02-09-2008 5:03pm

The total cost of the work done in preparation for Y2K is estimated at over 300 billion US dollars.

That's a fairly decent chunk of money in my eyes.

Others have claimed that there were no, or very few, critical problems to begin with, and that correcting the few minor mistakes as they occurred (the 'fix on failure' approach) would have been the most efficient and cost effective way to solve the problem. Editorial writing in the Wall Street Journal called Y2K an end-of-the-world cult and the hoax of the century.[26] The opposing view was bolstered by a number of observations.

* The lack of Y2K-related problems in schools, many of which undertook little or no remediation effort. By September 1, 1999 only 28 percent of US schools had achieved compliance for mission critical systems, and a government report predicted that "Y2K failures could very well plague the computers used by schools to manage payrolls, student records, online curricula, and building safety systems".[27]
* The lack of Y2K-related problems in an estimated 1.5 million small businesses that undertook no remediation effort. On 3 January 2000 (the first weekday of the year) the Small Business Administration received an estimated 40 calls from businesses with computer problems, similar to the average. None of the problems were critical.[28]
* The lack of Y2K-related problems in countries such as Italy, which undertook a far more limited remediation effort than the United States. In an October 22, 1999, report, a US Senate Committee expressed concern about safe travel outside of the United States. The report stated that overseas public transit systems were considered vulnerable because many did not have an aggressive response plan in place for any problems. Internationally, the report singled out Italy, China and Russia as poorly prepared. The Australian government evacuated all but three embassy staff from Russia.[29] None of these countries experienced any Y2K problems regarded as worth reporting.[30]
* The absence of Y2K-related problems occurring before January 1, 2000, even though the 2000 financial year commenced in 1999 in many jurisdictions, and a wide range of forward-looking calculations involved dates in 2000 and later years. Estimates undertaken in the leadup to 2000 suggested that around 25% of all problems should have occurred before 2000.[31] Critics of large-scale remediation argued, during 1999, that the absence of significant problems, even in systems that had not been rendered compliant, suggested that the scale of the problem had been overestimated.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 5:12pm

You didn't answer my question. Oh, and I'd appreciate if you'd attribute those quotes.

Celticfire · 02-09-2008 5:22pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Now, when you said "there was a shed load of money to be made on the back of the millennium bug scare", it seemed to me that you were implying that such money was made dishonestly, and that the predicted problems wouldn't have materialised if I and others hadn't been paid to fix them. Did I misunderstand you?

Ok, I'll ask you this. Did you continue to run any of your old software as a control to see if this problem really would have materialized ?

I got my quotes from Wikipedia,

RobAMerc · 02-09-2008 5:31pm

Ok - I agree there could have been an issue with the millennium bug - however, do you think a few people might have over played a bit in order to make a few quid ?

Could it be possible the same is happening again ? Maybe this time used not only to make a few quid ( perhaps selling your Video) - but to get into power based on your "ideals" (like a certain party who likes to name themselves after a colour?)

Call me a skeptic - but I would rather be accused of having basic intelligence and not fall for this sh*t again.

Flyer1 · 02-09-2008 5:33pm

The greens always have to have some silly thing to nark on about. It's generally a great way for the Governments to rake in revenue for doing nothing really.

In general the people are really fed up to the bones of listening to the tree hugging tail wagging nonsense that comes out of the mouths of the so called " green side ".

I know some people here will slate me for my comments but sorry guys, everyone really is fed up of the crap. We're not going to give up our daily comforts or our holidays to Spain. Around me there are 15 or 20 people, all of which feel the whole " going green " thing is absolute waffle. If there was a reasonable arguement then people would listen, weather records have been kept for a very short time, for anyone to judge climate change based on just over 100 years data is just stone mad.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 5:39pm

Celticfire wrote: »

Ok, I'll ask you this. Did you continue to run any of your old software as a control to see if this problem really would have materialized ?

You're sort of missing the really fundamental point that we identified the bugs, then fixed them.

I don't know if you're familiar with software engineering concepts at all, but to give a single brief example: in many midrange computing systems, dates were stored as 6-digit numbers, like 991231. Because of the yymmdd format, date values were often compared numerically: to check whether a date is between two others, you do something like "if date >= startdate and date <= enddate".

