Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Craig Lamson on February 15, 2020, 09:35:28 am
-
Ok, Bart and others who are like minded, exactly how would the USA look to become the green country you seem to think it should be.?
-
Ok, Bart and others who are like minded, exactly how would the USA look to become the green country you seem to think it should be.?
Why are you asking us? Trump is your savant.
:-)
-
Why are you asking us? Trump is your savant.
:-)
You and others seem to know what we need to do, so why not just list it?
-
TROLL WARNING
-
Ok, Bart and others who are like minded, exactly how would the USA look to become the green country you seem to think it should be.?
Your Senate just elected a king, so 2 of them is one too many.
But you could try reading this book:
DRAWDOWN
The most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse Global warming
https://www.drawdown.org/the-book
Drawdown describes the 100 most substantive solutions to global warming. For each solution, we describe its history, the carbon impact it provides, the relative cost and savings, the path to adoption, and how it works. The goal of the research that informs Drawdown is to determine if we can reverse the buildup of atmospheric carbon within thirty years. All solutions modeled are already in place, well understood, analyzed based on peer-reviewed science, and are expanding around the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drawdown_(book)
-
TROLL WARNING
Empty response warning.
-
Your Senate just elected a king, so 2 of them is one too many.
But you could try reading this book:
DRAWDOWN
The most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse Global warming
https://www.drawdown.org/the-book
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drawdown_(book)
Oh how wrong you can be. The Senate "elected" nothing, but I digress.
Describe in your own terms Bart, not chimp it.
-
Deregulate nuclear power
-
Describe in your own terms Bart, not chimp it.
TROLL CONFIRMATION
-
TROLL CONFIRMATION
Yes, it does appear you are being a troll in this topic.
-
Your Senate just elected a king, so 2 of them is one too many.
But you could try reading this book:
DRAWDOWN
The most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse Global warming
https://www.drawdown.org/the-book
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drawdown_(book)
So now we're supposed to read a book. Can;t you sum it up? After all, congress isn't going to legislate a book with 100 ideas. How about providing three legislative recommendations, their costs, and time frame? Also, how much reduction in CO2 we'll get and how long to get it. You're the one who wants to sell the idea. Never ask the buyer to do the work if you want to make a sale.
-
TROLL CONFIRMATION
One more pointless, inflammatory post like that, Peter, and you're gone for a while.
Jeremy
-
Fair enough.
-
Craig,
The easiest way to move forward would be elect a reasonable President.
All the rest is going to follow naturally.
Obama was perfectly fine to give you one recent example.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Craig,
The easiest way to move forward would be elect a reasonable President.
All the rest is going to follow naturally.
Obama was perfectly fine to give you one recent example.
Cheers,
Bernard
Things are different if you live in America. You;re more concerned with jobs, the economy, taxes, health care, retirements, Social Security, Medicare, cost of education, etc. The climate, while important, has less importance in the scheme of things.
-
Things are different if you live in America. You;re more concerned with jobs, the economy, taxes, health care, retirements, Social Security, Medicare, cost of education, etc. The climate, while important, has less importance in the scheme of things.
Sure... the 95.75% of the world's population not living in the US have the liberty to care about the threat paused by climate change on the common future of this planet because they don't have to care about jobs, taxes, health care,... ;D ;D ;D
Really?
But anyway, get the President right and things will fall in place as they should.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
But anyway, get the President right
Rather: get the right president! (see pic)
-
Sure... the 95.75% of the world's population not living in the US have the liberty to care about the threat paused by climate change on the common future of this planet because they don't have to care about jobs, taxes, health care,... ;D ;D ;D
Really?
But anyway, get the President right and things will fall in place as they should.
Cheers,
Bernard
As Jay Leno would say: it's hilarious!
The very things that have people "concerned" in the US include, apparently, many that a resonable ammount of common sense national caring would mostly resolve. "Don't you dare stop me drowning! Only I may be permitted to stop myself drowning; don't intrude upon my civil choices!"
You couldn't make this stuff up in a rational environment.
-
The whole page so far filled with sheer deflection. Not a single beep to answer the posed question. It figures. Ok, guys, spit it out... what else, apart from not having children?
-
Emigrate.
-
Sure... the 95.75% of the world's population not living in the US have the liberty to care about the threat paused by climate change on the common future of this planet because they don't have to care about jobs, taxes, health care,... ;D ;D ;D
Really?
But anyway, get the President right and things will fall in place as they should.
Cheers,
Bernard
Things have fallen into place quite nicely over the past three years. I cant think of a single way that I am worse off now then under Obama.
With Trump cutting regulations left and right, maybe he will eventually get to the nuclear ones. ;)
-
Things have fallen into place quite nicely over the past three years. I cant think of a single way that I am worse off now then under Obama.
With Trump cutting regulations left and right, maybe he will eventually get to the nuclear ones. ;)
We are talking about climate change action.
The US being one of the few rogue states in the world.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
We are talking about climate change action.
The US being one of the few rogue states in the world.
Yes, the US went rogue, reducing emissions, while the biggest polluters continue increasing it.
But, what action? Remember, that supposed "action" should be the subject of this thread, yet you post yet another deflection.
-
... But anyway, get the President right and things will fall in place as they should.
We will. Trump 2020!
-
We are talking about climate change action.
The US being one of the few rogue states in the world.
Cheers,
Bernard
And yet ...
U.S. Emissions Dropped in 2019: Here's Why in 6 Charts (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/07012020/infographic-united-states-emissions-2019-climate-change-greenhouse-gas-coal-transportation)
It kind of looks like our decrease in natural gas and fracking regulations greatly diminished our need for coal to the point where we started using much cleaner natural gas to produce electricity. Emissions in the electricity sector dropped by 10% with overall emissions dropping by 2%, on point with the EU.
Considering we are dropping our emissions at pretty much the same rate as Europe, I think it is fair to say that the Paris Accords really were pointless.
Meanwhile, in China, China CO2 emissions from energy sector still on rise - researchers (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-coal-carbon/china-co2-emissions-from-energy-sector-still-on-rise-researchers-idUSKBN1XO0QL)
-
I am currently listening to a podcast put on by the Hoover Institute specifically on energy policy and the absolute absurdities that the left places on the industry.
For instance, they are against new pipelines, but pipelines use less energy to transport fuel then trains and trucks. So using pipelines actually decrease CO2 emissions. On top of that, it is much safer to use a pipeline.
They then went on to talk about electricity in CA and how public policy is directly increasing the amount of forest fires. It is always best to replace older technology with newer ones, including when it comes to electrical lines. However, CA is so into solar and wind, which produce significantly less energy on a cost basis then other forms and also produces the most energy when we need it the least and vis versa, that there is very little money left over to replace aging electrical lines. This then leads to sagging lines with over grown foliage that then leads to forest fires. The speaker also noted that these forest fires are only starting on public lands, not privately owned lands that are managed by energy companies (such as Koch Industries) because the energy companies actually recognize the need to upgrade infrastructure and maintaining the land.
