Originally posted by FishyIt's basic human behavior, most people would understand that. Give them advantages for helping the environment and they will. Tax them more and they won't. Besides these problems you are talking about now, are not going to destroy the planet. Not unless people like you come in power, when it will kill tens of millions if not much more of people.
Not only will you force company's to go bankrupt, leave the country and what not but you are also forcing them to never hire a new CEO because nobody will be retarded enough to work as a CEO in a country where your idea's would be followed.
No companies will not go bankrupt, they are doing way more then fine right now. It may inconvenience them a bit, but it will not go bankrupt.
And yes my ideas will help, because it will force companies to stop the pollution, throwing more money at them is not the answer.
And to use your parent/child analogy, if your a parent (Government), why on earth should you ever have to negotiate with your child(Business)? The government makes the laws, they get to say what goes.
And, yes the problems I listed are going to end our life on this planet.
1)Polluted Water and Air supplies.
2)Species integral to our eco-system like bees being wiped out.
3)Rising rates of cancer, among those melanoma, a type of cancer from UV exposure.
4)Overloaded landfills.
You just don't want to inconvenience the business sector, well once again, I prefer life over money.
Originally posted by Starhawk
No companies will not go bankrupt, they are doing way more then fine right now. It may inconvenience them a bit, but it will not go bankrupt.And yes my ideas will help, because it will force companies to stop the pollution, throwing more money at them is not the answer.
And to use your parent/child analogy, if your a parent (Government), why on earth should you ever have to negotiate with your child(Business)? The government makes the laws, they get to say what goes.
And, yes the problems I listed are going to end our life on this planet.
1)Polluted Water and Air supplies.
2)Species integral to our eco-system like bees being wiped out.
3)Rising rates of cancer, among those melanoma, a type of cancer from UV exposure.
4)Overloaded landfills.You just don't want to inconvenience the business sector, well once again, I prefer life over money.
Only difference here is that the kids are the only reason the parents have money, they take care of the parents. And they have the ability to move out of the house and go somewhere else and forget about their parents.
And again your way won't work, it has been proven not to work in other country's. Where as my way has been proven to work in other country's.
Besides all the company's you have mentioned for taxing more are US company's either in huge debt or losing huge amounts of money. Giving them absolutely no reason to put up with the crap your saying. As for your so called problems.
1.) The only way to fix this is with new technology's. Which require money and which would require company's to want to do something about that. Tax loopholes are the perfect way.
2.) Any prove? Or are you just making more stuff up, like in the Hates crimes thread? After all we all know you like to lie and make stuff up so we have no reason to trust anything you say.
3.) By using your own source I have already proven that this has nothing to do with anything humans have caused. You fail come up with something better.
4.) Again, fixing this would require new technology, or already present technology to be used at greater levels. The only way to get this is through investments which take money. Forcing company's to invest can be done through tax loopholes, and will actually make them do it.
Now stop being an idiot and just realize that forcing company's that you depend on to do things they don't like won't help the situation.
Originally posted by Fishy
Only difference here is that the kids are the only reason the parents have money, they take care of the parents. And they have the ability to move out of the house and go somewhere else and forget about their parents.And again your way won't work, it has been proven not to work in other country's. Where as my way has been proven to work in other country's.
Besides all the company's you have mentioned for taxing more are US company's either in huge debt or losing huge amounts of money. Giving them absolutely no reason to put up with the crap your saying. As for your so called problems.
1.) The only way to fix this is with new technology's. Which require money and which would require company's to want to do something about that. Tax loopholes are the perfect way.
2.) Any prove?
3.) By using your own source I have already proven that this has nothing to do with anything humans have caused.
4.) Again, fixing this would require new technology, or already present technology to be used at greater levels. The only way to get this is through investments which take money. Forcing company's to invest can be done through tax loopholes, and will actually make them do it.
It's really sad that i have to keep editing your posts to make them worthy of a grown up debate.
2) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1005_041005_honeybees.html
3) So your claiming the depleting ozone has nothing to do with pollution?
As for 1) & 4) Where has your example worked exactly? Because it sure isn't Canada. We have constant problems with polluted water supplies and our air quality is getting worse, not better.
And it is not going to cause an economic collapse, those companies are making record profits and they can afford to be inconvenienced alittle. You act as if they are some fragile little thing, no they are swimming in money.
