Greta and the aristocrat sail the high seas to save the planet.

high_king · 16-11-2019 9:18pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Um. About three posts up I said this:

"I would suggest that everyone, including corporations, pay carbon tax."

and that ends in :

the wealthy and the corporations won't be, but they will be lecturing you on the environment, while you pay theirs for them.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 9:20pm

high_king wrote: »

and that ends in :

the wealthy and the corporations won't be, but they will be lecturing you on the environment, while you pay theirs for them.

Well let's vote in parties who won't allow that to happen.

high_king · 16-11-2019 9:21pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Well let's vote in parties who won't allow that to happen.

lol, and those would be ???

Dr. Bre · 16-11-2019 9:22pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Well let's vote in parties who won't allow that to happen.

The same parties get voted in around the world so unlikely

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 9:25pm

high_king wrote: »

lol, and those would be ???

The Greens have some good policies but won't get into power in time. We can hope that some of the existing parties will grasp the nettle. Up to ordinary people to agitate for change. Or Greta.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 9:26pm

Dr. Bre wrote: »

The same parties get voted in around the world so unlikely

Up to each and every human being to do their bit.

Dr. Bre · 16-11-2019 9:27pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Up to each and every human being to do their bit.

I agree. That’s a lot of humans to ask tho

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 9:30pm

Dr. Bre wrote: »

I agree. That’s a lot of humans to ask tho

It is, but unless we shout out, corporations and governments will carry on and future generations will be in serious trouble. Or even more serious trouble.

high_king · 16-11-2019 9:35pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Greens have some good policies but won't get into power in time.

The Greens ? Good God, the Irish people have short memories . . from 2007-2011 these were the corrupt scumbags that collaborated with FF to saddle generations of ordinary Irish taxpayers with billions of debts belonging to corporations, bankers, and developers, while they continue to live the high life. The Green Party defended, propped up, and clung in with FF right to the bitter end, and destroyed us for a generation. Hundreds of thousands of young people had to leave Ireland, many of them for good.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 9:39pm

high_king wrote: »

The Greens ? God God, the Irish people have short memories . . from 2007-2011 these were the corrupt scumbags that collaborated with FF to saddle generations of ordinary Irish taxpayers with billions of debts belonging to corporations, bankers, and developers, while they continue to live the high life. The Green Party defended, propped up, and clung in with FF right to the bitter end, and destroyed us for a generation. Hundreds of thousands of young people had to leave Ireland, many of them for good.

I like their policies insofar as they tackle climate change. Lot of personnel change since then too. I'd give them a vote in the absence of a viable alternative. But the best way is for citizens to agitate for change so that all political parties take notice.

high_king · 16-11-2019 9:48pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I like their policies insofar as they tackle climate change. Lot of personnel change since then too. I'd give them a vote in the absence of a viable alternative.

The exact same corrupt party that tax incentivsed new diesel cars, and their motor tax . . . and got most of the country to switched over to them ? Claiming it was good for the environment ? Good for the SIMI and German diesel manufacturer's environment more like.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

But the best way is for citizens to agitate for change so that all political parties take notice.

By telling them ordinary people need to pay more carbon taxes. . lol . .turkey's voting for Christmas.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 9:51pm

high_king wrote: »

The exact same corrupt party that tax incentivsed new diesel cars, and their motor tax . . . and got most of the country to switched over to them ? lol

By telling them ordinary people need to pay more carbon taxes. . lol . .turkey's voting for Christmas.

You have a rather circular and one-dimensional argument. Anything of nuance to offer?

high_king · 16-11-2019 9:55pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You have a rather circular and one-dimensional argument. Anything of nuance to offer?

This is from the poster that keeps claiming taxing ordinary people even further with trojan taxes and voting for the proven corrupt greens is going to save the environment.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 9:57pm

high_king wrote: »

This is from the poster that keeps claiming taxing ordinary people and voting for the proven corrupt greens is going to save the environment.

It would seem not, nothing of nuance. Just misrepresentation and repetitive straw man arguments ad nauseam.

high_king · 16-11-2019 10:01pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It would seem not, nothing of nuance. Just misrepresentation and repetitive straw man arguments ad nauseam.

That's your arguments not mine. You remind me of a Turkey enthusiastically telling other Turkeys what a good time they are going to have at the "green" Christmas party.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 10:04pm

high_king wrote: »

That's your arguments not mine. You remind me of a Turkey enthusiastically telling other Turkeys what a good time they are going to have at the "green" Christmas party.

Straw man, misrepresentation and now ad hominem. So, anything of nuance? Anything about climate change? Anything about how it might be addressed?

high_king · 16-11-2019 10:13pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Straw man, misrepresentation and now ad hominem. So, anything of nuance? Anything about climate change? Anything about how it might be addressed?

