The election thread - Medicare Vs cost of living Vs OMG China! Vs housing Vs I'm not Trump! Vs prehistoric fish Vs nuclear energy Vs tariffs Vs AUKUS

Who will you vote for May 2025?

  • Liberals

    Votes: 2 3.9%

  • Labor

    Votes: 20 39.2%

  • Nationals

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Greens

    Votes: 12 23.5%

  • Independant (other than teals)

    Votes: 11 21.6%

  • Clive Palmer Trumpet of Patriots Shitshow

    Votes: 2 3.9%

  • Teals

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • One Nation

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • Jacquie Lambie squad

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • Donkey/Invalid vote

    Votes: 1 2.0%
  • Total voters
    51
Calvin27 said:
Not sure that is entirely true. Resource consumption goes nuts during war.
Click to expand...
CO2 emissions are going nuts now!

350456

I'd argue a war would slow consumer consumption & make a positive impact on emissions as they stand today.
 
Nambra said:
Population & Capitalism - we need more people to earn more money to buy more stuff that consumes more resources to make so we can make more shareholder profits. More, more, more, more...
Click to expand...
Add more people to fight wars for more land and resources while they hide in their offices.
 
Haakon said:
A virus that simply sterilises 95% of men for a generation would be a less messy solution though.
Click to expand...

It's already happening to both women and men alike. It's called debt. Debt makes people older when they have kids and this self perpetuates.
 
Calvin27 said:
It's already happening to both women and men alike. It's called debt. Debt makes people older when they have kids and this self perpetuates.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but then a shit tonne of tax dollars get thrown at IVF and associated leave...
 
Scotty T said:
I guess I mean things are escalating so quickly that the science is out of date by the time someone bases a policy on it.
Click to expand...
That is policy not keeping up with science. A whole different kettle of fish to science not keeping up, especially with conservative governments.
 
Calvin27 said:
Singles are basically the tax carrying force that keep the country running, and to add insult to injury, they also have to fund their own retirement as well as current pensioners.
Click to expand...

Dont forget "selfish for not wanting kids"...
 
There's a bunch of arguments saying one less kid would make a massive dent.

In all honesty, it was a factor in us not having more than one kid even all those years ago when the first one was reaching an age where many parents make a second one. If we hadn't had the kid almost 20 years ago, and with things as dire they are now, we might well have been childless too.

Selfish childless people! Selfish for not giving the first kid another kid to keep it company!
 
so so selfish.... Or perhaps very selfless for not inflicting what would have been very questionable parenting skills on some poor sod...?
 
Haakon said:
so so selfish.... Or perhaps very selfless for not inflicting what would have been very questionable parenting skills on some poor sod...?
Click to expand...

Haha that's one way to put it, now I'm feeling guilty for not making my kid ride enough. Or making him ride too much. Still, he turned out OK. :D
 
The kids thing is a hard one because it's so emotionally and biologically charged.

At the very least I'd recommend winding back government backed subsidies and actually implementing policies to discourage, say beyond 2 kids. Once again though the problem is the perpetual growth engine that is our economy.
 
Reproducing is an instinct. So is consumption, and probably even war and territorial disputes.

If we are to survive as a species, and not completely fuck the planet, we’ll need to go against a lot of our basic instincts.

I see one version of the future as being like a zombie movie with a slightly adjusted frame of reference. Instead of being walking dead the zombies are just starving humans in search of food. Sure, they won’t be eating brains, but there’ll be a truckload of them, and they won’t be looking too healthy.
 
hifiandmtb said:
True that. CC cannot be solved inside the capitalism bubble.

Instead, CC is likely to burst the capitalism bubble...
Click to expand...
I'd argue the socialist bubble would have even less chance of solving CC. Market economies have an efficient mechanism for internalising environmental externalities. Pricing in efficient markets worked a treat for sulphur emissions and could work for carbon. The problem (as always) are the narrow sectional interests, particularly in coal.

The former USSR and to some extent China had hilariously inefficient state sectors, which in a socialist economy is most of the economy. Sure they weren't making throw away clothes but millions of tanks, nuclear missiles subs that had a nasty habit of melting down, and a huge standing army tends to put a drag on a economy. Then power the whole thing with medieval coal fired plants and reactors that go pop!



Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 
The funny thing is, the collapse of the Soviet Union can be measured in the CO2 emission record:

Screen-shot-2011-11-30-at-16.54.44.jpg

Can we not bring in a carbon tax & dividend inside the capitalism system?

God knows...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top