You need to stop putting record profits over our environment and health needs. Even with my restrictions they would still make massive profits and they would learn to adapt because they would have to. Necessity is the greatest motivator when it comes to invention.
Originally posted by Starhawk
It's really sad that i have to keep editing your posts to make them worthy of a grown up debate.2) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1005_041005_honeybees.html
3) So your claiming the depleting ozone has nothing to do with pollution?
As for 1) & 4) Where has your example worked exactly? Because it sure isn't Canada. We have constant problems with polluted water supplies and our air quality is getting worse, not better.
2.)
Let's pick apart your nice little link shall we
Look at the bold parts
"There are shortages [like this] that pop up from time to time," Kremen said. "Whether there are more [shortages] than there were 20 years ago, one would guess yes, as there are fewer bees to go around, but it's not well documented."
[The honeybee decline, which is affecting domesticated and wild bee populations around the world, is mostly the result of diseases spread as a result of mites and other parasites as well as the spraying of crops with pesticides, scientists say.
Among the greatest problems is the varroa mite, a bloodsucking parasite that attacks young and adult honeybees. Attacked bees often have deformed wings and abdomens and a shortened life span.
"The varroa mite is also really effective at transmitting disease, particularly viruses," Frazier said. Left untreated, a varroa mite infestation can wipe out a bee colony within a few months.
I just love how you think you can edit my post to make it only have good arguments, when you can't even provide a damned argument for yourself. So far you have provided two links, the bee one and the cancer one both spoke out against what you claimed in the end. Really do you even read the links you post, or do you just look at the pretty bold letters at the top?
3.) I am claiming that the Ozone is restoring it self, and I am claiming that the cancer you posted as an example is not caused by the depletion of the Ozone. I have already posted why a few pages back. You probably read it, because you stopped saying cancer mattered for two posts, and now it just pops back in. Cancer is not caused by the depletion of the Ozone layer. The rising cancer rates are not a big problem at all, especially not the one you keep mentioning.
1&4) Every country out there that wished to create a better environment has been faced with two choices, either weaken the economy and the consumers to cure it through taxes. Which is a long bureaucratic process with very little to no guaranteed effect and even more rules for company's. Where in most country's wish to reduce rules as it's just hurting company's.
The way to fix this is by giving company's the ability to do it themselves with their own money, investing in the environment and cleaner ways to produce thus because tax deductible making company's willing to do it.
And it is not going to cause an economic collapse, those companies are making record profits and they can afford to be inconvenienced alittle. You act as if they are some fragile little thing, no they are swimming in money.
What company's? You mentioned GM and Ford in previous posts which was stupid, because GM has a 300 billion dollar debt and Ford was actually losing money last year.
You need to stop putting record profits over our environment and health needs. Even with my restrictions they would still make massive profits and they would learn to adapt because they would have to. Necessity is the greatest motivator when it comes to invention.
And for company's it would also be necessary if they could save money through it. Even more so perhaps, as looking at alternatives for your stupid taxes is always an option. Alternatives like closing the factory's altogether and leaving to some other country. Like the two company's you have constantly mentioned GM and Ford can easily do.
Now I know you are just going to quote this entire post say I'm wrong and say the exact same thing again, so this is probably a useless question. But could you just for once address my post point by point, instead of ignoring everything?
1. The ozone layer is restoring itself. It is not fully restored, but it is repairing. The ozone layer does not prevent all UV radiation from penetrating the atmosphere.
2. The link between global warming and the ozone layer is tenuous, the link between human activities and global warming is inconclusive. There is nothing to suggest a link between global warming and cancer.
3. Malignant melanoma, and other skin cancers, are diseases of rich countries, incidence is related to genetic predisposition and age, longevity increases incidence. Personal recreational activity is one of the primary risk factors.
4. Increased incidence of skin cancer doesn't mean people will die off in droves.
Incidence for males and females of malignant melanoma in the UK has risen 4x and 3x respectively. Mortality rates however remain low at around 2.5 per 100,000 and 1 per 100,000 respectively.
"The global incidence of melanoma continues to increase – however, the main factors that predispose to the development of melanoma seem to be connected with recreational exposure to the sun and a history of sunburn. These factors lie within each individual's own responsibility." WHO
We've been waiting for your scans Yip-Yap, for over 200 hours. In that time 250,000 children under the age of 5 have died from preventable causes in developing countries.