Have you anything other than ordinary people paying more trojan horse taxes for the wealthy . . anything ? anything at all ? Or will I pass you the cranberry sauce ?

KyussB · 16-11-2019 10:32pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Good that you agree with the science. Wrt taxation and climate change, here is a statement signed by:

3554 U.S. Economists
4 Former Chairs of the Federal Reserve (All)
27 Nobel Laureate Economists
15 Former Chairs of the Council of Economic Advisers
2 Former Secretaries of the U.S. Department of Treasury

From the statement:

A carbon tax offers the most cost-effective lever to reduce carbon emissions at the scale and speed that is necessary.

And:

A carbon tax should increase every year until emissions reductions goals are met and be revenue neutral to avoid debates over the size of government.

Let us assume you agree with these economists. If we, as a country, intend to convince fellow human beings in India and China that carbon tax is a necessary way of tackling climate change, then we should do so by example. Otherwise we are hypocritical and will not be taken seriously.

The vast majority of those economists are responsible for the defining problem that is preventing dealing with carbon emissions: They are responsible for creating and upholding an economic orthodoxy that prevents the necessary scale of government action, to arrest climate emissions.

It even says it right in the link! They view debates over the level of government involvement as a controversial and bad thing...They view that position as 'neutral' - when it's actually leaning way towards right-wing economics.

A Carbon Tax on its own is useless. It needs to be paired with massive, massive war-time government spending on R&D and infrastructural redevelopment, among much more.

There are no 'market solutions' routes to solving climate change. What we should have instead of a carbon tax, is a straight up prohibition on carbon emissons past hard-set limits.

Exxon Mobil is in favour of the carbon dividends...

We're all pretty much fucked until people stop giving those economists legitimacy - we're still going on like many of them weren't both responsible for encouraging as well as failing to see (when it was easy to see if they didn't hold on to outdated theory...) the crisis coming a decade ago.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 11:06pm

KyussB wrote: »

The vast majority of those economists are responsible for the defining problem that is preventing dealing with carbon emissions: They are responsible for creating and upholding an economic orthodoxy that prevents the necessary scale of government action, to arrest climate emissions.

It even says it right in the link! They view debates over the level of government involvement as a controversial and bad thing...They view that position as 'neutral' - when it's actually leaning way towards right-wing economics.

A Carbon Tax on its own is useless. It needs to be paired with massive, massive war-time government spending on R&D and infrastructural redevelopment, among much more.

There are no 'market solutions' routes to solving climate change. What we should have instead of a carbon tax, is a straight up prohibition on carbon emissons past hard-set limits.

Exxon Mobil is in favour of the carbon dividends...

We're all pretty much fucked until people stop giving those economists legitimacy - we're still going on like many of them weren't both responsible for encouraging as well as failing to see (when it was easy to see if they didn't hold on to outdated theory...) the crisis coming a decade ago.

I think you're moving into a bigger discussion about politics there. Let's not forget that these economists could have said nothing at all about climate change. Anyway, carbon tax is seen as a primary route to tackling climate change by all parties in Ireland (including Greens). How do you see your ideas being brought to fruition globally in time to stop climate change? Are there any parities nationally or globally that promote your proposals?

Tell me how · 16-11-2019 11:27pm

high_king wrote: »

lol, and those would be ???

Dr. Bre wrote: »

The same parties get voted in around the world so unlikely

Be the change ye want to see in the world, run for office, vote for those outside the box.

Clare Daly and Regina O'Doherty would likely be in line with your style of thinking and yet I rarely see them commented on on Boards apart from people tearing strips out of them.

This BS of there's no alternative while neither voting for them or campaigning for them is laughable.

Ye should love the likes of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who wasn't happy with the politics in her area and so ran for congress and now is advocating for a system where corporations are paying vastly more tax but no, ye rip her to pieces as well and call her a commie socialist or whatever.

KyussB · 16-11-2019 11:41pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think you're moving into a bigger discussion about politics there. Let's not forget that these economists could have said nothing at all about climate change. Anyway, carbon tax is seen as a primary route to tackling climate change by all parties in Ireland (including Greens). How do you see your ideas being brought to fruition globally in time to stop climate change? Are there any parities nationally or globally that promote your proposals?

The Democratic Party under Bernie Sanders (and much popularized by Alexandria Ocasio Cortez) proposes the Green New Deal, and Labour in the UK are promoting a version of it too - as are other EU countries - though it's still to kick off properly. Unfortunately, their economic views don't shift far enough - but they still shift things significantly.

It's actually worse and more dangerous to undertake ineffective policies under the guise of making true progress - that's the danger of these economists, they get to stay in their positions of influence and political power, by only shifting just far enough that they can claim to be 'doing something' - even when it's totally inadequate.

