Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

"Green" policies are destroying this country

Options
17257267287307311067

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Im not sure how reducing the farms we have in ireland to a sustainable number equates to genocide.

    But great hyperbole all the same.



  • Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭Kiteview


    The two are in no way comparable. The employer isn’t mandating that an employee drives to work, whereas a uniform is mandatory for some jobs.

    For jobs where there is no mandatory uniform (or other special work clothes), an employer isn’t free to provide you with free socks, underwear etc etc That counts as a taxable “benefit in kind”.

    And yes that does apply even if there is an official or unofficial dress code and most employees get no personable benefit from such clothes other than being able to attend work in those places.

    Regrettably the taxman doesn’t make allowances for dress codes and accept the argument that the alternative to adhering to a dress code is that you’d attend work in the nude!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,779 ✭✭✭paddysdream


    What is a "right sized farm " in your opinion?

    Farming has less of an impact on the environment than a lot of industries and its the one sector that's not optional but essential.


    How exactly are we " over farmed" in this country?

    I would think that we have the capacity to produce a lot more in Ireland as a lot of the land is under farmed at the moment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Right sizing would be more about producing what we need domestically, with some space for export of course, but within the confines of our climate and emission targets.

    not to mention reduction of subsidy payments - how much do we pay out in farmimg subsidies in a year?

    Dont get me wrong, I am not saying we shouldnt subsidise some farms, the ones providing the essential product and doing so in a sustainable way, but we shouldnt be subsidising and encouraging over production/excess emissions.

    What that percentage of farm reduction looks like, i dont know.

    Many posters here would be better qualified to extrapolate, but i know its a reduction, thats for sure.

    Bringing more farms onstream is the last thing we would be doing, surely?

    That would just make the problem of emissions and subsidy funding worse!

    unless they were emission neutral and didnt rely on subsidies at all. Would that be the case?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,779 ✭✭✭paddysdream


    So what you are saying is that you really have no idea what you are talking about but farming is bad,ag subs are bad ,exporting stuff is bad and climate and emissions targets are the most important thing .



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,393 ✭✭✭prunudo


    Hopefully the countries that have better climates for growing grain don't take the same attitude and only produce for their domestic market.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    providing the food we NEED is very important.

    Reducing our emissions is very important and Agri is the largest contributor to our emissions.

    I take it you dont agree with either statement?

    The right sizing is coming. Like it or not. Starting with the herd reduction.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,779 ✭✭✭paddysdream


    To be frankly honest "reducing our emissions" is something that doesn't concern me to any extent.And to agriculture being the biggest emitter I have no idea and again its something of little importance to me.

    If every country only produced the food/goods they needed then that would be grand but of course we wouldn't be importing things either I assume.Or is it just food that we shouldn't export ?


    Dear leader Eamon R pinkie promised that there will be no herd reduction as does Pippa when asked.Do they mean what they say ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭Mr. teddywinkles


    Well considering we're listening about certain countries due to climate change that cant grow their own crops. Wheres the food aid going to come from then if we dont over produce.

    I said it once and I'll say it again. The greens are muppets.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    Why is reducing our (Ireland's) emissions by 2030 important though?

    I hear this trotted out all the time and nobody has given a good reason for it. It makes no difference to the climate what we do in Ireland. We could double our emissions and it still wouldn't register on a global scale.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,593 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande



    If that logic were to continue vegans would have to accept more pickled or fermented cabbage in their diet. This was once a country were most of the population depended on subsistence farming for survival and as well as shortages due to adverse weather, experienced seasonal shortages, hence fasting during Advent so that foodstocks could be conserved during the lean season. Bad Russian wheat harvests contributed to the Arab Spring back in 2012, the Arabian peninsula populations depends on agriculture production elsewhere int he globe, without oil & gas to trade these regions are mostly desert with sparse and impoverished populations. A major contributing reasons to high emigration from Ireland starting in the 19th century was the end of the corn laws, growing urban populations in the UK needed affordable food, and the opening up of the American prairies combined with industrialisation allowed that to happen. Under the corn laws scheme, the landlords needed cheap seasonal labour, the population in Ireland boomed on the back of that and the potato as their staple, ideal superfood, can grow it on marginal land, and can store it for the lean season.

    Vegans and food miles aside, much of the food we eat is imported, we can get fruit year round, including products that cannot be grown commercially here. There is also the unfashionable balance of trade, used to be an obsession with economists years ago, before finanancialisation and services industries became dominant. That is still important, you have to produce goods that other people want, in exchange for the stuff you want. Put simply less trade means less meat exports and fewer banana imports, but people still have to eat. Much of Western agriculture has specialised to concentrate on products that can be grown commercially, there is much more automation and industrialisation that has bought down the price of food and increased food security to the point where food waste due to non consumption is a problem. Food waste was an issue prior to current modern techniques, mainly due to spoilage, since refrigeration or irradiation did not exist, the shelf life of products was reduced and the quality of the food produce at the end of the distribution chain was not as good, plus the food prices as a percentage of income were much higher. Many more people became more vulnerable to earlier death through diseases bought about by malnutrition. The Greens lunatic ideas that food can only be produced in accordance with their ideology are the stuff of real year 0 nightmares.



    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,898 ✭✭✭Jizique


    So many problems with this, but for starters, everyone will have a different view of "essential produce".

