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

Zorya

I get itPM.
But before you go to the Greens look up the history of the movement. Right back towards fabianism eugenics and all those naturist neopagan elitists with their paedophilic inclinations. Anyways, i will trundle off with my boundless cheerful cynicism.

weisses

Zorya wrote: »

I get itPM.
But before you go to the Greens look up the history of the movement. Right back towards fabianism eugenics and all those naturist neopagan elitists with their paedophilic inclinations. Anyways, i will trundle off with my boundless cheerful cynicism.

Ur cynicism id projected at the wrong crowd .... which is cynical by itself

Professor Moriarty

Zorya wrote: »

I get itPM.
But before you go to the Greens look up the history of the movement. Right back towards fabianism eugenics and all those naturist neopagan elitists with their paedophilic inclinations. Anyways, i will trundle off with my boundless cheerful cynicism.

No. Your cynicism and anger are valid and come from your principles. I will look up their history. I just don't see any alternative but I'm happy to be corrected.

JJayoo

I would like if the green party had a back bone but their leader, Eamon Ryan, just comes across as such a soft useless gimp.

They did have one guy running during the last elections which I liked, Manchán Magan.

He presented a travel show on George Hook's radio show, and he would always talk about good initiatives/projects which he had witnessed in other countries and their viability to be applied in this country.

xtal191

Tell me how

^^^^^

KyussB

Zorya wrote: »

In the days following this 2018 announcement the EU signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Breakthrough Energy

http://www.b-t.energy/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/BE_EC_Memorandum_Of_Understanding_Oct_2018-1.pdf

This Memorandum gives Breakthrough Energy preferential access to these 25% of funds that will be set aside by the Eu from 2021 -2027.

Fair ****s, sez you, these Breakthrough Energy people sound very shiny. It's got a punchy name, they must be the superheroes in the story.
Who are they - https://www.b-t.energy/coalition/who-we-are/

You may have to run the gauntlet of Privacy Errors trying to get through to that site, which is their official home on the net, but if you don't wish to, I will let you know who some of the luminaries there are - people like Mark Zuckerberg, Richard Branson, Bill Gates, Jack Ma, big knobs from the banking and global industrial world. The World Bank, the UN, the Bank for International Settlements, are all involved.

No it doesn't. quote that. It's a €100 million EIB fund.

The EU is an inherently NeoLibeal organization - which indirectly enforces such economic principles on member states - so it will be completely unsurprising to see the EU go the 'market solutions' route to climate change, with massive public subsidies that predominantly end up lining private pockets.

That's why you want the Green New Deal - because it prioritizes proper direct government investmeent, not the public-private-partnership crap - and to achieve its goals it also spurs the need for reform in how the EU operates, to move away from NeoLiberalism.

windy shepard henderson

KyussB wrote: »

No it doesn't. quote that. It's a €100 million EIB fund.

The EU is an inherently NeoLibeal organization - which indirectly enforces such economic principles on member states - so it will be completely unsurprising to see the EU go the 'market solutions' route to climate change, with massive public subsidies that predominantly end up lining private pockets.

That's why you want the Green New Deal - because it prioritizes proper direct government investmeent, not the public-private-partnership crap - and to achieve its goals it also spurs the need for reform in how the EU operates, to move away from NeoLiberalism.

When people start mixing up things like neo liberation and moving away from m that way of life that's what really drives people away

It's not going to fix the issues of flytipping in the oceans or mass destruction of rain forests,

Nobody has a problem with a form of self sufficiency like driving electronically cars ect or cycling more often to work, but telling people to completely change there way of life is nonsense your still going to be left with the same world wide problems

I couldn't care less about capitalism or neo whatever if I had a complaint with the EU is they are not doing enough to put pressure on the flytipping countries or rainforest culling ones and bigger emissions culprits in the far east especially

KyussB

Well tough, because climate change is 100% an economic problem (it is the way our economies are run which inherently is pushing emissions), and if you don't make an effort to understand the problems with how our economies are run at a fundamental level (such as, what NeoLiberalism is and why it's harmful), then you're not going to be able to comprehend what the root problems are, and what needs to be done to resolve those problems very quickly, to arrest our contributions to climate change.

In short, we can't arrest our contributions to climate change, without returning to a form of capitalism which supports strong governments enacting things like the Green New Deal - NeoLbieralism is anathema to this.

Pa ElGrande

KyussB wrote: »

That's why you want the Green New Deal - because it prioritizes proper direct government investmeent, not the public-private-partnership crap - and to achieve its goals it also spurs the need for reform in how the EU operates, to move away from NeoLiberalism.

It's not different this time. Been there done that lets get rid of the capitalist roaders, kill the sparrows to increase grain yields, have Greta lead the cultural revolution. Better yet lets go to the year zero and build the new socialist man. The green new deal experiment was done in the twentieth century, it did not work then and for the same reasons it won't ever work.

windy shepard henderson

KyussB wrote: »

Well tough, because climate change is 100% an economic problem (it is the way our economies are run which inherently is pushing emissions), and if you don't make an effort to understand the problems with how our economies are run at a fundamental level (such as, what NeoLiberalism is and why it's harmful), then you're not going to be able to comprehend what the root problems are, and what needs to be done to resolve those problems very quickly, to arrest our contributions to climate change.