If the start date is 991231, and the end date is 000101, you don't need to run the old software as a control to see whether or not it's going to work.

I got my quotes from Wikipedia,

Ah, that bastion of reliability. I'm sure Wikipedia knows more about my job than I did.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 5:44pm

RobAMerc wrote: »

Ok - I agree there could have been an issue with the millennium bug - however, do you think a few people might have over played a bit in order to make a few quid ?

It's not only likely, it's practically a certainty.

Could it be possible the same is happening again ? Maybe this time used not only to make a few quid ( perhaps selling your Video) - but to get into power based on your "ideals" (like a certain party who likes to name themselves after a colour?)

It's possible. The analogy holds, however: just because some people may be exploiting the existence of the problem to further their own ends doesn't mean that there isn't a problem that needs to be fixed.

Sure, there may have been scam artists selling snake oil solutions to the y2k problem - but if my employer had decided that because of that, there was no problem to solve, they would have been in for a rude awakening in January 2000.

The key difference is that I was able to edit some source code, and see a routine that I could tell was definitely going to fail if not fixed. For a climate scientist it's a little less clear-cut. In both cases, those who actually have the expertise to assess the situation know that there is a problem, and that something needs to be done to address it, and they need to get on with it even while the nay-sayers express their doubts.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 5:45pm

Flyer1 wrote: »

If there was a reasonable arguement then people would listen...

What constitutes a reasonable argument, if you're not prepared to accept the science?

Morlar · 02-09-2008 5:56pm

Flyer1 wrote: »

people are really fed up to the bones of listening to the tree hugging tail wagging nonsense that comes out of the mouths of the so called " green side "

Y2k dramas aside that would be my take on it too.

Caoimhín · 02-09-2008 6:05pm

OP, I'm not so much sick of "Green issues" as i am sick of the condescending and "holier that thou" manner which these issues and the purported solutions are put forward.

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 6:10pm

OP, i think you have a point.
I used to be environmentally concious, and even voted Green, but now every time i hear "Green", especially "Green Party" , I think, "Oh jaysus, MORE TAX".

Never again will I vote for them.

Macha · 02-09-2008 6:48pm

Morlar wrote: »

Y2k dramas aside that would be my take on it too.

To be honest, people with this attitude are normally just whinging about having to give up relatively ridiculous luxuries (when look at on a global level). I find people whining about their 4x4s and holidays to Spain more annoying than anyone else. Especially when there are people in this world with no running water, dying of hunger, illiterate.

I find the complaint about tax hilarious. Study upon study upon study has shown that the most effective way to change people's behaviour is through financial incentive. Education, information schemes - no: the only thing people worry about is their wallet. So how to you implement this logic on a national level? Through the taxation system...durrr..

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 7:49pm

taconnol wrote: »

To be honest, people with this attitude are normally just whinging about having to give up relatively ridiculous luxuries (when look at on a global level). I find people whining about their 4x4s and holidays to Spain more annoying than anyone else. Especially when there are people in this world with no running water, dying of hunger, illiterate.

I find the complaint about tax hilarious. Study upon study upon study has shown that the most effective way to change people's behaviour is through financial incentive. Education, information schemes - no: the only thing people worry about is their wallet. So how to you implement this logic on a national level? Through the taxation system...durrr..

Just wait for the study on how yakking about raising taxes a la the green party gets a political party kicked out of power. Coming soon.
One of my luxuries was donating €500 a year to an African Orphanage i once worked in. Well nowadays that must go towards my rubbish collection. I always recycled anyway. My rubbish used to be paid for via my tax.

When water rates, which i already pay for via tax, come in some other donations will have to get cut. I already conserve water. I have a water butt. I have a block in the cistern. And i have 3 compost bins.

How about we go ahead and install water meters but allow those who use less to claim back some tax as they havent used the resource as much as others. Oh no, not a chance i of that happening.