Briefly,
Not to support Starhawk or anything, but I have heard some connections between warming and ozone.
The most likely cause for at least some of the ozone hole is CFCs. there are still lots of CFCs in the atmosphere, and they are generally too heavy to reach the ozone to destroy it (hence why the ozone is able to repair itself).
If the air and climate on earth get warmer though, these CFC particles will become active enough that it will reach the ozone at an accelerated rate, posing a fairly serious concern.
Oh, the natural geographic on bees is cool. I'm sure Starhawk (don't want to use a silly name, might get me reported again) was pumping the electromagnetic cause of the colony collapse disorder (CCD) but ya, not much we humans can do about bee parasites. Its almost like evolution is going on around us and is out of our control.... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
We've been waiting for your scans Yip-Yap, for over 200 hours. In that time 250,000 children under the age of 5 have died from preventable causes in developing countries.
man, a better analogy for the green movement has never been made.
So the right wing strikes again.
Many times over the years, governments have enacted new taxes and in some cases minor environmental restrictions. And has the economy collapsed? No. Nor will it collapse if my plans are put into action, the economy will do what it always does, adapt. They will figure out new ways to do thing that will not have such a dangerous impact on the environment. As I said necessity is the greatest motivator of invention.
And this is about more then just the ozone and global warming. As I said Kyoto is a good start we need to build on. We now need to expand into other things.
Twice in the last 5 months in my city we have had two major complaints of contaminated water. Barely a month goes by in ontario where there isn't a complaint of someone having polluted water. My local news does air quality reports everyday and year after year they get worse and worse. There's battles all over about where to put the garbage. Half the stuff we put in our food is horrible for us, one example is the steroids they pump into livestock and other farm animals.
These are not things we can sit back and ignore, or go crawling on our knees to big business begging them to help. We need to take action, this is not a situation where we can give business the option of saying now, we have to force a yes. As I said the market place may be inconvenienced but it will recover as they find new cleaner methods of production. Canada's dollar is at a 30 year high right now, we can afford to take the hit.
Originally posted by Starhawk
[B]So the right wing strikes again.
So you strike again and once again refuse to answer our points, refuse to answer our posts and instead just rabble on and make more crap come of your keyboard... If this was real life it would probably smell really bad because of all the shit coming from you.
Many times over the years, governments have enacted new taxes and in some cases minor environmental restrictions. And has the economy collapsed? No. Nor will it collapse if my plans are put into action, the economy will do what it always does, adapt. They will figure out new ways to do thing that will not have such a dangerous impact on the environment. As I said necessity is the greatest motivator of invention.
Many times in the past company's didn't have the ability to outsource, company's couldn't find lower wage country's and many times in the past the international market wasn't as strong as it is now. Besides your plans are not minor. The money required to create all these things you want is huge. Besides not only are you increasing taxes, you are also forcing company's to invest with their own money in new technology's and you are removing the ability for them to write off such expenses. Meaning you just made life more expensive for them on three levels.
And as already said, economical gain is a great motivator for company's. In fact it's the most important one. If economical gain can be gained by taking care of the environment then they will. If economical gain can be gained by leaving Canada then they will. How hard is that to understand?
And this is about more then just the ozone and global warming. As I said Kyoto is a good start we need to build on. We now need to expand into other things.
Like cancer rising? Which has nothing to do with anything you said earlier, or the dying bees which is once again not a part of the environmental issue. What do you think we are retarded?
Twice in the last 5 months in my city we have had two major complaints of contaminated water. Barely a month goes by in ontario where there isn't a complaint of someone having polluted water.
And the way to fix this would be to tax water company's more? Or to make them do new investments into cleaner technology's? Well with your way it would be both, costing the company's shit loads of money, meaning they will probably have to fire people to keep up their balance. Costing the state more money. If however you would give company's benefits for cleaning up their act then they would do so anyway.
My local news does air quality reports everyday and year after year they get worse and worse. There's battles all over about where to put the garbage. Half the stuff we put in our food is horrible for us, one example is the steroids they pump into livestock and other farm animals.
Sources for any of the crap your claiming? The last two sources you provide were both proven wrong by themselves, and your other claims in pretty much every thread, and specifically the hate crime thread have been unproven. Making you a liar so we have no reason to trust what you are saying here.