So yeah, I would get ride of all this BS too.
-
I am currently listening to a podcast put on by the Hoover Institute specifically on energy policy and the absolute absurdities that the left places on the industry.
For instance, they are against new pipelines, but pipelines use less energy to transport fuel then trains and trucks. So using pipelines actually decrease CO2 emissions. On top of that, it is much safer to use a pipeline.
They then went on to talk about electricity in CA and how public policy is directly increasing the amount of forest fires. It is always best to replace older technology with newer ones, including when it comes to electrical lines. However, CA is so into solar and wind, which produce significantly less energy on a cost basis then other forms and also produces the most energy when we need it the least and vis versa, that there is very little money left over to replace aging electrical lines. This then leads to sagging lines with over grown foliage that then leads to forest fires. The speaker also noted that these forest fires are only starting on public lands, not privately owned lands that are managed by energy companies (such as Koch Industries) because the energy companies actually recognize the need to upgrade infrastructure and maintaining the land.
So yeah, I would get ride of all this BS too.
So.. the Hoover institute is generally considered conservative-ish, with a pro-business focus. That's fine, and it doesn't mean that they are making up any of the things you mention above, but they might be looking at worst-case or short-term scenarios on alternative energy. Worth considering at least.
Regardless, to answer the OP question in wide general terms, I'd like to see the following:
- Tapering of subsidies for fossil fuels (including corn subsidies for ethanol), and subsequent reassignment to encourage greener energy production (including nuclear).
- A "moon shot" approach to rapid progress and adoption of alternative energy via basic research and aggressive public/private partnerships
- Continued encouragement of increasing CAFE standards
- Application of a similar system (Via LEED or something similar) to industrial and residential HVAC and building materials.
etc.
-
I am currently listening to a podcast put on by the Hoover Institute specifically on energy policy and the absolute absurdities that the left places on the industry.
For instance, they are against new pipelines, but pipelines use less energy to transport fuel then trains and trucks. So using pipelines actually decrease CO2 emissions. On top of that, it is much safer to use a pipeline.
You understand how misplaced that argument is, right?
Yes, a pipeline is better than trucks to carry oil just like a chemiotherapy is better than full brain removal. The underlying issues being that of reliance on oil, of drilling in protected areas, of driving Ford 150s instead of hybrid cars...
Building pipelines is like adding parking space in an urban area. It's fueling a problem instead of solving it.
They then went on to talk about electricity in CA and how public policy is directly increasing the amount of forest fires. It is always best to replace older technology with newer ones, including when it comes to electrical lines. However, CA is so into solar and wind, which produce significantly less energy on a cost basis then other forms and also produces the most energy when we need it the least and vis versa, that there is very little money left over to replace aging electrical lines. This then leads to sagging lines with over grown foliage that then leads to forest fires. The speaker also noted that these forest fires are only starting on public lands, not privately owned lands that are managed by energy companies (such as Koch Industries) because the energy companies actually recognize the need to upgrade infrastructure and maintaining the land.
So yeah, I would get ride of all this BS too.
It's certainly possible to find cases where privately owned power operators do some things better than publicly owned ones just like it's possible to find citations by Donald Trump that carry some resemblance to the truth.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
You understand how misplaced that argument is, right?
Yes, a pipeline is better than trucks to carry oil just like a chemiotherapy is better than full brain removal. The underlying issues being that of reliance on oil, of drilling in protected areas, of driving Ford 150s instead of hybrid cars...
Building pipelines is like adding parking space in an urban area. It's fueling a problem instead of solving it.
It's certainly possible to find cases where privately owned power operators do some things better than publicly owned ones just like it's possible to find citations by Donald Trump that carry some resemblance to the truth.
Cheers,
Bernard
No Bernard, you're being misguided. Regardless if the pipeline was built or not, oil would continue to flow and be transported by either older pipelines (the pipeline projects being protested were to replace aging ones) or by much more dangerous and uncontrolled methods like trucks and trains.
If you want to outlaw oil all together, run on that. But trying to eliminate oil by preventing the construction of a safer much more efficient form of transportation will do nothing but force industry to use other methods, which is what they will do.
-
No Bernard, you're being misguided. Regardless if the pipeline was built or not, oil would continue to flow and be transported by either older pipelines (the pipeline projects being protested were to replace aging ones) or by much more dangerous and uncontrolled methods like trucks and trains.
If you want to outlaw oil all together, run on that. But trying to eliminate oil by preventing the construction of a safer much more efficient form of transportation will do nothing but force industry to use other methods, which is what they will do.
There are always good reasons to do the wrong thing.
Similarly those in favor of more parkings in town will swear to you that cars will come anyway...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
There are always good reasons to do the wrong thing.
Similarly those in favor of more parkings in town will swear to you that cars will come anyway...
Cheers,
Bernard
LOL, apples to oranges comparison.
With oil, there is a large demand with a large supply that needs to transported. It is going to be moved one way or another.
Adding parking lots is hoping (not really knowing) for more cars, but there is no guarantee of enough cars to for the capacity unlike with oil. On top of that, those that are building the parking lots are not supplying the cars to fill them, so they have no direct knowledge of future use. Oil companies building pipelines to transport their oil know exactly how much oil they have to move, so it is not a bet insofar as having enough oil to fill the pipes.
But like I said before, if you're so against oil, campaign to outlaw it. Being a coward and going around it with pipeline moratoriums will only produce unwanted consequences.
-
Yes, the US went rogue, reducing emissions, while the biggest polluters continue increasing it.
But, what action? Remember, that supposed "action" should be the subject of this thread, yet you post yet another deflection.
I have answered once for all, get the right president.
Many private actors in the US understand the need to work to reduce emissions, companies such as Apple for instance.
When I write that the US went rogue, I am of course focusing on the decision of Trump to withdraw from the agreements the US had previously signed. There was a time when US Presidents understood that the leadership of the US wasn't due to strength, it was due to respect. The respect that results from actions aimed at making the world a better place, at moving human kind towards progress.
I believe that this is what attracted a large majority of historical immigrants to the US, a lot more so than money.
It would by the way be very interesting to measure the historical contribution of the States supporting Trump vs the other ones in terms of contribution to the greatness of the US. But I digress. ;D
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I would stop the wasting of land and water for fracking.
Fracking uses masses of water and pollutes it and the soil by adding toxic chemicals.
The fracking proces is only economic because they don't have to clean the soil and water afterwards.
Once they have got all the oil and gas out an ugly polluted landscape is left. The Tax payer will pay for the cleaning.
http://www.shaletest.org/resources/fracking-101/
-
...There was a time when US Presidents understood that the leadership...
We do not feel the urge to lead lunatics.
Bernard, once again, you offer bitching and moaning instead of proposing solutions.
-
We do not feel the urge to lead lunatics.
Bernard, once again, you offer bitching and moaning instead of proposing solutions.
There's no need: on both sides of the Atlantic we, the sane and rational, have been ousted by a race of lemmings.