Flyer1 · 02-09-2008 7:55pm

Hold on now. I thought this was about ENVIRONMENTAL issues, not how much money the Government can screw people out of.

taconnol, i'm all for supporting developing countries and knocking out hunger and disease, but i'm also all for making my own life as comfortable and enjoyable as I can. I think the main issue here is the Government riding people's pockets out of whatever few euro they can !

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 8:07pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

My rubbish used to be paid for via my tax.

...and mine, when I was paying for rubbish collection and you weren't.

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:11pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and mine, when I was paying for rubbish collection and you weren't.

When exactly were you paying for rubbish collection when i wasnt?

djpbarry · 02-09-2008 8:14pm

RobAMerc wrote: »

What I mean is - people are getting jaded by the greens constantly nagging on that everything we do is incorrect and not green.

And I’m sick of listening to Fianna Fáil tell me I have to tighten my belt; so what?

RobAMerc wrote: »

Few people in my opinion, deny climate change is happening.
...
And few people believe we have any impact on climate change at all.

So, most people (does that include you?) accept that climate change is happening, but most believe it’s nothing to do with us?

RobAMerc wrote: »

The new ice age, in the 70's

This was largely media hype. A 1971 paper by Stephen Schneider suggested that the cooling effect of dirty air could outweigh the warming effect of carbon dioxide, potentially leading to an ice age if aerosol pollution quadrupled. However, he soon realised he had overestimated the cooling effect of aerosol pollution and underestimated the effect of CO2, meaning warming was more likely than cooling in the long run.

RobAMerc wrote: »

The hole in the Ozone layer 80 - 90's

It’s still there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:160658main2_OZONE_large_350.png

RobAMerc wrote: »

The millennium bug.

OscarBravo’s already tackled this one.

RobAMerc wrote: »

Global Warming and now Climate Change
How many more of these Fads can go on before people realize they are being sold a pup to the benefit of a few to the tune of millions ?

Oh yeah, absolutely. There’s no hole in the ozone layer; never has been, has there? There were no software bugs that had to fixed at the turn of the millennium; nope, not at all. And this graph isn’t real. Neither is this one. Nope, all just media hype.

“Sunshine, lollipops and rainbows everywhere...”

Flyer1 wrote: »

If there was a reasonable arguement then people would listen, weather records have been kept for a very short time, for anyone to judge climate change based on just over 100 years data is just stone mad.

Fortunately that’s not the case.

KhanTheMan wrote: »

I used to be environmentally concious, and even voted Green, but now every time i hear "Green", especially "Green Party" , I think, "Oh jaysus, MORE TAX".

What taxes are these?

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 8:17pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

When exactly were you paying for rubbish collection when i wasnt?

When did you start paying for rubbish collection?

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:19pm

djpbarry wrote: »

What taxes are these?

Plastic bags, bin charges, soon to be water charges, motor tax, WEEE ............

Listen to the Green party. All they do now is suggest more taxation.

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:22pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

When did you start paying for rubbish collection?

Why dont you answer my question first? How could you possibly know that you paid rubbish charges when i didnt if you dont know when i didnt?

Why assume such a thing when you clearly dont know a thing about me?

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:24pm

Apologies for the rant. I just disagree with the stick attitude when ive been environmentally conscious all my life. Why should i pay extra to make me do what i do already. There are better more people, pocket friendly ways to encourage people to be green instead of beating them into it.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 8:24pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

Why dont you answer my question first? How could you possibly know that you paid rubbish charges when i didnt if you dont know when i didnt?

Because I was paying for refuse collection for years before people starting kicking and screaming about having to do so.

djpbarry · 02-09-2008 8:26pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

Plastic bags,

You think that was a bad idea?

KhanTheMan wrote: »

bin charges,

Encourages recycling and reduces waste - again, not a bad idea (in my opinion).

KhanTheMan wrote: »

soon to be water charges,

We'll have to wait and see about that one. Again, I wouldn't be totally opposed to it, in principle.

KhanTheMan wrote: »

motor tax,

Motor/road tax has been charged as long as I can remember.

KhanTheMan wrote: »

WEEE

No, that's a disposal charge, not a tax.

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:27pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Because I was paying for refuse collection for years before people starting kicking and screaming about having to do so.

Still no need to assume you were paying them before us here when you didnt know when anyone here started paying them is there?

