Greta and the aristocrat sail the high seas to save the planet.

James Brown

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

It is all very vague though. Thunberg never seems to be one for specifics.

The planet is dying.
Her childhood is lost
How dare you.

There is no mention of the economic costs of what she is very vaguely proposing, and how they can be funded.

It is very easy to call for change when other people are left with the discussions to make - what taxes to introduce, who to tax, which countries should be given free reign to develop. While the western youngsters tweet about 'going green' on thier smartphones made from precious metals mined in Africa and made in China.

OK she went on a boat to get people talking grand... nice stunt.
She has addressed the EU, UN climate change, American Congress, UK Parliament with not one mention or idea how this proposed 'change' is going to be achieved.

No one has even seemed to ask her has she any ideas?
Any ideas at all so notes could be taken etc

I would not ask her for ideas. Are you nuts? She's a kid raising climate change awareness not a scientist.

gozunda

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Not at all. Criticising a kid who is merely a symbol, like she's part of a nefarious scheme to improve the planet at a loss to billionaires and their companies sounds pretty disturbed to me.
It's no coincidence that right wingers, anti antifa, anti main stream media folk all seem to be the same people and often use americanised terms brainwashed into them from randos on youtube and other wise folk like Trump. It's a massive multimedia con being perpetrated on the public, especially those who think, "I'll be really smart and wily and NOT believe people talking common sense or coming from a reasonable stance.I know a chap shared a youtube video. His comment was 'Paris has fallen!'. It showed some black kids breaking a few shop windows down some side street. The 'news' was Paris had fallen and mob rule had taken over etc. This is the effect this con job has on the weaker minded out there, with votes. It's very concerning. Playing along to troll or whatever is great laugh though. Shows smarts.
[INSERT quip from anti-libtard handbook]

No sorry - none of that makes any sense whatsoever. Are you offended by something or?

SafeSurfer

Matt Barrett wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

We need to change how we behave to prevent climate change. I get that. So the reason to change is fear of climate change. Now if people are not afraid of climate change they see no reason to change. Get it?
So your assertion that only people afraid of any change criticise Greta Thunberg is baloney.

Not at all. Criticising a kid who is merely a symbol, like she's part of a nefarious scheme to improve the planet at a loss to billionaires and their companies sounds pretty disturbed to me.
It's no coincidence that right wingers, anti antifa, anti main stream media folk all seem to be the same people and often use americanised terms brainwashed into them from randos on youtube and other wise folk like Trump. It's a massive multimedia con being perpetrated on the public, especially those who think, "I'll be really smart and wily and NOT believe people talking common sense or coming from a reasonable stance.
I know a chap shared a youtube video. His comment was 'Paris has fallen!'. It showed some black kids breaking a few shop windows down some side street. The 'news' was Paris had fallen and mob rule had taken over etc. This is the effect this con job has on the weaker minded out there, with votes. It's very concerning. Playing along to troll or whatever is great laugh though. Shows smarts.

[INSERT quip from anti-libtard handbook]

Of course there are practical things that we could all do to improve the environment. Such as asking political leaders to distance themselves from those who dump tons of toxic waste in the countryside from their fossil fuel laundering activities. Rather than commending those people.
It’s the little things.

James Brown

SJW Lover wrote: »

Fear change? Children with mental health issues are now going to tell grown adults what to do? That the change you want?

Commenting on the conspiracy theorists. The kid touched a nerve.

hatrickpatrick

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

She only seems to infuriate males.

My ex-girlfriend is the most vehement critic of her I've ever met in real life.

1800_Ladladlad

Who would dare criticize a 16-year-old? We all know they should be beyond condemnation.

Sean.3516

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

Who would dare criticize a 16-year-old? We all know they should be beyond condemnation.

Well that 16 year old has done nothing wrong.

SJW Lover

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Commenting on the conspiracy theorists. The kid touched a nerve.

Your use of "conspiracy theorists" in this context shows that you are exactly the type of shrill person the powers that be love. So brainwashed that a child can tell you what to think once she appears on the box in your room.

Omackeral

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

My ex-girlfriend is the most vehement critic of her I've ever met in real life.

Obviously she's a victim of the patriarchy. Only way it makes sense.

Micky 32

I see the power station in Lanesborough re opened again saving those peoples jobs..

The Green party's Mr Eamonn Ryan wasn't happy, saying a step back. He really doesn't give a crap about peoples livelihoods.

Tell me how

SJW Lover wrote: »

Your use of "conspiracy theorists" in this context shows that you are exactly the type of shrill person the powers that be love. So brainwashed that a child can tell you what to think once she appears on the box in your room.

That child is really taking advantage of her new found audience isn't she.

'Listen to the scientists', such a sinister and manipulative message isn't it.

Thelonious Monk

Micky 32 wrote: »

I see the power station in Lanesborough re opened again saving those peoples jobs..