In short, we can't arrest our contributions to climate change, without returning to a form of capitalism which supports strong governments enacting things like the Green New Deal - NeoLbieralism is anathema to this.

Your going to have a fair job trying to convince people with a 35 year mortgage that this is the way of the future

KyussB

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

It's not different this time. Been there done that lets get rid of the capitalist roaders, kill the sparrows to increase grain yields, have Greta lead the cultural revolution. Better yet lets go to the year zero and build the new socialist man. The green new deal experiment was done in the twentieth century, it did not work then and for the same reasons it won't ever work.

You're a Libertarian who has been citing material funded by the Koch's i.e. oil oligarches, to argue against acting on climate change, throughout the entire thread. You would argue that pretty much any level of government activity, equates to the above. Useful to see that windy stands alongside spouting that kind of shite...

You're not a capitalist at all - you support oligarchy, which is not what capitalism is about - I support capitalist markets backed by strong governments, to correct the faults in capitalism - you want to malign that as being way off on the opposite end of the political spectrum, because you support oligarchs.

If we want to arrest our contributions to climate change fast enough, massive direct government involvement, within capitalist market economies, is the only game in town - and the Green New Deal is exactly that.

Veritas Libertas

KyussB wrote: »

If we want to arrest our contributions to climate change fast enough, massive direct government involvement, within capitalist market economies, is the only game in town - and the Green New Deal is exactly that.

This is nothing but scare-mongering propaganda designed to stir people into action but the effect is the opposite, once you start wildly exaggerating; nobody will believe what you say.

"We're led to believe that the two sides of this debate are those who say that the only way to deal with anthropogenic climate change is to dismantle the capitalist system and those who want to pretend it's all a hoax. I think the majority of sensible people would like to deal with the problem and support the free market system" - Peter Hadfield.

windy shepard henderson

Yeah people need to be more realistic in how to change things, having people like Thom Yorke, Michael stipe and greta telling people how to change when they have never been placed with the financial burden of the normal man makes no sense

Until something is put in place that doesn't create people to lose their livelihoods jobs ect.. Then nothing is going to change, this is the first step that people particular from the extinsion rebellion groups need to understand

Veritas Libertas

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

Yeah people need to be more realistic in how to change things,

Indeed many people are, but are being shut down by a very loud vocal minority right now(AOC and her ilk).

Here's a video I posted a few days ago that identifies exactly how market based solutions already ARE changing things.

KyussB

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

This is nothing but scare-mongering propaganda designed to stir people into action but the effect is the opposite, once you start wildly exaggerating; nobody will believe what you say.

"We're led to believe that the two sides of this debate are those who say that the only way to deal with anthropogenic climate change is to dismantle the capitalist system and those who want to pretend it's all a hoax. I think the majority of sensible people would like to deal with the problem and support the free market system" - Peter Hadfield.

All the credible climate scientists have a consensus that urgency is not an exaggeration.

My posts precisely describe tackling climate change within the capitalist system - which a strong government must be a part of, to ensure we can act fast enough.

KyussB

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

Yeah people need to be more realistic in how to change things, having people like Thom Yorke, Michael stipe and greta telling people how to change when they have never been placed with the financial burden of the normal man makes no sense

Until something is put in place that doesn't create people to lose their livelihoods jobs ect.. Then nothing is going to change, this is the first step that people particular from the extinsion rebellion groups need to understand

The GND explicitly guarantees that people have a job/livelihood...

Veritas Libertas

KyussB wrote: »

The GND explicitly guarantees that people have a job/livelihood...

In the last post you just said 'within' the capitalist system....

Capitalism means playing off people's desire for profits. It increases productivity and creativity all of which are stifled by guaranteeing jobs and income(communism). That's only one of an absurd list of 'guarantees' outlined in the GND based on technology that doesn't yet exist(i.e. total dependence on 'green' energies). Ludicrous is an under-statement.

The GND would bankrupt the world so fast it would make your head spin.

The GND is not within the capitalist system. It throws a bomb on the capitalist system and hopes after the explosion everything will be left in order. Fairy-tale stuff.

windy shepard henderson

KyussB wrote: »

The GND explicitly guarantees that people have a job/livelihood...

But would the transition not mean a long spell recession while changes are being made

suicide_circus

KyussB wrote: »

The GND explicitly guarantees that people have a job/livelihood...

wow. quite the guarantee!

statesaver

Why no plans to visit China or India yet. She's fcuking wasting time we don't have, 12 years is it still, ffs get a move on

lleti

suicide_circus wrote: »

Plenty of lovely dopamine hits to be had from this type of activity. Feelings of togetherness and righteous indignation which are a rare commodity nowadays.