Too late, he cried, too late!
-
I have answered once for all, get the right president.
Many private actors in the US understand the need to work to reduce emissions, companies such as Apple for instance.
When I write that the US went rogue, I am of course focusing on the decision of Trump to withdraw from the agreements the US had previously signed. There was a time when US Presidents understood that the leadership of the US wasn't due to strength, it was due to respect. The respect that results from actions aimed at making the world a better place, at moving human kind towards progress.
I believe that this is what attracted a large majority of historical immigrants to the US, a lot more so than money.
It would by the way be very interesting to measure the historical contribution of the States supporting Trump vs the other ones in terms of contribution to the greatness of the US. But I digress. ;D
Cheers,
Bernard
We HAVE the right President.
Signing wothless pieces of paper are a fools errand. What Trump has done is put the US first, which in my opinion is where our priorites belong. Help when required but we come first. Period.
That companies like Apple and ohters are making good progress is a perfect example of the markets working NOT becuse they are being forced to do so by a treaty or demands from a goverment, but because they want to so and AND it makes business sense.
You don't get respect by bowing down and going on an apology tour like our last President. Respect is earned and IMO its earned by NOT beiing a pushover and demanding that others earn their keep. I could care less if other countries "like" us. We come first.
-
So.. the Hoover institute is generally considered conservative-ish, with a pro-business focus. That's fine, and it doesn't mean that they are making up any of the things you mention above, but they might be looking at worst-case or short-term scenarios on alternative energy. Worth considering at least.
Regardless, to answer the OP question in wide general terms, I'd like to see the following:
- Tapering of subsidies for fossil fuels (including corn subsidies for ethanol), and subsequent reassignment to encourage greener energy production (including nuclear).
- A "moon shot" approach to rapid progress and adoption of alternative energy via basic research and aggressive public/private partnerships
- Continued encouragement of increasing CAFE standards
- Application of a similar system (Via LEED or something similar) to industrial and residential HVAC and building materials.
etc.
I have little arguement on the above other an it be a market driven move and not a governmental demand. And for the most part I think that is what is happening.
As to subsidies, I was not all that informed as to the amouts and breakdowns so I looked. It seems that for the most part what you suggest is in fact what is happening, based on the graphs and articles I have seen. I owud be happy to see some additional figures if I'm not correct. But again I'm prefer market based solutions so I could be happy to see all subsidies eliminated and may the best tech win.
But, in the near term, we need oil and will continue to need for for many years to come. Lets say we want to eliminate fossil fuel vehicles. How long will it take to totally convert the current oil powered vehicles? 20 years, 30 years? Many people don't buy new vehicles. I love cars but I rarely buy new, I don't like the financial hit. I'm not alone. Many can only afford older used cars. How do you orce these folks to move to electric? As it stands I would not purchase a used electric car...just my take on the potential problem areas like batteries for example. I can envison the US being the new Cuba as it relates to cars with old wrecks being duct taped together to keep them on the road.
As I've stated before I don't have an issue with electric cars and even trucks for certain uses. But again, in my view a wholesale conversion is problematic. Can you imagine a household trying to charge 4 or 5 cars each night? I wonder what the load mihgt be on the electric grid with every household having 1-2-3 or more 220V lines pumping out power to cars daily. Not to mention the infrastructure needed to keep these cars on the road when away from home.
Maybe the younger generation will be more adept at living with these limitations if they do indeed happen. I'm old and grumpy and in no mood to change my lifestyle drastically. :)
-
We HAVE the right President.
Signing wothless pieces of paper are a fools errand. What Trump has done is put the US first, which in my opinion is where our priorites belong. Help when required but we come first. Period.
That companies like Apple and ohters are making good progress is a perfect example of the markets working NOT becuse they are being forced to do so by a treaty or demands from a goverment, but because they want to so and AND it makes business sense.
You don't get respect by bowing down and going on an apology tour like our last President. Respect is earned and IMO its earned by NOT beiing a pushover and demanding that others earn their keep. I could care less if other countries "like" us. We come first.
Interesting. So trying one's best to attain a non-proliferation deal with anyone is just a peice of paper, a fool's errand. Strikes me that standing in the way of achieving that is anything but putting the US first: after all, it's your butts that would be first targets. It's the way you now go about making friends that earns you that love.
All companies that succeed do so because they have got their act together; making it more difficult for them to operate abroad is the opposite of helping them grow richer, fatter and anything else you'd wish for them. Create international difficulties for them and they suffer too.
Of course you come "first" because it's your country. But your country being first is another matter and doesn't come as of right; indeed, you have to earn it. And you don't earn it by isolationism which is eactly where your supreme leader would lead you.
Rob
-
Interesting. So trying one's best to attain a non-proliferation deal with anyone is just a peice of paper, a fool's errand. Strikes me that standing in the way of achieving that is anything but putting the US first: after all, it's your butts that would be first targets. It's the way you now go about making friends that earns you that love.
All companies that succeed do so because they have got their act together; making it more difficult for them to operate abroad is the opposite of helping them grow richer, fatter and anything else you'd wish for them. Create international difficulties for them and they suffer too.
Of course you come "first" because it's your country. But your country being first is another matter and doesn't come as of right; indeed, you have to earn it. And you don't earn it by isolationism which is eactly where your supreme leader would lead you.
Rob
Yep treaties are pretty much only worth the paper they are written on. Do you really think the enemies of the US are really being bound by that paper? We are the first targets regardless of whatever paper gets signed. Protection comes from strength. Love? Really?
I would suggest that Trump is in fact not leading us to isolation, but rather, leading us from being the sucker. But hey, YMMV.
-
Yep treaties are pretty much only worth the paper they are written on. Do you really think the enemies of the US are really being bound by that paper? We are the first targets regardless of whatever paper gets signed. Protection comes from strength. Love? Really?
I would suggest that Trump is in fact not leading us to isolation, but rather, leading us from being the sucker. But hey, YMMV.
With treaties come controls. You are being somewhat disengenuous there. Better that monitors prevent, and at the very least, delay and make much more difficult the building of weaponry that could singe that orange head of hair, not to mention many others with completely different hair.
Yes, protection comes from strength; that's exactly North Korea's point as well as Iran's obvious conclusion. But somehow only some folks are supposedly worthy of feeling self-protected, which is an interesting proposition of itself. Who gives the US or any other entity that right to decide who is who?
Love is the antidote to hatred. It's a far nore difficult emotion to arouse in others than are the easy routes to hatred.
-
...Who gives the US... that right to decide who is who?...
Exactly, Rob. Nobody. There is no cosmic justice.
We take that right, we do not need anyone to give it to us.
-
Exactly, Rob. Nobody. There is no cosmic justice.
We take that right, we do not need anyone to give it to us.
As NK and Iran keep indicating. So do they take it - or at least, both will eventually unless something susprising developes. After all, in the case of Iran, if Israel really has it, then what does anyone expect from the neighbours?