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:29pm

djpbarry wrote: »

You think that was a bad idea?
Encourages recycling and reduces waste - again, not a bad idea (in my opinion).
We'll have to wait and see about that one. Again, I wouldn't be totally opposed to it, in principle.
Motor/road tax has been charged as long as I can remember.
No, that's a disposal charge, not a tax.

Theres just no arguing with the blind.

You just dont get my point at all. For example, Look up the new motor tax regime will you.

My point - All sticks in the name of the environment. Remember the money back on bottles .... Carrot.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 8:30pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

Still no need to assume you were paying them before us here when you didnt know when anyone here started paying them is there?

Fair enough. If you answer my question, we can clear this up.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 8:31pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

You just dont get my point at all. For example, Look up the new motor tax regime will you.

The one where more efficient cars have cheaper motor tax?

For shame.

djpbarry · 02-09-2008 8:39pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

For example, Look up the new motor tax regime will you.

My point - All sticks in the name of the environment. Remember the money back on bottles .... Carrot.

Remember that more efficient cars pay less tax? Carrot?

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:42pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Remember that more efficient cars pay less tax? Carrot?

And funnily enough the motor tax take is higher with the new regime. Dont take my word for it. look it up.

All an exercise in getting the tax take up, via green issues.

djpbarry · 02-09-2008 8:50pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

And funnily enough the motor tax take is higher with the new regime.

Probably because car ownership is up too?

ytareh · 02-09-2008 8:55pm

Car ownership up ?!Everyone knows the car sales market is on its knees.If they are taking in more tax they have really pulled a fast one !

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 8:56pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Probably because car ownership is up too?

No, its not because car ownership is up. Look it up.

OP is right, Im jaded about green issues already.

ytareh · 02-09-2008 9:01pm

And yes Im TOTALLY sick of all the Green pontificating too despite being generally pro recycling etc ...Human CO2 causing catastrophic climate change ?Rubbish !(Science graduate )We are within a decade of the nightmarish pay per mile (£1.43 propsed by the UK Govt just recently).Cars and plane travel will soon be for the wealthy only.

oscarBravo · 02-09-2008 9:04pm

Oh, a science graduate? I guess that makes you an expert, so.

ytareh · 02-09-2008 9:19pm

OscarBravo Ive read your passionate postings about how you saved the world from the Y2K bug ...now do you seriously think weve forgotten all the PC experts who charged a fortune to put 'Y2K safe' stickers on gullible companies computers.

ytareh · 02-09-2008 9:23pm

tacconnol are you actually saying that you expect us to just stop travelling by air as the prices are hiked sky high by eco levies because our great grandparents couldnt afford to?!Same attitude to other luxuries like cars (of course I hardly need ask!)health care and oh yeah education ???

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 9:27pm

taconnol wrote: »

You have an incredibly short memory. First of all, air travel has only existed for the last 100 years. And air travel that is affordable to the masses has only existed for the last c.30 years. (Ryanair was set up in 1985). Expensive air travel is the norm, not cheap air travel.

PhD here

Air travel like everything else is just more affordable than it used to be now. So affordable that it is ripe for the piking as far as taxing is concerned.
Cheap air travel is actually the norm now, unless you havent noticed that Ryanair arent the only airline and that you can get to New York for a day or two wages. Been like that for a few years now too. I dont see this changeing ever - just the govts adding taxes now and again in the name of the environment. Just enough to bleed you up but not stop you flying.

Kind of like the tax on fags. They bleed people up so the take is higher but its not quite enough to make people give up smoking. If they really wanted people to stop smoking (like they should want) they should put the fags up by €50 or ban them altogether. So they go to the black economy, so what. Make the sentances for selling them so high that the risks of selling is huge, therefore the price charged is greater. So is Heroin and Cocaine sold on the black market and not nearly the same amount of people buy those as fags. End result a lot less people living longer lives than there are now, but wait ... Tax take down, no good.

ytareh · 02-09-2008 9:33pm

Look lets reverse the whole "Think Globally Act Locally" slogan for a minute ...Think Locally .Its as simple as this the government allowed a situation to arise (they could lock down the market in the space of 3-6 months when they wanted) whereby I as a Dubliner with a good job could not afford a house in my home county let alone near the original community I grew up in.I consider myself lucky that I managed to get one in Kildare ,many ended up in Laois ,Westmeath etc .They then tax the buggery out of motorists who have to drive hours daily back to Dublin ...
And we're expected to smile happy in the knowledge that we are saving the planet ...