Don't forget the witty posters at protests. Gotta get those likes to raise awareness to your friends who are at the protest aswell. lol

gozunda

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I assume all the Greta haters on this thread live in one off houses and eat beef 3 times a day and drive Range rovers. You all need to be more like me, a carbon conscious cyclist city dweller who cruises 2nd hand clothes shops.

I love that the our friend can manage to boil an entire discussion down to a personal diatribe of 'Greta hating range rover driving meat eaters vs 'carbon conscious cyclist city dwelling & 2nd hand clothes shop cruisers' lol.

But of course the whole discussion is about Thelonious

:rolleyes:

Veritas Libertas

As usual it is comedians in society with their fingers on the pulse:

lleti

Must also remember...who are the EUs biggest enemy? Russia.

Doesn't take a genius to see what they want, to no longer want anything to do with Russia. So they'll get the citizens of the EU to pay for this. Selfish bastards. it's all about politics at the end of the day, not the planet.

Jimmy Garlic

KyussB wrote: »

You're a Libertarian who has been citing material funded by the Koch's i.e. oil oligarches, to argue against acting on climate change, throughout the entire thread. You would argue that pretty much any level of government activity, equates to the above. Useful to see that windy stands alongside spouting that kind of shite...

You're not a capitalist at all - you support oligarchy, which is not what capitalism is about - I support capitalist markets backed by strong governments, to correct the faults in capitalism - you want to malign that as being way off on the opposite end of the political spectrum, because you support oligarchs.

If we want to arrest our contributions to climate change fast enough, massive direct government involvement, within capitalist market economies, is the only game in town - and the Green New Deal is exactly that.

While you keep banging on like a broken record about the Koch brothers and libertarians Saudi prince's, oil corporations (Total) banks and umbrella groups for the arms industry (the Carlyle group) that are lining up to gorge at the EUs climate change honey pot/slush fund.

JJayoo

Russia love climate change its fecking freezing up there.

gozunda

Tell me how wrote: »

Stop with the conspiracy theories for a second and listen to the scientists. Look at the catastrophic impact on wildlife and ecosystems and decide should something be done or will we keep doing what we're doing because Alex Jones said George Soros is trying to make money or whatever.
I'm not targeting you specifically but why undermine a positive activist such as Greta by casting doubt while the corporations and oil companies delight in the confusion.

And yet the fact is you are not one of those 'scientists' and gretas doomsdayism is nowhere near what those scientists are saying about climate change. It is evident the kid is being used to push a populist political agenda and little more.

Of note the biggest impacts on wildlife and ecosystems to date are neither new or solely down to climate change. The single biggest catastrophic impact on wildlife and ecosystems to date is the human overpopulation of the planet. Ignoring this and lionising a scared child who believes the one and only bogeyman is climate change with a rallying cry of 'something should be done' (or wtte) is little more than rabble rousing and fixes nothing.

KyussB

Veritas Libertas wrote: »

In the last post you just said 'within' the capitalist system....

Capitalism means playing off people's desire for profits. It increases productivity and creativity all of which are stifled by guaranteeing jobs and income(communism). That's only one of an absurd list of 'guarantees' outlined in the GND based on technology that doesn't yet exist(i.e. total dependence on 'green' energies). Ludicrous is an under-statement.

The GND would bankrupt the world so fast it would make your head spin.

The GND is not within the capitalist system. It throws a bomb on the capitalist system and hopes after the explosion everything will be left in order. Fairy-tale stuff.

Capitalism includes government - it can't exist without government - all it means is that the economy is predominantly oriented around a market economy, it doesn't mean it's exclusively a market economy.

A Capitalist economy, with a Job Guarantee, fixes a lot of the faults within capitalism (the ways that persistent unemployment and underemployment warps the labour market, and leads to a lot of social ills and inequity) - it makes Capitalism work even better than before.

Capitalism can take on a huge number of different forms, very unfamiliar to what people are used to today - that is one such alternative configuration.

The GND advocates massive amounts of R&D to develop the needed technology. It also advocates (in the US anyway) governments undertaking this using their own currency - and governments utilizing their own currency, can't involuntarily go bankrupt...

KyussB

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

But would the transition not mean a long spell recession while changes are being made

If you mean a transition to a Job Guarantee, then no - in fact the Job Guarantee brings economies out of recession much faster, because it is counter-cyclical (i.e. is relatively inactive when the economy is functioning well, and is way more active working to boost the economy when it is in a downturn).

If you mean a transition to a renwable-energy-based economy, then it depends on how you go about that: The massive employment and work projects needed to transition, are pretty much a direct boost to economic activity - but there is a lot of debate on whether or not economic growth needs to be suppressed, to reduce carbon emissions, while we are still developing the technology needed for a renewable economy.

My position, is that if we engage in R&D on a big enough scale, that no, we don't need to reduce economy activity or undergo any recessions - but we need to extremely rapidly develop the needed tech, so the R&D has to be undertaken at a couple/few orders of magnitiude greater level than the present, to achieve this.