-
Exactly, Rob. Nobody. There is no cosmic justice.
We take that right, we do not need anyone to give it to us.
WE take that right; is that your Servian side or your US side...
...
it doesn't sound very sane either way, let alone democratic.
-
WE take that right; is that your Servian side or your US side...
...
it doesn't sound very sane either way, let alone democratic.
Democracy doesn;t apply in international affairs. How would you vote on such a thing? Even in the U.N. some countries have more power. In any case, where would you be if America wasn't around?
-
Democracy doesn;t apply in international affairs. How would you vote on such a thing? Even in the U.N. some countries have more power. In any case, where would you be if America wasn't around?
You seem to confuse a kind of populism (the old Greek Democratic Rule-by-the-people as opposed to Aristocracy) with a modern form of Democacy. Populism seeks majority rule. (True)Democracy is when the majority (e.g. in a simple case 50 % + 1) is delegated/appointed to deal the shots on behalf of the entire populus, while at the same time protecting the rights of the minority.
But as Slobodan and others have said before, the USA is not a democracy. I disagree, but see the USA as one of many forms of Democracy, but less modern than a many Western Liberal Democracies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy
With such an old-fashioned view on what modern Democracy actually is, I can see how you fail to see that such a concept could actually apply across borders.
This actually is at the basis of our different appreciations of the USA's role in the international community (a global village where our actions affect all the other community members).
-
You seem to confuse a kind of populism (the old Greek Democratic Rule-by-the-people as opposed to Aristocracy) with a modern form of Democacy. Populism seeks majority rule. (True)Democracy is when the majority (e.g. in a simple case 50 % + 1) is delegated/appointed to deal the shots on behalf of the entire populus, while at the same time protecting the rights of the minority.
But as Slobodan and others have said before, the USA is not a democracy. I disagree, but see the USA as one of many forms of Democracy, but less modern than a many Western Liberal Democracies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy
With such an old-fashioned view on what modern Democracy actually is, I can see how you fail to see that such a concept could actually apply across borders.
This actually is at the basis of our different appreciations of the USA's role in the international community (a global village where our actions affect all the other community members).
Bart, You didn't describe how democracy or democratic principles work among nations. The closest we have in the U.N. which has very limited power that can be vetoed by certain states on the really important issues.
Countries decide how they operate based on their own interests. Sometimes, those interests coincide with a number of countries. So they can join together in a common purpose such as NATO or the EU. But at the end of the day, each country decides what its interest are and then attempts to protect them.
I think that America has also taken on greater responsibility for the common good. Some of it is for our own interests. Some of it is less self-interested. WE've often gotten involved in foreign adventures that seem "good" initially only to turn out terrible for us and others. Right now we have huge debt. So we can;t afford many activities we and others thought were regular for us. Regardless of who wins in 2020 and later, American presidents are going to have to back off because the money isn't there any longer to pay for many of these things.
-
You seem to confuse a kind of populism (the old Greek Democratic Rule-by-the-people as opposed to Aristocracy) with a modern form of Democacy. Populism seeks majority rule. (True)Democracy is when the majority (e.g. in a simple case 50 % + 1) is delegated/appointed to deal the shots on behalf of the entire populus, while at the same time protecting the rights of the minority.
But as Slobodan and others have said before, the USA is not a democracy. I disagree, but see the USA as one of many forms of Democracy, but less modern than a many Western Liberal Democracies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_democracy
With such an old-fashioned view on what modern Democracy actually is, I can see how you fail to see that such a concept could actually apply across borders.
This actually is at the basis of our different appreciations of the USA's role in the international community (a global village where our actions affect all the other community members).
This always happens in life: one-time leaders and systems always become passé in the end.
Britain once set the world stage for parliamentary and legal procedures. Now, we are starting to cut ourselves off from the tree as we still sit on the branch. The creaking just got ominously louder on the 31st of January.
What chance the US without a many centuries-old tradition and setting of such standards? It did its best to hang on to what came over with it from Europe, but distance and the wild-west attitudes prevailed. It never had a chance: instead it developed the mafia and the most dangerous trade unions and industrial lobbies. And nobody has ever known where lie the lines between those and governmental powers. And worse, today, the very questioning of it all has become known as fake news.
-
This always happens in life: one-time leaders and systems always become passé in the end.
Britain once set the world stage for parliamentary and legal procedures. Now, we are starting to cut ourselves off from the tree as we still sit on the branch. The creaking just got ominously louder on the 31st of January.
What chance the US without a many centuries-old tradition and setting of such standards? It did its best to hang on to what came over with it from Europe, but distance and the wild-west attitudes prevailed. It never had a chance: instead it developed the mafia and the most dangerous trade unions and industrial lobbies. And nobody has ever known where lie the lines between those and governmental powers. And worse, today, the very questioning of it all has become known as fake news.
With all of that...I still rather be stuck in the USA.
Peter
-
With all of that...I still rather be stuck in the USA.
Hi Peter,
I understand, but which USA are we talking about?
The "rich man's justice" kind of USA, or that of normal people putting in an honest effort and contributing their part to society?
Time For Warnings Is Past As Trump Openly Abuses Power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roGPWFUCz0c
Europeans and others around the world are watching this, and wonder (which is an understatement) ...
-
Hi Peter,
I understand, but which USA are we talking about?
The "rich man's justice" kind of USA, or that of normal people putting in an honest effort and contributing their part to society?
Time For Warnings Is Past As Trump Openly Abuses Power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roGPWFUCz0c
Europeans and others around the world are watching this, and wonder (which is an understatement) ...
Watching what? Wondering about what? Trump's been president for 4 years. What has he done that affects you so much that would keep you up nights? I didn't realize he had so much effect in the Netherlands. How has your life changed? What justice has changed here in America? You're just being politically hyperbolic because you don;t like him.
-
Hi Peter,
I understand, but which USA are we talking about?
The "rich man's justice" kind of USA, or that of normal people putting in an honest effort and contributing their part to society?
Time For Warnings Is Past As Trump Openly Abuses Power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roGPWFUCz0c
Europeans and others around the world are watching this, and wonder (which is an understatement) ...
;D ;D ;D
I can assure you, Bart, that “normal people” is the States are doing just fine, actually, better than under Obama. Whatever problems we might have are not related to Trump, but to life itself.
Perhaps time to change your binoculars?
-
Hi Peter,
I understand, but which USA are we talking about?
quote]
Bart,
One of the normal people putting in an honest effort and contributing their part to society! Via Taxes...
This is how I , and my family before me, have always lived and always will. This is all I know how to be...
Peter
-
Hi Peter,
I understand, but which USA are we talking about?
The "rich man's justice" kind of USA, or that of normal people putting in an honest effort and contributing their part to society?
Time For Warnings Is Past As Trump Openly Abuses Power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roGPWFUCz0c
Europeans and others around the world are watching this, and wonder (which is an understatement) ...
