Obama calls climate change the ‘global threat of our time’ in Berlin address.

reply to post by Moshpet

#1 Truth be told, yes it will be more expensive in the short term to switch to more sustainable energies. However the long term benefits of cleaner air and less pollution will add up. A- Less people dealing with asthma. B- Less need for the elderly to be forced to use supplementary oxygen. EG Reduced medical expenditures all around. Not to mention cleaner rain, and healthier foods (from not needing to filter out extra pollution.)

There are not long term 'benefits' as business leaves this country and go other places who don't give a ratts behind ample evidence of that already.

#1a No I don't have a problem with energy costing more in the short term either. Because I understand the long term gains it provides for future generations. I also understand the process will not immediately solve all the problems we face using petroleum & coal, however, even a 50-70% reduction of using it for power generation will make a huge difference. We still will need fossil fuels for plastics and back up power generation, we can't completely escape it.

A lot of people do have problems with increasing energy costs because that translates to every single product made here that won't be made here because again it will be made elsewhere.

#1b The other point of making a change to cleaner energy, is that it would force more competition among the power companies. If you can install your own pv/wind power grid cheaper than living on the supplied grid; either the supplied grid will have to lower its rates or face competition from a company that will lower its rates.

Competition would be alternative and fossil competing with each other not destroy fossil because the 'in crowd' 'thinks' it's better.

#2 Corporations/Industry/Big business/etc. do not willingly police themselves when it comes to pollution or human (food/drug/working conditions/hazards) safety, nor will they make an effort to do so without a reason. We've seen this time and time again, Love Canal, West Texas, BP, and the like. Then there is the misconception that the regulations were just created out of thin air by some bureaucrat; if people didn't demand protection or actions against big polluters it would not have been implemented. Joe Congressman didn't look at the polluted burning Hudson River and demand action; people -made- it an issue and force Joe Congressman to do something. Which was one of the things that lead to the EPA and USGS.

First BP is not even an American company secondly the largest polluter in the world is not even America.

#2a Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle", had the same effect in that it created public awareness of the poor food industry. Even if Roosevelt had a hand in it, he could not have created the FDA without public awareness and support.

What the hell does that have to do with 'Climate change' ?

#2b If there are no protections in place, those regulations and controls from the government, then we would be rolling the death dice every time we took an aspirin, drank water, ate a meal and so on.

Again what the hell does that have to do with 'Climate Change' ?

So it is not a question of how much freedom or rights I am giving up by insisting on food safety, clean water and clean air, safe medicines and the like: It's more a case of, "I can't be everywhere at every time to see just what is going into my food, water, air, meds and so on.... Therefore I need someone whose job it is to make sure the food/water/air/drugs can go and ensure the minimum standards are being upheld. " (Minimum standards, not the best and highest standards... the old adage of 'Government Standards....' )

I love it 'government makes us safer' argument hell lets give them more power, that those who are paying attention have historically abused it's power.

reply to post by peck420


Yea, regulations are so bad...







Hmm, anyone else see where regulations might be a good idea?

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by peck420

 

Yea, regulations are so bad...

Hmm, anyone else see where regulations might be a good idea?

Good thing I mentioned regulations anywhere in my post...

For whatever it is worth, the vast majority of our 'regulations' were championed by corporations.

That would include everything from employee safety to child labour laws and equality rights.

I find it very telling that you make no mention of the things that corporations do get right, even though the number of 'evil' corporations is a miniscule minority that created the reputation.

reply to post by HauntWok


Yeah regulations are bad


dailycaller.com...

Tough luck to the thousands of employees because 'save the planet' is more important than people being able to work and provide for themselves.

indianapublicmedia.org...

Go on pat on the back for a 'job well done'.

I suspect because of the population we do contribute to stores of mephane gas and other types of pollution due to mining, farming and irresponsible use of the land and tree felling to just name a few of our contributions.

But I was fascinated the other night to watch a programme on Alexander the Great's trip down a river called the Oxus which stretches through Afganistan and other countries albeit by other names and tributaries. In the ancient Greeks' time the rivers were very different. In fact unrecognizable in places and it had been until this programme"s investigation impossible to see how he had actually travelled the distances and route history claimed.

When you think that Alexander was not that long ago yet the river course had changed beyond recognition in parts,
without any contribution by mankind on the lines Obama states. I hear what Obama says when he tells us about the actual threat that climage change has on the land, but I don't accept the bul---t that its all down to us, I think its a natural phenomenon due to a number of factors eg water levels, the simple way the tectonic plates move which causes the land to alter periodically etc etc.

reply to post by peck420

Good thing I mentioned regulations anywhere in my post...

For whatever it is worth, the vast majority of our 'regulations' were championed by corporations.

That would include everything from employee safety to child labour laws and equality rights.

I find it very telling that you make no mention of the things that corporations do get right, even though the number of 'evil' corporations is a miniscule minority that created the reputation.

