.0019%

[2011G6E]

China is far from a "developing backward country"...they are a staggeringly huge economic powerhouse which is closing fast on first place as "the biggest economy in the world". India isn't far behind.

No idea how long they can keep up the charade of coming before the west on bended knee and claiming to be "developing"...
Dirt-poor countries in Africa where the populace has to burn dung fires inside mud huts to cook meals and children drop like flies...now that's a developing country that desperately needs our assistance.

[CoupeKing]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

China is far from a "developing backward country"...they are a staggeringly huge economic powerhouse which is closing fast on first place as "the biggest economy in the world". India isn't far behind.

No idea how long they can keep up the charade of coming before the west on bended knee and claiming to be "developing"...
Dirt-poor countries in Africa where the populace has to burn dung fires inside mud huts to cook meals and children drop like flies...now that's a developing country that desperately needs our assistance.

China will use Africa as an over-spill for their population.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

China is far from a "developing backward country"...they are a staggeringly huge economic powerhouse which is closing fast on first place as "the biggest economy in the world". India isn't far behind.

No idea how long they can keep up the charade of coming before the west on bended knee and claiming to be "developing"...
Dirt-poor countries in Africa where the populace has to burn dung fires inside mud huts to cook meals and children drop like flies...now that's a developing country that desperately needs our assistance.

Not saying they need our assistance.

They are large economically because they have a large population, a large portion of that population are poor workers. They are developing because those workers look to accumulate wealth like we did in the 60s and 70s.

[Adamz Ghia]

Originally Posted by CoupeKing

China will use Africa as an over-spill for their population.

China's population is heading for a fall, their one child policy had decimated their demographics, not to mention men out number woman by a (relatively) huge margin.

[SpoolMan]

Originally Posted by Adamz Ghia

not to mention men out number woman by a (relatively) huge margin.

33 Million.

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by PG2

The second one.................
EDIT: I hope this sort of makes sense - hard for me to explain typing it on the wife's tablet.

I can understand that. I tried typing on an Aspro once and found it really difficult.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I like how there are cries about 'socialism' in this thread, but then people cry about baby formula and not being able to get any is unfair because other people are buying it in bulk and how its not fair, essentially having a teary about capitalism.

What do you want? You can't have it both ways.

We seem to be stuck going around in circles with our solution to reducing our carbon foot print, we have these issues:

Coal:

Pros:

Cheap
Already exists
Lots of coal in Australia

Cons:

Unfortunately is bad for ye olde environment, kills whales and clubs baby seals, we still use crappy brown coal in Victoria

Nuclear:

Pros:

Cleaner than oil/gas/coal power generation for c02 emissions
Lots of uranium in Australia to take advantage of

Cons:

Political issue as no one wants nuclear power due to problems from 30+ years ago

Nuclear waste

Wind Turbines:

Pros:

Clean energy production

Looks cool

Cons:

People get their knickers in a knot, a bunch of people get the small violins playing because they don't like the look of them, or it will 'devalue' property for them being near by.

Its not windy all day every day.

Apparently kills birds.

Political issue - The Victorian Blue team banned them from being used in the Macedon Ranges due to tears from a lobby group, even though its one of the best regions to use them in.

Solar:

Pros:

Generate power from the sun, we got plenty of sun!

Cons:

You get an overcast day and you cripple your power generation

Expensive to buy a decent size system

Scare campaign from power companies about everyone else subsidising people with solar panels

So, I put forward the following idea:

We keep driving Volkswagen diesels, we keep burning brown coal cause its cheap, we can't seem to come up with a solution because it ends up in some political deadlock, blaming greenies, blaming 'socialism', blaming the 'system', not wanting to spend money for a solution, so we just keep pointing fingers and its a global problem, why should we make the first move, why should we have to change when you caused the problem blah blah blah.

If thats all too hard then we're just going to have to remove 85% of the population from the planet, seems like thats an easier and more accepted solution than spending tax payer money

Who volunteers to be the one to go?

*Disclaimer: may be sarcasm

We do have modern nuclear power stations now that can use the depleted uranium wast of all the old backward power plants don't and what is left over is a hell of a lot safer and less toxic for much less time.

Now why don't the media and so called greenies or the government inform all about this fact !!!

And this new type of power plant safety is just astounding.

All them old backward types of crap should of been gone by now if the greenies were fair dinkum green, but it's full of far left socialist and communist pushing people around with their Political Correct dictating backward moronic filth.
Not to mention that the far right mega rich are in on this crap full on as well. Just like such people as our new PM turncoat who if you understand where he got all his money from, was a criminal act that worked hand in glove ripping off many people in fact, as far as I can see it.

That nuclear plant problem we seen in Japan would not of been a problem at all if it was this new type, and Japan has some of this new type in use as does Russia and some other country's but no such thing is in the USA.

[LTD Ute]

I say put an enforcable quota on how much each living person can negatively contribute
to our environment to properly guarantee the well being of the planet for future generations.

Democratic, egalitarian and everybody pulls their weight.