Considering the crap the news media put out nowadays I can understand your confusion, Bart. People don't work to "contribute to society." They work to contribute to themselves, and since Trump got into office in most cases their contributions to themselves have increased noticeably. But for the "media," reporting that is a no no.
-
Russ, Europeans are all Socialists. You know that.
-
Considering the crap the news media put out nowadays I can understand your confusion, Bart. People don't work to "contribute to society." They work to contribute to themselves, and since Trump got into office in most cases their contributions to themselves have increased noticeably. But for the "media," reporting that is a no no.
Yes, perhaps that's the case, but as money is always short*, it must be at the cost of spending money on your shared infrastucture. I think I see it already: in many of Jay Leno's car videos he complains about the holes and cracks in the streets of LA, how much extremely expensive damage they do the wheels of his many cars, and I have heard exactly the same for New York from William Klein.
That's not to absolve the UK: the most noticeable thing when you cross from French motorways to English ones is how poor the home side is compared with France which has pay-for motorways, though some stretches are free, or were when I had the pleasure of using them.
* See The impossibility of surviving on 50 million bucks.
Rob
-
Considering the crap the news media put out nowadays I can understand your confusion, Bart. People don't work to "contribute to society." They work to contribute to themselves, and since Trump got into office in most cases their contributions to themselves have increased noticeably. But for the "media," reporting that is a no no.
This may come as a huge surprise to you Russ, but many people in the world are not just thinking about their selfish selves. Be it in their private life or in their professional life.
As recently as 2 weeks ago I hired a young lady whose main motivation to select the company I work for instead of another one was our contribution to the sustainability of our customers. The reason being that she needed to know she was contributing to society.
This is the case for a large majority of young people in Europe and I believe the same applies in most parts of the US.
I know it's a terribly slipping slope... you start by caring about society and the next thing you know is you being ok to contribute to the healthcare of poor people... which is the entry point into the socialist hell. Selfishness is a lot safer... ;D ;D ;D
Cheers,
Bernard
-
... As recently as 2 weeks ago I hired a young lady whose main motivation to select the company I work for instead of another one was our contribution to the sustainability of our customers. The reason being that she needed to know she was contributing to society...
OMG! With idiots like that, the humanity is indeed doomed.
;D :D ;D
P.S. 20 years ago, I hired a young lady whose main motivation to select the company I worked for instead of another one was that her boss would be good looking, charming, and gentlemanly. The reason being that she needed to know she has a chance of marrying him.
P.P.S. it almost happened then. It still might happen. I’ll keep you posted.
-
This may come as a huge surprise to you Russ, but many people in the world are not just thinking about their selfish selves. Be it in their private life or in their professional life.
As recently as 2 weeks ago I hired a young lady whose main motivation to select the company I work for instead of another one was our contribution to the sustainability of our customers. The reason being that she needed to know she was contributing to society.
This is the case for a large majority of young people in Europe and I believe the same applies in most parts of the US.
I know it's a terribly slipping slope... you start by caring about society and the next thing you know is you being ok to contribute to the healthcare of poor people... which is the entry point into the socialist hell. Selfishness is a lot safer... ;D ;D ;D
Cheers,
Bernard
To the above, I would add that not everybody works just to make money.
They are the exceptions, but I know several folks who do what they do in life because they love it; whether they become rich has nothing to do with it: as the graffito in the famous Jeanloup Sieff photograph of a French wall said: ne perdez pas votre vie a la gagner. Which roughly translated means: don't waste your life in the earning of your living. (It works better in the French.)
I guess artists mostly understand and get that.
-
OMG! With idiots like that, the humanity is indeed doomed.
;D :D ;D
P.S. 20 years ago, I hired a young lady whose main motivation to select the company I worked for instead of another one was that her boss would be good looking, charming, and gentlemanly. The reason being that she needed to know she has a chance of marrying him.
P.P.S. it almost happened then. It still might happen. I’ll keep you posted.
Usually, once bitten twice shy! I told you I patted a dog once.
;-)
-
P.S. 20 years ago, I hired a young lady whose main motivation to select the company I worked for instead of another one was that her boss would be good looking, charming, and gentlemanly. The reason being that she needed to know she has a chance of marrying him.
P.P.S. it almost happened then. It still might happen. I’ll keep you posted.
Slobodan, please stop the suspense and tell us what happened during those 20 years.
-
Slobodan, please stop the suspense and tell us what happened during those 20 years.
Next time we get together for a coffee, Les :)
-
This may come as a huge surprise to you Russ, but many people in the world are not just thinking about their selfish selves. Be it in their private life or in their professional life.
As recently as 2 weeks ago I hired a young lady whose main motivation to select the company I work for instead of another one was our contribution to the sustainability of our customers. The reason being that she needed to know she was contributing to society.
This is the case for a large majority of young people in Europe and I believe the same applies in most parts of the US.
I know it's a terribly slipping slope... you start by caring about society and the next thing you know is you being ok to contribute to the healthcare of poor people... which is the entry point into the socialist hell. Selfishness is a lot safer... ;D ;D ;D
Cheers,
Bernard
You're conflating different things. People try to advance themselves so they can take care of their families better. No one thinks, gee I think I'll get a Master Degree so I can contribute more to charity. Give me a break.
On the other hand, giving to charity is a very American thing to do. We give more private charity than anyone else. Companies support the arts, pay for documentaries on climate change, the sciences, etc. Buffett and other billionaires have formed charity partnerships. Hospitals have been paid for by private charity.
Remember, tithing is suppose to represent only 10% of your earnings, Even God wants you to take care of yourself and your families with the other 90%.
Finally, charity must come personally from the heart. You can't stick a gun to someone's head and force them to give to others. That's what Socialism is all about. You lose your freedom to be good.
-
Finally, charity must come personally from the heart. You can't stick a gun to someone's head and force them to give to others. That's what Socialism is all about. You lose your freedom to be good.
No, social democracy is about increasing the odds that everybody gets reasonably similar opportunities to climb the ladder. That starts with giving everyone access to great education and a good health.
In other words, it attempts to ensure that human rights are not the victim of greed and corruption.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
No, social democracy is about increasing the odds that everybody gets reasonably similar opportunities to climb the ladder. That starts with giving everyone access to great education and a good health.
In other words, it attempts to ensure that human rights are not the victim of greed and corruption.
Cheers,
Bernard
Sanders isn;t stopping at social democracy or soft capitalism. He wants government control of industry and redistribution of wealth a la Marxism. He's a dedicated Bolshevik.
-
In other words, it attempts to ensure that human rights are not the victim of greed and corruption.
Cheers,
Bernard
As long as human beings exist so will greed and corruption. Any misguided attempt to change human nature is doomed to failure.
-
Sanders isn;t stopping at social democracy or soft capitalism. He wants government control of industry and redistribution of wealth a la Marxism. He's a dedicated Bolshevik.
Careful with mentioning bolsheviks. They were as bad as their unmentionable solemates in pre-war Germany.
Referring to their party or their leader and other top-ranking party members could get you banned. Or were the former ones pardoned?