These are not things we can sit back and ignore, or go crawling on our knees to big business begging them to help. We need to take action, this is not a situation where we can give business the option of saying now, we have to force a yes. As I said the market place may be inconvenienced but it will recover as they find new cleaner methods of production. Canada's dollar is at a 30 year high right now, we can afford to take the hit.
Again, the company's you have mentioned before are GM and Ford one with a 300 billion dollar debt the other actually lost money last year. Neither of them are Canadian company's. The reason the Canadian dollar is so high is probably because it's compared to the American dollar and that one is sinking in value. Which by the way will not help the Canadian economy at all.
Now are you ever going to respond to the individual points in our posts or are you going to just re quote yourself over and over, and then leave the topic when you can't claim things without prove anymore?
Originally posted by Starhawk
Many times over the years, governments have enacted new taxes and in some cases minor environmental restrictions. And has the economy collapsed? No. Nor will it collapse if my plans are put into action, the economy will do what it always does, adapt. They will figure out new ways to do thing that will not have such a dangerous impact on the environment. As I said necessity is the greatest motivator of invention.
this will not work unless every nation on the planet enacts the same restrictions regarding the environment
if only the Canadian economy does, then the Canadian economy will fall because companies wont change their practices, only move out of country.
In this case, we have failed to prevent any climate change and also reduced our ability to influence corporate action. Companies that are not in Canada will not follow are laws or do what we tell them.
A domestic market to replace this would be slow, stifled, and require such massive government investment that our system would generally be state controlled, which instantly lowers the standard of living for all Canadians.
Your idealism is nice, but it is not a realistic plan that addresses all of the variables. We live in the real world, we don't get to choose the world that we make changes to.
Originally posted by inimalist
this will not work unless every nation on the planet enacts the same restrictions regarding the environmentif only the Canadian economy does, then the Canadian economy will fall because companies wont change their practices, only move out of country.
In this case, we have failed to prevent any climate change and also reduced our ability to influence corporate action. Companies that are not in Canada will not follow are laws or do what we tell them.
A domestic market to replace this would be slow, stifled, and require such massive government investment that our system would generally be state controlled, which instantly lowers the standard of living for all Canadians.
Your idealism is nice, but it is not a realistic plan that addresses all of the variables. We live in the real world, we don't get to choose the world that we make changes to.
And yes, every country needs to enact these changes or we won't have a planet that can sustain us any longer.
And it is perfectly realistic, I am just willing to inconvenience big business to get the job done.
Originally posted by Starhawk
And yes, every country needs to enact these changes or we won't have a planet that can sustain us any longer.And it is perfectly realistic, I am just willing to inconvenience big business to get the job done.
You will kill hundreds of millions of people, for what again?
Not to stop cancer, not to stop the declining rate of bees
You still haven't proven global warming is caused by humans so it can't be because of that either...
Everything else requires investments, instead of hurting the economy and killing hundreds of millions of people...
Originally posted by Fishy
You will kill hundreds of millions of people, for what again?Not to stop cancer, not to stop the declining rate of bees
You still haven't proven global warming is caused by humans so it can't be because of that either...
Everything else requires investments, instead of hurting the economy and killing hundreds of millions of people...
To reduce Cancer, to save bees, to have air we can breathe and water we can drink and use.
And if we have to inconvenience the economy so be it, and the governments in those 3rd world countries are responsible for what happens to their people not us.
Originally posted by Starhawk
To reduce Cancer, to save bees, to have air we can breathe and water we can drink and use.And if we have to inconvenience the economy so be it, and the governments in those 3rd world countries are responsible for what happens to their people not us.
Both the cancer and the bees have nothing to do with global warming, this has already been proven by just quoting the text in your own damned links. You never actually responded to that though, why is that? Do you just like ignoring everything that speaks against your bullshit claims?
I have already responded to how we could help the water and the air, but you just like ignoring that too don't you? Stop ignoring everything we post.
And yes you are responsible for what happens in third world country's if you want to pose sanctions against them you idiot. You are the one that is willing to limit their economic growth. You are the one willing to fine them and sanction them for every kind of technological progress they make. You are willing to kill hundreds of millions of people. You and your idea's will kill more people then even Mao could ever hoped of killing.