The Green party's Mr Eamonn Ryan wasn't happy, saying a step back. He really doesn't give a crap about peoples livelihoods.

So would you be all for opening coal mines if we had large deposits of coal here if it meant creating jobs?

Tony EH

SJW Lover wrote: »

Fear change? Children with mental health issues are now going to tell grown adults what to do? That the change you want?

She's just a kid pulling a stunt to raise awareness of something she feels strongly about. Regardless of whether I think her issues on climate change are correct or not, there's no real problem here.

The **** on here and elsewhere trying to do her down need to get a grip on themselves. It's pathetic.

Tell me how

Micky 32 wrote: »

I see the power station in Lanesborough re opened again saving those peoples jobs..

The Green party's Mr Eamonn Ryan wasn't happy, saying a step back. He really doesn't give a crap about peoples livelihoods.

It's because he cares about the long term livelihoods of society that he is saying this is a step back.

If you want to adopt the position of 'I'm only concerned about what affects me right now' then that's your prerogative, but you should own it.

Tell me how

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1176284552387538949

Fox News issued an apology afterwards for the behaviour of the guest in suggesting Greta was mentally ill.

I hope a lot of the people here take note of that, even the ultra conservative Fox News doesn't have time for that nonsense argument.

KyussB

It's a consistent lie that something like a Green New Deal has to be paid for by taxes - and especially, taxing the average joe - that's not how government finances work.

It's simply not true - huge adjustments in infrastructure, efficiency in energy use and generation, and ecological efficiency of consumption can be achieved, without having to tax more.

Things like carbon taxes are for dissuading use of fossil fuel sources - if we're switching to renewable sources within a rapid time, that doesn't require taxing the crap out of people - and something like the Green New Deal can keep everybody employed, even in the depths of recession (given that there is such a huge amount of work that needs to be done) - ensuring people are consistently earning and keeping money in their pockets.

The Libertarians/oil-oligarchs decry this as 'Communism', though - in order to try and divide people - yet it's all about the continued survival of Capitalism, removing power from oligarchs (as oligarchy is not what Capitalism's about, yet is what people are defending...), and preventing the self-destruction of Capitalism through gradual climate change.

All of us are going to be paying for the costs of climate change - and we can all avoid/minimize those costs, by acting now to revamp our infrastructure/economies, to arrest our contribution to climate change.

Sean.3516

My problem with Greta Thunberg and all her ilk (not just the small kids but the big kids like AOC also) who are so “courageous and full of passion” is that not a single one of them has proposed anything that could be considered a coherent and remotely achievable strategy to prevent or mitigate against the effects of climate change.

They stand there and scream and cry about how we have 11 years before we are all doomed. If they do propose a solution, it’s that we have to completely annihilate carbon. Which even if achieved in the West would barely make a dent in climate change since China and India and Russia who don’t give a toss account for over 40% of global emissions. It makes me wonder why they aren’t calling for war with these countries. Destroy their carbon emitting facilities. After all, we’ll die otherwise?

The truth is that 0% Carbon is impossible in the timeframe they’re proposing and we would be better occupied in examining what the actual fallout will be and how we will manage it through mitigation efforts such as geo-engineering, sea walls, movements of populations in dangerous areas etc. and yes, find ways to scale back on carbon. I’ll never understand the environmentalist opposition to nuclear energy and natural gas which are both much cleaner than coal and oil.

Bottom line is we need to stop hemming ourselves in solution wise, by pretending we’ll all be dead by the end of the century.

gormdubhgorm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I would not ask her for ideas. Are you nuts? She's a kid raising climate change awareness not a scientist.

Let her off to see what she says. She obviously things about it a lot and is surrounded by like minded people.
Surely she has heard something new and innovative?

I mean she is obviously a political motivated individual she must have some idea besides the soundbites? I mean we have Dáil na nÓg to give the youngsters a bit of a say in things.

Surely there is bound to be some future leader among her and her group?

Thelonious Monk

How about stopping trading and buying cheap sh*t from China if you all want to keep banging on about China. That would see the end of most of the bloody crap they produce and slow their economy down big time. You just wouldn't be able to buy waffle makers for a 5er in Lidl on Thursdays.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

That child is really taking advantage of her new found audience isn't she.'Listen to the scientists', such a sinister and manipulative message isn't it.

It's a pity she doesn't listen to the scientists herself - rather than spouting all that end of civilisation in 10 years yada yada nonsense she comes out with.

Odd that you seem to ignore that completely no?

KyussB

She's voiced support for the Green New Deal and has met with AOC (one of the biggest proponents of the GND) - but my impression is she doesn't want to pin her advocacy to one plan/policy-goal - which is wise, because sticking to raising general awareness is (right now) the more important goal.