-
As long as human beings exist so will greed and corruption. Any misguided attempt to change human nature is doomed to failure.
Fortunately there has always been more than that or we would not exist anymore...
-
As long as human beings exist so will greed and corruption. Any misguided attempt to change human nature is doomed to failure.
That's a good logic for condoning gun sales across the board.
-
That's a good logic for condoning gun sales across the board.
Except that a gun in the RIGHT hands is often quite useful.
And then there is that pesky 2nd Amendment and the fact that there are nearly somewhere around 300 million firearms owned by US citizens. I own 6 myself including two of those dreaded "black rifles". But to counterbalance I do own way more cameras....
-
Except that a gun in the RIGHT hands is often quite useful.
And then there is that pesky 2nd Amendment and the fact that there are nearly somewhere around 300 million firearms owned by US citizens. I own 6 myself including two of those dreaded "black rifles". But to counterbalance I do own way more cameras....
That's where the trouble begins: whose hands are the right ones, and who decides, other than the guy with the armoury?
Why am I not surprised you have a mania for guns? One, at least, for protection against the rest of the ones floating around everywhere (obviously you'd need the army against all of those coming at you at once). It all goes along sweetly with a law drawn up for the days of horses and coaches. If you have a big appetite, I understand you may want need to shoot a stag or three now and again, what with all the supermarkets soon being closed due to that pesky coronavirus - another import from China - better raise the tariffs...
Cameras. I ended up with just two systems and two brands: 135 and 6x6 formats. I was ever so happy to leave 4x5 behind. Today, were I able to do the same work again on digital, I think I might have settled on one format. Probably a Nikon again. Nothing like simplicity and no surprises to make your work second-nature.
:-)
-
That's where the trouble begins: whose hands are the right ones, and who decides, other than the guy with the armoury?
Why am I not surprised you have a mania for guns? One, at least, for protection against the rest of the ones floating around everywhere (obviously you'd need the army against all of those coming at you at once). It all goes along sweetly with a law drawn up for the days of horses and coaches. If you have a big appetite, I understand you may want need to shoot a stag or three now and again, what with all the supermarkets soon being closed due to that pesky coronavirus - another import from China - better raise the tariffs...
Cameras. I ended up with just two systems and two brands: 135 and 6x6 formats. I was ever so happy to leave 4x5 behind. Today, were I able to do the same work again on digital, I think I might have settled on one format. Probably a Nikon again. Nothing like simplicity and no surprises to make your work second-nature.
:-)
I really don't have "mania" for guns. They are like many other things mechanical that one can own and enjoy both working with and working on them, and of course one can also enjoy the design qualities of these items. There is also the protection aspect, but quite frankly I truly hope it never comes to that, either as protection from my fellow man or a government, mine or someone elses. However should it happen I hope I've trained properly.
As to who's hands are the right ones, its very easy, the law abidding hands.
Cameras are tools that fed my family so over the yeras I've collected quite a few. All the film stuff is long gone but the digital era produced a number of dust catchers on the shelf.
Film stuff before it and the studio was gone...
-
I really don't have "mania" for guns. They are like many other things mechanical that one can own and enjoy both working with and working on them, and of course one can also enjoy the design qualities of these items. There is also the protection aspect, but quite frankly I truly hope it never comes to that, either as protection from my fellow man or a government, mine or someone elses. However should it happen I hope I've trained properly.
As to who's hands are the right ones, its very easy, the law abidding hands.
Cameras are tools that fed my family so over the yeras I've collected quite a few. All the film stuff is long gone but the digital era produced a number of dust catchers on the shelf.
Film stuff before it and the studio was gone...
Good grief! Were you a photographer or a shop?
Studio gone made me smile: I had a rented one from the day I began my business, and it was used a lot. Then, studio work began to fall away as the location stuff built up. So, deciding to stop wasting money on rent, I let it go. You guessed: studio work came back, and for a while I was screwed, until we built a new studio alongside our house. Again, afer an initial revival for paper roll background shots, the work for it fell away and I ended up doing nothing except Kodachrome and Ektachrome work outside, which eventually convinced us that the work and the world were changing, so we upped sticks and went to Spain which provided most of the location stuff we required, but we still managed to end up travelling quite a bit after the move.
It was an interesting life, much more interesting than after it ended.
-
Sanders isn;t stopping at social democracy or soft capitalism. He wants government control of industry and redistribution of wealth a la Marxism. He's a dedicated Bolshevik.
No, that's how Republicans are trying to paint him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6J3ROV4IPc
Cheers,
Bernard
-
No, that's how Republicans are trying to pain him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6J3ROV4IPc
Cheers,
Bernard
Sanders defends Castro and is still doing it. Presenting a video, with socialist anti Trump Krugman who makes believe he's a capitalist, is just silly. Of course, you're a socialist from Europe so I realize you can't see Sander's real beliefs. Or you actually do but think they're benign. Even mainstream Democrats recognize who Sanders is which is why they're panicking. Of course, getting free stuff is always attractive to people.
-
Sanders defends Castro and is still doing it. Presenting a video, with socialist anti Trump Krugman who makes believe he's a capitalist, is just silly. Of course, you're a socialist from Europe so I realize you can't see Sander's real beliefs. Or you actually do but think they're benign. Even mainstream Democrats recognize who Sanders is which is why they're panicking. Of course, getting free stuff is always attractive to people.
More FUD from you.
The reality is that 99.9% of Americans, including yourself, would be much better off with a Denmark like Scheme such as the ones promoted by Sanders.
This is has very little to do with the Social state you are describing.
I am not sure why you feel the need to run down Sanders like this. You are certain that Trump will win the election anyway, and it should - according to your logic - be an even easier win against Sanders right? Leave the old man alone.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Guys, we have other threads for that.
This thread should be about what other moronic ideas you might have, besides not having children, that would “save” the planet.
-
The whole page so far filled with sheer deflection. Not a single beep to answer the posed question. It figures. Ok, guys, spit it out... what else, apart from not having children?
Getting off the meat and cheese diet would be a good start.
-
Getting off the meat and cheese diet would be a good start.
Ok, fair enough. Many people already do that. Are you suggesting a government-imposed vegan diet for everyone else?
And assuming the above is feasible. What are the implications of a plant-only diet? And I do not mean only medical, but also agricultural. Would we be able to produce enough to feed the world? What would it mean for the use of pesticides, genetically modified food, organic food? My vegan friends tell me they need to eat much more in quantity to fill up. Would we need to clear up forests to make room for plant fields?
-
Ok, fair enough. Many people already do that. Are you suggesting a government-imposed vegan diet for everyone else?
And assuming the above is feasible. What are the implications of a plant-only diet? And I do not mean only medical, but also agricultural. Would we be able to produce enough to feed the world? What would it mean for the use of pesticides, genetically modified food, organic food? My vegan friends tell me they need to eat much more in quantity to fill up. Would we need to clear up forests to make room for plant fields?