DiEM25 on an EU level, support a Green New Deal as well - but they're very ineffective - the necessary changes are more likely to happen not through new grassroots parties, but through public opinion/views changing, and forcing changes in policy of mainstream parties.

The important thing is, every single bit of it is rooted in economics - and in how economics has long ago been politically/intellectually corrupted to serve political goals (the same type of political intereference as in climate science in the past, except vastly more successful, with vastly bigger networks of think tanks upholding it).

Nothing significant enough is going to change politically, until that is faced up to - which even among supporters of climate action, this doesn't seem to be much on their radar. All of our political parties (including the Greens) pretty much uphold somewhere between lite-to-hawkish versions of orthodox economic views.

Professor Moriarty · 16-11-2019 11:52pm

KyussB wrote: »

The Democratic Party under Bernie Sanders (and much popularized by Alexandria Ocasio Cortez) proposes the Green New Deal, and Labour in the UK are promoting a version of it too - as are other EU countries - though it's still to kick off properly. Unfortunately, their economic views don't shift far enough - but they still shift things significantly.

It's actually worse and more dangerous to undertake ineffective policies under the guise of making true progress - that's the danger of these economists, they get to stay in their positions of influence and political power, by only shifting just far enough that they can claim to be 'doing something' - even when it's totally inadequate.

DiEM25 on an EU level, support a Green New Deal as well - but they're very ineffective - the necessary changes are more likely to happen not through new grassroots parties, but through public opinion/views changing, and forcing changes in policy of mainstream parties.

The important thing is, every single bit of it is rooted in economics - and in how economics has long ago been politically/intellectually corrupted to serve political goals (the same type of political intereference as in climate science in the past, except vastly more successful, with vastly bigger networks of think tanks upholding it).

Nothing significant enough is going to change politically, until that is faced up to - which even among supporters of climate action, this doesn't seem to be much on their radar. All of our political parties (including the Greens) pretty much uphold somewhere between lite-to-hawkish versions of orthodox economic views.

Good post. The bit in bold has been my core point. It's up to individuals to agitate immediately. There simply isn't time for parties that support radical change to evolve and gain support. Ditto existing parties who are beginning to develop credible climate change policies The best chance we have is to convince those currently in power - be that politics, business or media - that fundamental change needs to happen now.

One can argue for carbon tax or for carbon caps. Or both. But it doesn't really matter if you don't have the power to implement the change. So we must force change on the powerful. Which brings us back to Greta, of course.

windy shepard henderson · 17-11-2019 12:45am

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Good post. The bit in bold has been my core point. It's up to individuals to agitate immediately. There simply isn't time for parties that support radical change to evolve and gain support. Ditto existing parties who are beginning to develop credible climate change policies The best chance we have is to convince those currently in power - be that politics, business or media - that fundamental change needs to happen now.

One can argue for carbon tax or for carbon caps. Or both. But it doesn't really matter if you don't have the power to implement the change. So we must force change on the powerful. Which brings us back to Greta, of course.

exactly , force change on the powerful not the guy on the street

if its possible for the UN to put crippling sanctions on countries for weapons of mass destruction :rolleyes:

then its more then possible to put huge sanctions on the biggest offenders , ie china , india US and so on , this is the argument most of us have been banging on about for months now on here , anything else is a complete wast of time

Professor Moriarty · 17-11-2019 12:59am

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

exactly , force change on the powerful not the guy on the street

if its possible for the UN to put crippling sanctions on countries for weapons of mass destruction :rolleyes:

then its more then possible to put huge sanctions on the biggest offenders , ie china , india US and so on , this is the argument most of us have been banging on about for months now on here , anything else is a complete wast of time

The problem is that the UN is a creature of big governments such as China, India and the US. So the UN will wring its hands, produce reports and do nothing because it is powerless to sanction these countries. Similarly, if you look at the people currently in charge of those countries then you will know they won't be subscribing to credible climate change policies. Nobody has the power to sanction the US, India and China. Ditto other big countries such as Brazil and Russia. It's down to individual human beings to make themselves heard.

Dr. Bre · 17-11-2019 1:00am

Greta is an anagram of great ...

Tell me how · 17-11-2019 1:09am

windy shepard henderson wrote: »

exactly , force change on the powerful not the guy on the street

if its possible for the UN to put crippling sanctions on countries for weapons of mass destruction :rolleyes:

then its more then possible to put huge sanctions on the biggest offenders , ie china , india US and so on , this is the argument most of us have been banging on about for months now on here , anything else is a complete wast of time

You should check out UN success in forcing the big players to do something they aren't interested in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vetoed_United_Nations_Security_Council_resolutions

They are a long way from being able to force US/China/Russia to do anything they don't want to do.