Or we could pay for what we contribute?

NFWK here in OZ! Right? The cost per foot print would be unimaginable.

Just remember the little thin slice of stratosphere that keeps this planet livable
is everyone's safety net and dumping ground as well as the waters we treat as
a cesspool and the earth we walk on as a rubbish dump.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by LTD Ute

I say put an enforcable quota on how much each living person can negatively contribute
to our environment to properly guarantee the well being of the planet for future generations.

And there it is! The ideologically correct imposition of a tax on civilisation for a false premise to advance the cause of socialism...

[Franco Cozzo]

So guys since we've all got the solution to such a simple problem, how many of you are going to nominate for preselection with your major political party of choice?

[jpblue1000]

Commies under the bed again yob. Everything you seem to disagree with is the master plan of the far left. I need proof, rather than vitriol, that the green movement is interested in politics other than those necessary with protecting the earth?
JP

[marty351]

To join the greens, it should be mandatory to be a vegan, fart sniffing, Prius driving hippie, whose house is made of recycled cardboard, power is produced by lemons and all sewerage recycled to make garden fertilizer for their 1/4 acre vegie patch.
This, I hope, would weed out all the two-faced idiots who think they're green.

[LTD Ute]

Originally Posted by superyob

And there it is! The ideologically correct imposition of a tax on civilisation for a false premise to advance the cause of socialism...

Hey brother we all pay according to the size and impact of our footprint

A hefty price I would imagine

And FFS stop this lefty socialist *****, no mofo here is ******* with right wing redneck polluting I am holier than than thou and have the cheapest coal to
Burn at anyone's expense, bull****.

Any problem with paying your fair share?

[Trump]

Green is the new red:

http://www.wnd.com/2010/10/215837/

The human hating roots of the green movement:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/1868...-arnold-ahlert

[superyob]

Ltd Ute, as stated before, I have no issue with trying to clean the place up with alternative energy solutions but my statement stands. The evidence that has already been exposed by many in this thread alone speaks for itself.

'Any problem with paying your fair share?'

And what am I not paying my 'fair share' of???

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

Green is the new red:

http://www.wnd.com/2010/10/215837/

The human hating roots of the green movement:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/1868...-arnold-ahlert

Excellent articles...

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by superyob

Excellent articles...

so the EPA was created by Congress eight months after the first Earth Day celebration in 1970 by a right wing government.
You telling me the last bastion of rampant capitalism, the United states of America and a strongly republican government of the day, were actually puppets of three men most probably tarred with the commie brush to silence them.
Nixon, the republican, 37th president, who had earlier in his career sat on the Un-American Activities Committee, and campaigned against political foes by plastering them as communists earning himself the title Tricky Dick!
In a social environment and time where the 'reds' were always 'under the bed' I highly doubt an entire country, the united states would be fooled by a 'three man movement' irrespective of how its dressed up.

Perhaps the environmental movement gained traction because its right! sure there may be ideological socialist ideas but you don't have to dig very deep to discover socialism and its benefits in today's Australia. So Id argue its not really bad and as such bring it on!
the louder the right protest the better it must be!!!!!



JP

[cs123]

Would love to know some of your thoughts on leaded fuel...

[LTD Ute]

Originally Posted by superyob

Ltd Ute, as stated before, I have no issue with trying to clean the place up with alternative energy solutions but my statement stands. The evidence that has already been exposed by many in this thread alone speaks for itself.

'Any problem with paying your fair share?'

And what am I not paying my 'fair share' of???

Mate, per capita we have the dirtiest footprint on the planet. If there was a
dollar figure on that we'd be stuffed. We need to own up to our share of the
problem and help rectify.

What we haven't done in this country is take on the challenges and seen them
as opportunities. Spain took on the great solar advances we had created and
is now a world leader and exporter of this technology whilst we dropped the ball
and wasted opportunities in creating industries and jobs.
We've become a lazy bunch of sods, if we can't dig it up or sell the farm,
then it's just too much effort to be creative and take a punt.

And bring back State owned infrastructure, it will still be run poorly and cost me
the same, but at least the profits will translate into jobs and not going overseas.

Enough of rant, good night.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by LTD Ute

Mate, per capita we have the dirtiest footprint on the planet. If there was a
dollar figure on that we'd be stuffed. We need to own up to our share of the
problem and help rectify.

I assume you mean Australians. I'd love to see proof of that. Fact is, it's an outright lie.

Would live to know why you would just straight out BS about that.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

so the EPA was created by Congress eight months after the first Earth Day celebration in 1970 by a right wing government.
You telling me the last bastion of rampant capitalism, the United states of America and a strongly republican government of the day, were actually puppets of three men most probably tarred with the commie brush to silence them.
Nixon, the republican, 37th president, who had earlier in his career sat on the Un-American Activities Committee, and campaigned against political foes by plastering them as communists earning himself the title Tricky Dick!
In a social environment and time where the 'reds' were always 'under the bed' I highly doubt an entire country, the united states would be fooled by a 'three man movement' irrespective of how its dressed up.