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 9:35pm

ytareh wrote: »

OscarBravo Ive read your passionate postings about how you saved the world from the Y2K bug ...now do you seriously think weve forgotten all the PC experts who charged a fortune to put 'Y2K safe' stickers on gullible companies computers.

I was actually one of those saviours

. And i can tell you that while there was the odd serious bug it was so over hyped on purpose you wouldnt believe it. We made an absolute fortune out of it. Cobol programmers were brought in from the cold on £800 a day in 1999 when they were left on the sidelines years before.

We even sent out what we called scaresmen to clients to talk up the millenium bug. It was so well orchestrated that friends of clients were ringing us up begging for us to make them Y2K compliant. We had to bring in programmers from India and hire students whose only jobs were to go through code to find "DD/MM/YY" day in day out, just so we could print it out and send the scaresmen back to the clients. Then we would look at it and go "no problem", but charge to fix it anyway. We got £2000 a man (12 clients fell for it) for having people sit in the office of clients that night.

It was such a turkey shoot. The biggest con in History.

Macha · 02-09-2008 9:42pm

ytareh wrote: »

tacconnol are you actually saying that you expect us to just stop travelling by air as the prices are hiked sky high by eco levies because our great grandparents couldnt afford to?!Same attitude to other luxuries like cars (of course I hardly need ask!)health care and oh yeah education ???

Oh great, take something I said about one thing, apply it to something completely different. Great logic there...oh wait..

Anyway, on the air travel: basically yes. Boohoo. Is everyone going to go cry into their cappuccinos like the spoilt selfish, materialistic Westerners they are? Or are they going to cop on and realise that some things are more important in life than being able to fly to Europe 4 times a year. Oh another thing I forgot to point out: most humans in this world have never, and will never be on a plane. So fliying is most definitely not the norm, on a global level. You have a very West-centric way of looking at things.

KhanTheMan wrote: »

PhD here

Air travel like everything else is just more affordable than it used to be now. So affordable that it is ripe for the piking as far as taxing is concerned.
Cheap air travel is actually the norm now, unless you havent noticed that Ryanair arent the only airline and that you can get to New York for a day or two wages. Been like that for a few years now too. I dont see this changeing ever - just the govts adding taxes now and again in the name of the environment. Just enough to bleed you up but not stop you flying.

Kind of like the tax on fags. They bleed people up so the take is higher but its not quite enough to make people give up smoking. If they really wanted people to stop smoking (like they should want) they should put the fags up by €50 or ban them altogether. So they go to the black economy, so what. Make the sentances for selling them so high that the risks of selling is huge, therefore the price charged is greater. So is Heroin and Cocaine sold on the black market and not nearly the same amount of people buy those as fags. End result a lot less people living longer lives than there are now, but wait ... Tax take down, no good.

I am aware that Ryanair is not the only airline that flies cheaply (btw, they don't go to NY but I take your point). I'm glad you pointed out that cheap air travel is the norm now. Because it sure ain't going to be like that in the future. Airline's fuel bills have doubled. Has anyone noticed the fule surcharges over €75 one way to New York? And this nothing to do with taxes. This is the simple market mechanism of supply and demand in action.

I'm not sure I understand your drug analogy or what it has to do with the environment...

Macha · 02-09-2008 9:48pm

ytareh wrote: »

Look lets reverse the whole "Think Globally Act Locally" slogan for a minute ...Think Locally .Its as simple as this the government allowed a situation to arise (they could lock down the market in the space of 3-6 months when they wanted) whereby I as a Dubliner with a good job could not afford a house in my home county let alone near the original community I grew up in.I consider myself lucky that I managed to get one in Kildare ,many ended up in Laois ,Westmeath etc .They then tax the buggery out of motorists who have to drive hours daily back to Dublin ...
And we're expected to smile happy in the knowledge that we are saving the planet ...