Who cares about feeding the world? The world's powerful never have, and only a few groups with a social conscience give a shit about the rest of the world, which is perfectly obvious in the majority of the traffic on CC. It starts with the "I'm okay for now, Jack" denial about the man-made damage we are doing to the planet and continues through the cheers for unbridled greed and for private armies of gun-toting families.
It's all enough to make one wish for a second deluge and a fresh start.
Rob
-
Who cares about feeding the world? The world's powerful never have, and only a few groups with a social conscience give a shit about the rest of the world, which is perfectly obvious in the majority of the traffic on CC. It starts with the "I'm okay for now, Jack" denial about the man-made damage we are doing to the planet and continues through the cheers for unbridled greed and for private armies of gun-toting families.
It's all enough to make one wish for a second deluge and a fresh start.
More deflection. Answers, please.
-
More deflection. Answers, please.
Answer what?
-
Answer what?
I think I made the questions perfectly clear and reasonably detailed.
-
Ok, fair enough. Many people already do that. Are you suggesting a government-imposed vegan diet for everyone else?
And assuming the above is feasible. What are the implications of a plant-only diet? And I do not mean only medical, but also agricultural. Would we be able to produce enough to feed the world? What would it mean for the use of pesticides, genetically modified food, organic food? My vegan friends tell me they need to eat much more in quantity to fill up. Would we need to clear up forests to make room for plant fields?
One of the advantages of a warming climate is that it creates more arable land for farming.
-
Also, more CO2 increases food yields per acre.
-
Except that a gun in the RIGHT hands is often quite useful.
..
For my country and my fellow EU-members that is just the police and the army. ( apart from a few hunters and sport-shooters)
-
For my country and my fellow EU-members that is just the police and the army. ( apart from a few hunters and sport-shooters)
The average response time for Police to arrive at a crime means in a deadly situation you will be dead or wounded before they arrive. Police usually only mop up the mess. If thats how you choose to live, more power to you. Me, I'll at least give myself the option and chance to defend myself.
-
For my country and my fellow EU-members that is just the police and the army. ( apart from a few hunters and sport-shooters)
Which is exactly why the US always has to rush to save your -- whatever.
-
Good grief! Were you a photographer or a shop?
Studio gone made me smile: I had a rented one from the day I began my business, and it was used a lot. Then, studio work began to fall away as the location stuff built up. So, deciding to stop wasting money on rent, I let it go. You guessed: studio work came back, and for a while I was screwed, until we built a new studio alongside our house. Again, afer an initial revival for paper roll background shots, the work for it fell away and I ended up doing nothing except Kodachrome and Ektachrome work outside, which eventually convinced us that the work and the world were changing, so we upped sticks and went to Spain which provided most of the location stuff we required, but we still managed to end up travelling quite a bit after the move.
It was an interesting life, much more interesting than after it ended.
You gotta have at least two of everything important. Things sometimes break at the worst time and I have yet to stop a shoot because of an equipment failure. And when I had the studio it was quite common to have two rv's in studio and sets built at any given time. After spending the better part of the day setting up and shooting an interior shot I really liked to keep it intact until I saw the film the next day. So having enough camera, lighting and grip gear for two sets was important.
I loved having the studio and the one I'm showing was 6000 sqft. 18"ceilings. I could get two large or three small RVs inside at a time. We later moved to a 10,000 sqft. space that was drive through, and it could hold 3 or four. Sadly the market died in 2008 and my clients jsut stopped having photos produced. So the studio went away and we switched to doing all work on location at the factories. A much better business model with almost zero overhead...
And yes this is climate related :). Americans loved then and still do now, using RV's and boats large and small to enjoy the vast US.
-
For my country and my fellow EU-members that is just the police and the army. ( apart from a few hunters and sport-shooters)
If the army and police are the only ones with guns, how do you stop a dictatorship? How would you protect yourself from total breakdown during civil unrest? remember, the first thing a dictator does is take away citizen's guns? Apparently, they won't have to do that in your country. They already have a good start.
-
My vegan friends tell me they need to eat much more in quantity to fill up. Would we need to clear up forests to make room for plant fields?
No, we would grow crops in the fields vacated by the cows, pigs and sheep.
-
No, we would grow crops in the fields vacated by the cows, pigs and sheep.
Well, that’s an interesting approach, but my understanding is that such fields are used for cattle precisely because they are not suitable for crops. An old rivalry between farmers and ranchers (for water access, not fields).
-
The average response time for Police to arrive at a crime means in a deadly situation you will be dead or wounded before they arrive. Police usually only mop up the mess. If thats how you choose to live, more power to you. Me, I'll at least give myself the option and chance to defend myself.
No fortunately it is not the situation where i live. I can walk at night at any street in amsterdam and feel save. Apparantly there is not much need for people here to rob each other.
Maybe that is the situation where you live...
Our crime rate is much lower... only once in my lifetime (58) i have been confronted with a robbery in a park in Amsterdam ...
I had only 36,25 € with me. They took it from me while threatening me with a knive; then i asked 1.25 euro back to get a coke and i got it.
(These were stupid young kids going out without any money , not realizing that this could end up very seriously if they used that knive.)
For having firearms you can get a 4 years sentence .
-
Which is exactly why the US always has to rush to save your -- whatever.
off the point- 8-track... whatever indeed
-
off the point- 8-track... whatever indeed
Okay, Pieter: Which is why we always have to send our own people to save your civilization.
I'm being as polite as possible.
-
Ok, fair enough. Many people already do that. Are you suggesting a government-imposed vegan diet for everyone else?
And assuming the above is feasible. What are the implications of a plant-only diet? And I do not mean only medical, but also agricultural. Would we be able to produce enough to feed the world? What would it mean for the use of pesticides, genetically modified food, organic food? My vegan friends tell me they need to eat much more in quantity to fill up. Would we need to clear up forests to make room for plant fields?
Considering the combined production costs, water usage, antibiotics and hormones, illnesses, spoilage, and other factors, costs of raising livestock are severely times higher than of vegetables. Costs of producing plant-based meat substitutes are currently higher, but that is becoming slowly also more streamlined and more efficient. Personally, I never buy processed meat substitutes, I prefer the real unprocessed food ingredients.
Industrial animal agriculture has been operating and optimizing at a global scale for decades. Yet it is still inherently more efficient to make meat directly from plants rather than feeding our crops to animals and then eating a part of the animal.
https://www.gfi.org/plant-based-meat-will-be-less-expensive
https://grocycle.com/most-profitable-crops-to-grow/
-
Considering the combined production costs, water usage, antibiotics and hormones, illnesses, spoilage, and other factors, costs of raising livestock are severely times higher than of vegetables....
For now.
What I am asking is similar to electric cars: if every gas car is replaced with electric one, we would need to up the production of electricity exponentially, creating a whole new set of problems.
So, a plant-based agriculture of the future would need a similar, exponentially higher level of production, which includes pesticides, other chemicals, GMO food, dying-bees syndrome, etc.