Perhaps the environmental movement gained traction because its right! sure there may be ideological socialist ideas but you don't have to dig very deep to discover socialism and its benefits in today's Australia. So Id argue its not really bad and as such bring it on!
the louder the right protest the better it must be!!!!!



JP

Such as the continued theft of other people's money to fund disagreeable causes?

The texts were spot on in relation to the insidious workings of socialism...

[superyob]

Originally Posted by LTD Ute

Mate, per capita we have the dirtiest footprint on the planet.

Are you for real? Cities overseas are so polluted that people die. Where does this happen in Australia? I can't even comprehend why someone would disseminate falsehoods like that, let alone believe it...

[mcflux]

Originally Posted by superyob

Are you for real? Cities overseas are so polluted that people die. Where does this happen in Australia? I can't even comprehend why someone would disseminate falsehoods like that, let alone believe it...

Do you understand the definition of "per capita"?

EDIT: I found an interesting article online which surprised me, Australia didn't even rank within the top-10 per-capita highest emissions countries, I genuinely thought we were up near the top, if not on top. For PER-CAPITA, obviously when it comes to overall volume it's the big guys like China, US, Russia that sit on top.

Because there are simple graphs displayed nobody needs to get bogged down reading the actual article:

http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-gr...op-10-emitters

[castellan]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

so the EPA was created by Congress eight months after the first Earth Day celebration in 1970 by a right wing government.
You telling me the last bastion of rampant capitalism, the United states of America and a strongly republican government of the day, were actually puppets of three men most probably tarred with the commie brush to silence them.
Nixon, the republican, 37th president, who had earlier in his career sat on the Un-American Activities Committee, and campaigned against political foes by plastering them as communists earning himself the title Tricky Dick!
In a social environment and time where the 'reds' were always 'under the bed' I highly doubt an entire country, the united states would be fooled by a 'three man movement' irrespective of how its dressed up.

Perhaps the environmental movement gained traction because its right! sure there may be ideological socialist ideas but you don't have to dig very deep to discover socialism and its benefits in today's Australia. So Id argue its not really bad and as such bring it on!
the louder the right protest the better it must be!!!!!



JP

Socialism and the benefits ? well there can be but there is a price to pay down the track with how restrictive they tend to be and not many socialist are very realistic and most I have come across are in fact just short sighted and narrow minded and I think this is mainly due to that they have never ran a business themselves to be able to comprehend the reality's of the stupidity they do that is so destructive, but sadly they just dismiss all their destructiveness for some means to an end goal that goes nowhere.

Sure there are destructive capitalist idiots about as well and both them and the socialist work to fool the masses leading them astray for there own goals, as such are both in the business of feathering their own nest and playing all others for fools.

They like to put people into two camps and that's what they desire to fool all in playing there games.
I myself despise the far right and the far left and so such hate me because I am a centre party and that makes a true three party state and that's a threat to there games they love to play people for fools.

[NAK302]

Originally Posted by OCTANEBOSS

The biggest problem facing mankind is over population & is likely to contribute to more greenhouse gas long term than anything else but how will the emperors tackle that one, flood, famine, disease or the ever popular genocide.

Anyway slip slop slap, nothing much will change anytime soon except price increases I think
Cheers

and there it is. we are a virus on this planet and will eventually kill the planet and therefore ourselves, humans will fail or discover another host to move to. taxing us along the way is a bonus for the select few.
anyone who proclaims to be "green" but populates is indeed the highest form of hypocrite.

[jpblue1000]

As far as I'm concerned Australia is a modern socialist state. And we are not really that far right.
In my experience those who espouse socialism are actually long sighted future conscious, many run successful businesses too.
And nots confuse socialism, capitalism, communism and fascism, they are polar ideologies.
JP

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Ghia5L

Because there are simple graphs displayed nobody needs to get bogged down reading the actual article:

http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-gr...op-10-emitters

Similar to this.................

[mcflux]

^^^ That's a good display of total energy intensity as opposed to per-capita.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Ghia5L

Do you understand the definition of "per capita"?

EDIT: I found an interesting article online which surprised me, Australia didn't even rank within the top-10 per-capita highest emissions countries, I genuinely thought we were up near the top, if not on top. For PER-CAPITA, obviously when it comes to overall volume it's the big guys like China, US, Russia that sit on top.

Because there are simple graphs displayed nobody needs to get bogged down reading the actual article:

http://www.wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-gr...op-10-emitters

Amazing, yet we have Government with support of left wing media willing to sacrifice our economy and future by throwing billions at reducing our emmissions, the net effect of which, on world emmission will be nothing.

[jpblue1000]

Or the enlightened policy will ensure jobs migration in an transitioning economy which will prosper, our per capita emissions will tumble, and we wont suffer trade sanctions because if our belief we don't pollute enough to worry about. I cant prove this as much as you cant prove otherwise. Lets have this discussion again in 30 years and se who was right
I believe based on the science I've read that continue the way were going will end in environmental, social and of course economic ruin.
JP