Undoubtedly, and undebatably, she has succeeded enormously at generating discussion about the issue - that is job done and a massive success on its own, no matter what you think about her, her background/family, or how she's expressed her views.

This previously unknown teenager is arguably the impetus that sparked a 10k-strong protest in our capital last week - among hundreds of other protests at the same time and similar proportional scale, around the world.

gormdubhgorm

Tell me how wrote: »

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1176284552387538949

Fox News issued an apology afterwards for the behaviour of the guest in suggesting Greta was mentally ill.

I hope a lot of the people here take note of that, even the ultra conservative Fox News doesn't have time for that nonsense argument.

It was a poor choice of words from a person who is not medically trained or has no knowledge of the nature of her disorder.
The correct phrase would have being a child with a 'mental disorder'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders

Also I notice how the first argument of the other guy is xyz about a child. It is shield that is used to stifle debate.
If the same comment was made about an adult would it get the same traction?

SafeSurfer

KyussB wrote: »

It's a consistent lie that something like a Green New Deal has to be paid for by taxes - and especially, taxing the average joe - that's not how government finances work.

It's simply not true - huge adjustments in infrastructure, efficiency in energy use and generation, and ecological efficiency of consumption can be achieved, without having to tax more.

Things like carbon taxes are for dissuading use of fossil fuel sources - if we're switching to renewable sources within a rapid time, that doesn't require taxing the crap out of people - and something like the Green New Deal can keep everybody employed, even in the depths of recession (given that there is such a huge amount of work that needs to be done) - ensuring people are consistently earning and keeping money in their pockets.

The Libertarians/oil-oligarchs decry this as 'Communism', though - in order to try and divide people - yet it's all about the continued survival of Capitalism, removing power from oligarchs (as oligarchy is not what Capitalism's about, yet is what people are defending...), and preventing the self-destruction of Capitalism through gradual climate change.

All of us are going to be paying for the costs of climate change - and we can all avoid/minimize those costs, by acting now to revamp our infrastructure/economies, to arrest our contribution to climate change.

If governments are not going to find the spending on the green new deal by taxes, how are they going to fund it?


Here’s a quote:

“In February 2019, Thunberg shared a stage with the then President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, where he outlined “In the next financial period from 2021 to 2027, every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will go towards action to mitigate climate change” “

Think about that. Every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will be spent on mitigation of climate change.

KyussB

You already discussed that with me earlier in the thread. Governments never fund anything 100% through taxes - that's not how government finances work - balanced budgets are incredibly rare.

Kermit.de.frog

KyussB wrote: »

She's voiced support for the Green New Deal and has met with AOC (one of the biggest proponents of the GND) - but my impression is she doesn't want to pin her advocacy to one plan/policy-goal - which is wise, because sticking to raising general awareness is (right now) the more important goal.

Undoubtedly, and undebatably, she has succeeded enormously at generating discussion about the issue - that is job done and a massive success on its own, no matter what you think about her, her background/family, or how she's expressed her views.

This previously unknown teenager is arguably the impetus that sparked a 10k-strong protest in our capital last week.

She says her childhood was "taken away from her".

Really?

99% of children in the world did not have the childhood available to her by birth right.

Whatever about the rights or wrongs of the message she needs to work on optics because stuff like that will rightfully irritate people. And if she is going to be a public advocate and so forceful she (and her family who intentionally brought her in to it) are right to be challenged on it.

They are in the 1% and should refrain from lecturing the rest of us in that manner when making their arguments.

KyussB

Who gives a toss what hyperbole she's used - it's all generated discussion and awareness, that's a success.

rgmmg

Sean.3516 wrote: »

My problem with Greta Thunberg and all her ilk (not just the small kids but the big kids like AOC also).

What does Alex Oxlade Chamberlain have to do with it? He was injured for most of last season for a start.

SJW Lover

Tell me how wrote: »

That child is really taking advantage of her new found audience isn't she.

'Listen to the scientists', such a sinister and manipulative message isn't it.

Sinister and manipulative are very apt words to describe this debacle surely. You don't even realise your intelligence is being insulted.

SJW Lover

Tony EH wrote: »

She's just a kid pulling a stunt to raise awareness of something she feels strongly about. Regardless of whether I think her issues on climate change are correct or not, there's no real problem here.

The **** on here and elsewhere trying to do her down need to get a grip on themselves. It's pathetic.

Sorry, if you are attending the UN and speaking about major global issues then people can comment. And, if they disagree with what she is saying, they can say that too. Of course, your reaction above is exactly why this child is being utilised in this way.

gormdubhgorm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

How about stopping trading and buying cheap sh*t from China if you all want to keep banging on about China. That would see the end of most of the bloody crap they produce and slow their economy down big time. You just wouldn't be able to buy waffle makers for a 5er in Lidl on Thursdays.

Where do you think the parts of your phone/tablet/pc were made when you posted this post?