-
So, a plant-based agriculture of the future would need a similar, exponentially higher level of production, which includes pesticides, other chemicals, GMO food, dying-bees syndrome, etc.
But if we stopped eating meat, we would free up all the crops that we currently use to feed livestock. It is more efficient to eat corn than corn-fed chicken.
-
No fortunately it is not the situation where i live. I can walk at night at any street in amsterdam and feel save. Apparantly there is not much need for people here to rob each other.
Maybe that is the situation where you live...
Our crime rate is much lower... only once in my lifetime (58) i have been confronted with a robbery in a park in Amsterdam ...
I had only 36,25 € with me. They took it from me while threatening me with a knive; then i asked 1.25 euro back to get a coke and i got it.
(These were stupid young kids going out without any money , not realizing that this could end up very seriously if they used that knive.)
For having firearms you can get a 4 years sentence .
There are many places that are very safe and some not so safe in the USA. Personally I’ve not encountered any dangerous events myself, but things happen. I’ll prefer not to be bleeding while I await for cops to arrive in the event of an attack.
In the US, in my state and many others I can open carry a handgun and I also have a license to carry concealed if I choose. Ah... freedom.
-
For now.
What I am asking is similar to electric cars: if every gas car is replaced with electric one, we would need to up the production of electricity exponentially, creating a whole new set of problems.
So, a plant-based agriculture of the future would need a similar, exponentially higher level of production, which includes pesticides, other chemicals, GMO food, dying-bees syndrome, etc.
The thing about electric cars is that they constitute part of a plot to isolate people in their ghetto. They won't be able to go far away from wherever they happen to be stuck. Beautiful idea in times of pestilence. Control the recharging points, declare outages when it suits the local mayor or sheriff...
But don't worry about the electricity: the gas companies are ahead of you and me: they have already invested fortunes in seeking new propellants. No way they're going the way of the local advertising photographer!
-
No fortunately it is not the situation where i live. I can walk at night at any street in amsterdam and feel save. Apparantly there is not much need for people here to rob each other.
Maybe that is the situation where you live...
Our crime rate is much lower... only once in my lifetime (58) i have been confronted with a robbery in a park in Amsterdam ...
I had only 36,25 € with me. They took it from me while threatening me with a knive; then i asked 1.25 euro back to get a coke and i got it.
(These were stupid young kids going out without any money , not realizing that this could end up very seriously if they used that knive.)
For having firearms you can get a 4 years sentence .
In NYC, you can go to jail for one year if you carry a gun without a permit. However, you're able to keep guns legally in your home to protect your home. That's not much different than the Swiss. Why would you want to give up your rights to keep arms in your home if you desire? For myself, I don;t keep guns in my home.
-
But if we stopped eating meat, we would free up all the crops that we currently use to feed livestock. It is more efficient to eat corn than corn-fed chicken.
There are three food groups. Carbs, meat (protein) and vegetables. People tend to eat more carbs if they don;t eat meat. After all, how many carrots can you eat? :) This accounts for such higher diabetes rates, a disease that causes all kinds of sickness. Carbs are more dangerous than eating meat fats.
-
There are three food groups. Carbs, meat (protein) and vegetables. People tend to eat more carbs if they don;t eat meat. After all, how many carrots can you eat? :) This accounts for such higher diabetes rates, a disease that causes all kinds of sickness. Carbs are more dangerous than eating meat fats.
Beware of medical advice you read on the internet. And certainly get a second opinion from a medical expert about anything Trump may have to say about public health.
-
There are many places that are very safe and some not so safe in the USA. Personally I’ve not encountered any dangerous events myself, but things happen. I’ll prefer not to be bleeding while I await for cops to arrive in the event of an attack.
In the US, in my state and many others I can open carry a handgun and I also have a license to carry concealed if I choose. Ah... freedom.
Not my kind of freedom.
I am glad nobody here walks with guns.. to protect himself against what ? the other person with a gun...
-
Not my kind of freedom.
To each his own.
-
To each his own.
The problem in the States is that it's gone too far and is too late. The guns exist in all sorts of hands, exactly as in the Middle East...
Now there's a sobering thought - or two.
Rob
-
The problem in the States is that it's gone too far and is too late. The guns exist in all sorts of hands, exactly as in the Middle East...
Now there's a sobering thought - or two.
Rob
I have been in the Sahara desert many times in my life, even in south Libya with Touaregs, and always felt save.- That was all more than 15 years ago.
Journeys through the Sahara are now too dangerous.
After the fall of Moammar al-Qadhafi the Libyan weapons ended up in the desert.
They are now in the hands of desperate African people that wanted to Europe but ulimately stranded.
Even the very nice Sahel countries like the peaceful Burkina Faso and Mali are getting hit by violence, it is very sad. ( was there in 1987 before the mobile phone and TV )
-
I have been in the Sahara desert many times in my life, even in south Libya with Touaregs, and always felt save.- That was all more than 15 years ago.
Journeys through the Sahara are now too dangerous.
After the fall of Moammar al-Qadhafi the Libyan weapons that ended up in the desert.
They are now in the hands of desperate African people that wanted to Europe but ulimately stranded.
Even the very nice Sahel countries like the peaceful Burkina Faso and Mali are getting hit by violence, it is very sad. ( was there in 1987 before the mobile phone and TV )
Sadly we have a huge problem in America with feral youth, who seemingly have zero regard for human life. Like it or not they exist and they kill people with seeming abandon. If there were no guns they would find another method, maybe knives and swords like in other "civilized" parts of the world.
Bad people exist everywhere.
-
Sadly we have a huge problem in America with feral youth, who seemingly have zero regard for human life. Like it or not they exist and they kill people with seeming abandon. If there were no guns they would find another method, maybe knives and swords like in other "civilized" parts of the world. Bad people exist everywhere.
/
Feral youth?
-
Hi Fab. "Feral" means "Wild and menacing." Seems to fit the situation pretty perfectly.
-
Hi Fab. "Feral" means "Wild and menacing."
I think, that's what he meant.
-
I think, that's what he meant.
Exactly, Les.
-
Feral youth?
Is Super Predators better?
-
Is Super Predators better?
Enlighten me.
-
Enlighten me.
Unless your response was sarcastic, here is the origin of the term:
"Hillary Clinton "is the one that labeled African-American youth as ‘superpredators.’"
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/aug/28/reince-priebus/did-hillary-clinton-call-african-american-youth-su/
-
/
Feral youth?
I'm more than happy to use another term if you have one that fits the situation. I'm really not sure what term fits the youth founnd in many cities that are gang members, criminals and drug dealers...and who find killing to be acceptable in their way of life.
-
Gee Officer Kruptke from West Side Story musical describing juvenile delinquency in NYC in the 1950's.
https://youtu.be/j7TT4jnnWys
-
Gee Officer Kruptke from West Side Story musical describing juvenile delinquency in NYC in the 1950's.
https://youtu.be/j7TT4jnnWys
Feral yuts with neckties...:)