Actually that would be Unions who championed safer working conditions, better wages, child labor laws, but that's another dinosaur that I don't want to deal with.

If left to their own devices, corporations would mine, drill, plunder and deforrest this planet to a barren rock just to make a buck.

That's what corporations do, make a buck, they don't care about the consequences of their actions, as long as those actions are fattening their wallets.

But hey, you and Neo can champion to eliminate all those horrid regulations choking back the poor downtrodden corporations, all I know is, my kid isn't going to be working in a mine at 10 years old.

Originally posted by HauntWok

Actually that would be Unions who championed safer working conditions, better wages, child labor laws, but that's another dinosaur that I don't want to deal with.

Incorrect. Unions were a part, but not the only part. Individuals, corporations, and the government all took part in changing all of our laws.

If you just hate corporations, just say so, don't lie to back up your claims when it is easily debunked.

If left to their own devices, corporations would mine, drill, plunder and deforrest this planet to a barren rock just to make a buck.

That's what corporations do, make a buck, they don't care about the consequences of their actions, as long as those actions are fattening their wallets.

So the corporations that INVENTED alternative energy did what?

What about the ones that make massive yearly donations to environmentla programs, when they really don't do anything detrimental to the environment to warrant it?

But hey, you and Neo can champion to eliminate all those horrid regulations choking back the poor downtrodden corporations, all I know is, my kid isn't going to be working in a mine at 10 years old.

And, you can thank some CEO a long time ago for funding the movement that put a stop to that.

Corporations are nothing more then conglomerates of people. They show the same dispersion of traits as people. Some are good, some are bad, most fall in the grey zone in between.

Try to keep that in mind before you trumpet your hatred for 'corporations'.

reply to post by HauntWok

If left to their own devices, corporations would mine, drill, plunder and deforrest this planet to a barren rock just to make a buck.

That was hilarious as the biggest plunderer is its government that some people just love so much.

Yeah people keep defending 'Climate change' becaue it's nothing but corruption.

Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated. – Ottmar Edenhofer

wattsupwiththat.com...

There is nothing 'nobel' behind 'climate change' the only thing it is about is money, and control, and who get's to divy up the cookie jar.

Aw shucks Americans coal plants are bad here but their A-ok elsewhere in the world!!!!

More than 1,000 new coal plants planned worldwide, figures show World Resources Institute identifies 1,200 coal plants in planning across 59 countries, with about three-quarters in China and India

www.guardian.co.uk...

People wonder why I don't think to much of 'climate change' right there is a good reason.

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Indigo5
Without the government telling corporations what they can or can't spew into streams, lakes, oceans and the air...you would have 11 fingers and one eye right now or likely be dead.

Not sure how to even start with this kind of ignorance.

BS.

There is no way of telling what would happen if corporations were in charge. They have been the bane and blessing of the average person more then once...in this century. Countless times over humanity and corporations existence.

Oh really? Let's look at some of the famous industrial disasters and mass pollution incidents the corporations you worship have been responsible for.

For starters, there's the Bhopal gas disaster. 500,000 injured, over 2000 dead when a Union Carbide plant in India ignored warnings and safety precautions, releasing a cloud of methyl isocyanate.

Then you've got the site in northern Kentucky known as the Valley of the Drums, where thousands of gallons of hazardous waste were simply dropped off and ignored.

Or how about Bubbly Creek, where meatpackers dumped so much offal that it still stinks of decay to this day?

reply to post by ShadeWolf


Don't forget, Exxon Valdez, Deepwater Horizon,

Among others.

reply to post by ShadeWolf


So what's the point?

That Government 'who get's to control the environment' drops nuclear bombs, depleted uranium, loses nuclear bombs in the ocean, and on land, and does far things worse.


So why should anyone of us support 'save the planet' when they don't have such a great track record themselves?

reply to post by neo96


I included them to make a point about regulations being needful, and to point out the necessity of a regulated industry.

Also, if everyone is bearing the cost of more expensive energy, the corporations that jump ship as it were; would do so for other reasons. Hell they jump ship every time they can find cheaper resources or labor. It's that save a buck and screw the people mentality they have.

I am sorry that your pipe dream of no government regulations, rules or law is so unattainable, not to mention impractical and deadly, in a society as large as ours. Really I am. People would have to care for each other and the environment, and do so instinctively for it work; placing the other persons needs above their own. It has worked in a commune or very small community; but it takes people willing to live to that kind of commitment. Frankly as much I like the idea, I know reality is much harsher and it would only work at that level.

However, we all know exactly how that works out in real life. "Some pigs are more important than other pigs." (Yes I know I abused the quote.) Once your tribe/commune/group has to compete for resources with another tribe/group that may not share your groups values, it all falls down. When a group is facing starvation, they will kill for food. With out a governing body strong enough to enforce peace, sharing of resources and the like, that commune becomes a raiding society or they would die. Murder and theft for food and resources would become the norm.