The reason you're living in a house in Kildare and not an apartment in Dublin is due to a million human induced factors:

-Irish reluctance to live in apartments ("no, I want a garden! A gaarrdennn"!!")
-Developer inability to build decent sized apartments
-crap, crap local authority urban design and planning
-the Fianna Fail government allowing the housing market to get to hysterical levels by misjudging demand and then allowing developers to build whatever they want.

The result: urban sprawl, based on private, car-based transport, the M50 mess (more capitulation to the developers), traffic jams, 5 hour daily commutes, a commuter belt that extents into 3 surrounding counties, rightfully disgrunted posters!

Look at cities like Copenhagen, where people live in spacious apartments that are well serviced by good public transport and cycle lanes. THe problem in Copenhagen isn't a lack of car parking spaces but bike parking spaces! Fantastic. The difference? Government policy and the general Danish attitude towards apartment-living.

I told my Norwegian friends that one of the best sellers in Ireland last year was "A guide to apartment living". They thought it was hilarious.

bonkey · 02-09-2008 9:55pm

KhanTheMan wrote: »

It was such a turkey shoot. The biggest con in History.

And yet, when ESB rolled their test systems forwards to see what would happen, after they had completed their first round of "readiness" checks, things promptly failed.

Had they done nothing other than those initial checks/fixes, the entire country would have been without power for about 2-3 days. Had they not done those initial checks/fixes, the country could have potentially been without power for weeks or longer.

That some conmen (like what you admit to having been) took advantage of the situation doesn't mean that there wasn't a problem and that the whole issue was a con.

The same applies with the Green question at hand.

There will be misguided fools who wouldn't know a good idea if it hit them in the head.

There will be the analogues to yourself in 1999, ready and willing to take other people's money by hyping up whatever snakeoil they want to sell.

And just like the millenium bug...underneath it all, there is a serious problem which needs addressing.

KhanTheMan · 02-09-2008 10:01pm

taconnol wrote: »

Anyway, on the air travel: basically yes. Boohoo. Is everyone going to go cry into their cappuccinos like the spoilt selfish, materialistic Westerners they are? Or are they going to cop on and realise that some things are more important in life than being able to fly to Europe 4 times a year. Oh another thing I forgot to point out: most humans in this world have never, and will never be on a plane. So fliying is most definitely not the norm, on a global level. You have a very West-centric way of looking at things.

Sorry, i didnt mean to sound like a grouch in the last post.

On the flights.

Go to Europe 4 times a year - About €200 or less for the 4 trips.

Double that price. Europe 4 times a year for €400 or less. Still happy and still going to Europe.

Even Double it again and im still going

Flying is definitely the norm here. Show me someone in Ireland who hasnt been on a plane. Slim Pickings. If i asked that question 20 years ago you could have pointed to most people. So it wasnt the norm 20 years ago.

taconnol wrote: »

I am aware that Ryanair is not the only airline that flies cheaply (btw, they don't go to NY but I take your point). I'm glad you pointed out that cheap air travel is the norm now. Because it sure ain't going to be like that in the future. Airline's fuel bills have doubled. Has anyone noticed the fule surcharges over €75 one way to New York? And this nothing to do with taxes. This is the simple market mechanism of supply and demand in action.

People fly a lot. Its the norm now. Hell i flew to Gatwick last week to meet my brother for a pint in the Airport and came home. The first round cost me more than the trip. Flights Cost me €10.02 return . And €10 was a credit card charge. He's coming over to me for pint in 2 weeks and paying a similar amount. How is that going to stop. Sure if all our cars run on hydro generated electricity there will be no demand for Oil. Airlines can then buy it for nothing and flying is sooooo cheap then anyway.

A €75 each way fuel charge on a trip to New York at the prices those flights are now is not going to hurt anyone.

There is a thread in Bargain alerts with Flights to NY and LA for less than €350 return all in.

taconnol wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand your drug analogy or what it has to do with the environment...

It was more of a tax and ciggy analogy.

People jaded by 'Green' issues

Comments