    Speaking of "right sizing", maybe we need to think about sustainable population size in some of the more inhospitable places in the world. We need to stop blaming western society for famine and war in parts of the world that are ridiculously overpopulated.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,059 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Ireland has to do its bit proportionately, because if big Countries and small alike don't demonstrate the same commitment then the common purpose falls apart.

    Personally I think divestment from foreign sourced (and priced) energy is a very good thing for our people and economy, but I do have big concerns about cuts to emissions in other sectors, especially agri, because I don't think that Ireland is getting enough credit in kind for the amount of food we produce that feeds overseas populations.

    For instance, Irish milk protein goes into formula products that feed half a billion infants every year. That comes from our belching livestock and is actually over one third of all dairy produce. To my mind, for producing such a quality product for so many across the globe our tiny dairy herd methane emissions should be fully exempt.



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,419 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    I'm talking about what the government should and shouldn't tax. Nobody drives to work for any reason other than for work purposes (unless they're Eunoch Burke or some other lunatic) so that should be treated as a work expense.

    Taxing it is just a tax on work if there is no alternative mode of transport



  • Registered Users Posts: 22,419 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    If Ireland can produce food with a lower environmental cost than other countries can, then we should produce as much as we can and export it.

    The global climate doesn't care which country the emissions came from



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,779 ✭✭✭paddysdream


    Do people really believe that food produced in Ireland is more " emissiony " than that from other countries?


    My belief is that food is essential to our survival and that an adequate supply should be our number 1 concern and only then look at the other issues.

    Not much point in having a future where people are not around to see it due to a lack of food is there ?

    Where are all these magical places that can supply us without being a burden on our conscience?



  • Registered Users Posts: 435 ✭✭Coolcormack1979


    Milk etc we all know comes from Tesco and lidl by magic.it doesn’t need a farmer to get up in the morning and work to produce it.another green ideology fantasy.go off and eat a tree instead or your air to heat system.that will sustain us all



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    A logical approach.

    But we must also account for transport/export and related emissions.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    I hear what you are saying, but there isnt much Ireland can do about population growth in other continents.

    I appreciate that the approach of dishing out climate targets to each individual country seems a blunt tool, but it is the tool that international govts have chosen.

    I guess one of the pertinent questions is, what happens to those countries that dont hit their targets?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Thats the Healy Rae argument personified, indeed :)

    I think the difficulty here is that how do you select which countries have to abide by their targets and which do not.

    In order to gain momentum in reduction of emissions, there probably has to be a shared goal. where every country is doing its part and we all pull together.

    The material repercussion of that approach failing is perhaps not heavily felt by small countries like ireland not hitting their targets, but more through larger countries not reaching for their own targets, citing the small countries not striving to reach their climate goals as an excuse for them doing same.

    As the Cranberries once said, "if everybody else is (not) doing it, why cant we?"



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40 joggerjogger


    What twisted logic 🙄, employees benefit by getting paid. In an urban area with lots of public transport, free car parking is absolutely and without doubt definitely a Benefit-In-Kind.

    Only those biased for their own gain would object



  • Registered Users Posts: 40 joggerjogger


    This is an outright lie, talk to all the people in the ifsc or down on the docks, they most definitely do not have free parking

    Those with the overwhelming amount of free parking are the civil servants who staff the departments and as reported are almost always the obstacles to progress because of their bias and selfishness



  • Registered Users Posts: 40 joggerjogger


    Because we contribute to the global food supply. Your logic would mean forcing vast swathes of Africa to starve, maybe you don't like black people, that's ok everyone is free to like or dislike but

    Reducing food supply on a mass scale = Starvation and Genocide for the poorest and weakest

    As carried out by all of the most evil totalitarian regimes in history



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    The big problem with that approach is that the biggest emitters are already ignoring it.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Lol. Sounds like a post from a 6 yr old.

    I hadnt realised Ireland alone enables the entire food supply to the continent of Africa.

    Irish farms will have no choice but to reduce in scale to meet our climate targets.

    Immature deflection tactics wont change that.

    You just have to accept that change is coming.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Cant disagree with you there. Its a fair point.

    But I expect financial penalties will ensue & scale up, rapidly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40 joggerjogger


    No, no, no you don't get to gaslight like that but you trapped yourself anyway. The entire world is connected as you all tell us but I'll digress to your level

    So only Irish farms will have to reduce food supply, who will replace our supply when right now statistically their is only a single handful of grain / sustenance reserve for each person in the world

    To get a moist temperature climate country to reduce its food supply means a more polluting country must increase theirs or the starvation of poor people


    I will not accept the starvation of people, only the most evil of people would even countenance that



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Nobody ever said only Ireland will have to reduce its food production, what are you talking about?

    Climate reduction targets are applicable to all countries and more investment will be put into helping developing nations sustain their own food sources, thus reducing transport related emissions.

    Food Import and Export will always occur, sure.

    But exports will reduce globally, not just in Ireland, obviously.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,993 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    Financial penalties from whom and and to who?

    Where are the Chinese going to pay fines too? Themselves?

    What about the USA, India or Brazil?

    This isn't like the EU and those countries answer to nobody.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    Thats for international govts to work out, but it will happen.

    If it doesnt, many countries will just ignore the targets, as you say.



Advertisement