The simple fact remains, without our government, imperfect as it is or isn't and those regulations; we'd be nothing more than a pack of tribes raiding and stealing from each other.

Which is why I would tolerate higher energy costs, and tighter emission restraints. Because the benefits of having those regulations far outstrips any perceived losses. An just because I can live in a tepee/tent/yurt off in the boonies, and work / live in a commune, does not mean I want to be forced to it. Because I rather prefer my amenities and lifestyle.

I have no doubt that America can be pushed to destruction and fragmentation via pollution and it's effects on the planet. Frankly I expect the US to face a second Dustbowl like event in the next 5-10 years. Add in hurricanes that are growing worse, Derechos that have become part of our storm weather jargon, not to mention the deadly tornados. Flooding and the like around the world wrecking other nations crops lands, not to mention putting several of our nuclear power plants at risk in the mid-west.

Frankly we needed to be tightening our pollution standards downwards years ago, but no one in power wanted to step up to the task. However, President Obama is stepping up and has pointed out the problem. The fact remains he stepped up, which is more than any other President in the past has done on the issue.

Your interpretation of his politics not withstanding, or if you think global warming or global climate change doesn't exist, really has no impact. You can't change what is: that pollution has had a nasty destructive impact on the planet. What you can do is try to keep it from getting worse.

M.

reply to post by neo96

So why should anyone of us support 'save the planet' when they don't have such a great track record themselves?

Because the government is made up OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people. It's OUR government, and we should hold them to the standards we think they should be held to, if they don't hold to those standards, we need to elect people who will.

Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by neo96

 

So why should anyone of us support 'save the planet' when they don't have such a great track record themselves?

Because the government is made up OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people. It's OUR government, and we should hold them to the standards we think they should be held to, if they don't hold to those standards, we need to elect people who will.

The government is made up of people for,of and by themselves, and their political power OUR?

That government is nothing but a charlie Foxtrot that I want no part of, and especially giving them more power or letting them take more power.

Obama calls climate change the ‘global threat of our time’ in Berlin address

There is a war going on between big oil and those who would replace it with big solar, big hydrogen, big wind (lol... must be from Washington), etc.

Obama is dead set against allowing the US to become energy independent via oil drilling in the areas of the Dakotas where there is enough shale deposits to make our nation energy independent for no less than 30 years. Left to his call, the Keystone Pipeline project will not be allowed and we will remain at the disposal of OPEC until such time as NASA is funded to launch a solar collector the size of Texas... or we get hydrogen converters for every car and gas pump in the nation.

It's one thing to wish a way out of this petroleum vaseline jar but quite another to destroy the economy in the process.

Is global warming real? My opinion is that a century of burning coal and oil has to be recognized. hell, Los Angeles alone can pump enough CO2 to strangle itself twice over each year. It all has to go somewhere and have some effect. The question is whether the current THEORY of global warming is anywhere near factual or more a political gambit by those at war with petroleum.

Science doesn't help too much because every time one commissioned study is released, another arrives to kick it in the ass.

At this point... Obama is in serious hot water. His administration has left a trail of tears and fears with those who elected him. He desperately needs us to look somewhere else...

reply to post by Moshpet

I am sorry that your pipe dream of no government regulations, rules or law is so unattainable, not to mention impractical and deadly, in a society as large as ours.

Obviously a 'free market is a pipe dream.

However, we all know exactly how that works out in real life. "Some pigs are more important than other pigs."

Yep some people want to replace that fossil fuels pig with another pig called alternative that all is made by that first pig fossil fuels because that alternative pig doesn't generate the power need to make themselves, and another pig called government gets to decides who lives and who dies.

The simple fact remains, without our government, imperfect as it is or isn't and those regulations; we'd be nothing more than a pack of tribes raiding and stealing from each other.

The simple fact remains is with government that does nothing but rob, and pick winners, and losers and STEALS from all the 'tribes'.

Frankly we needed to be tightening our pollution standards downwards years ago, but no one in power wanted to step up to the task.

That does absolutely nothing because the China's and India's and other countries in the world doesn't care what th US say's.

What they will do is say thanks for the new business.

Your interpretation of his politics not withstanding, or if you think global warming or global climate change doesn't exist, really has no impact

Climate change exist's and has for billions of years the issue is making it a political agenda that kills business puts people out of work for nothing.

reply to post by neo96

The government is made up of people for,of and by themselves, and their political power OUR?

That government is nothing but a charlie Foxtrot that I want no part of, and especially giving them more power or letting them take more power.

But you trust companies to do the right thing? Really? There would be nothing you could do if they ruined your business through an environmental disaster they caused because you helped get rid of the government and all those regulations you seem to hate so much.

reply to post by HauntWok


Broken record no matter what business is evil.

Guess didn't bother reading this earlier: www.abovetopsecret.com...

So what about those business owners eh?"


So what about those employees?

From the man made disaster of the US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT?