[Deleted User] wrote: » how many people is too many for ireland
gozunda wrote: » Since 1973 Irelands population had grown by over a third. Varadkar and friends have a plan to grow the population by another couple of million in what is euphemistically bring referred to as 'growing the tax base' ... This is the new financial livestock - forget national resources, forget indiginous industries - the biggest asset and source of revenue for these boys is milking those working. Go figure ...
Tell me how wrote: » Wrong. Again.It's not so much that they plan to grow the population, it's that they expect it to grow as more people seek to make Ireland their home for a variety of reasons. Also, the CSO expects it to grow to 6.7M in the next 22 years. That is way outside any time scale Leo is thinking of in terms of his responsibility as the leader of the Irish government.
Deleted User wrote: » how many people is too many for ireland
Thelonious Monk wrote: » We already have too many in my opinion. Gas .
Thelonious Monk wrote: » That homeless guy at Dail Eireann didn't need to be homeless. Us urban gentry dandies certainly don't view rural Ireland as Wilderness, there is no wilderness in Ireland. It's just one off housing and cows and polluted rivers. This series of tweets sums up how you guys f*cked up the whole countrysidehttps://twitter.com/collbradan/status/1166416101997273089
gozunda wrote: » https://pics.me.me/city-folks-are-like-cattle-are-ruining-the-planet-ya-44199320.png
Dr. Bre wrote: » Overpopulation is the elephant in the room. Nobody wants to talk about it. How do we decrease it? World wars use to but none recently .
Thelonious Monk wrote: » We already have too many in my opinion. Gas how none of the farmers on here just cant bear to say that we should ever limit the amount of cattle we have.
seamus wrote: » This is the usual divisive bollox that gets pushed in the hope that people align themselves on one side or another and so nothing gets done while everyone points fingers at one another.Yes and no. Overpopulation is an issue at our current consumption levels. The only people who want to talk about overpopulation are people who don't want to have to change their own life.It's really simple here lads. You're one of three people.1You don't believe climate change is real. In which case you're a moron who needs to go stand in the corner and stop talking. 2. You believe climate change is real but we can't do anything about it.3. You believe climate change is real and we can do something.If you're in groups 1 or 2, then you need to step out of the fncking way while the adults in the room attempt to salvage the situation. Go crawl into a hole and die or something. Otherwise as things become more desperate, the people who stand in the way of attempts to fix it, will be first against the wall.If you consider yourself part of group 3, then stop standing around criticising people who are trying to help, and put your shoulder to the fncking wheel. Nothing is off the table when it comes to this. We should be doing everything, and not trying to cherrypick the things which won't affect us really. Farmers whinging about city people. City people whinging about farmers. Can you all please just STFU and start doing your part, start supporting every measure that could help even the tiniest little bit.
seamus wrote: » Can you all please just STFU and start doing your part, start supporting every measure that could help even the tiniest little bit.
1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability. The leading advocates of the Climate Change movement are politicians, entertainers, and even children. Climate preachers such as Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio lack any formal scientific training whatsoever, and live personal lives of unparalleled luxury while prescribing carbon austerity for the masses. Yet no one is permitted to point out their scientific ignorance or call attention to their hypocritical lifestyles. Child advocates such as Greta Thuneberg and the crudely indoctrinated children of the “Sunrise movement” are essentially sock puppets for their shameless activist handlers. Refuse to bend the knee to these tiny fascists, as Diane Feinstein most recently did, and the mainstream left will relentlessly attack you as an accessory to mass murder. The authority of Climate Change leaders is entirely unmerited and absolute, yet no one is permitted to hold them accountable for their ignorance, inexperience, or brazen lies. Thus, the Climate Change movement clearly meets the first warning sign for unsafe groups.source
Pa ElGrande wrote: » https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1099076130089459712 Child advocates such as Greta Thuneberg and the crudely indoctrinated children of the “Sunrise movement” are essentially sock puppets for their shameless activist handlers.... ...
Child advocates such as Greta Thuneberg and the crudely indoctrinated children of the “Sunrise movement” are essentially sock puppets for their shameless activist handlers....
Sunrise Movement is an American youth-led political movement coordinated by Sunrise, a ... political action organization that advocates political action on climate change. When first incorporated in 2017, the group's goal was to elect proponents of renewable energy in the 2018 midterm elections, first in the Democratic primaries and then in the general election. After the election, the organization has been focused on gaining a consensus within the Democratic Party in support of an environmental program known as the Green New Deal... Together with Justice Democrats and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the group organized a sit-in in the office of Nancy Pelosi, which brought Sunrise its first significant press coverage.
Which technique for indoctrinating youth is most powerful and dangerous? Why? How is social media used for youth indoctrination today? How can indoctrination or “brainwashing” be countered? What groups could be instrumental?
seamus wrote: » Go crawl into a hole and die or something. Otherwise as things become more desperate, the people who stand in the way of attempts to fix it, will be first against the wall.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » Pa ElGrande - I'm pretty sure no one is watching your videos, I wouldn't bother. You still didn't get back to me on yesterday's question. Do you think we can keep growing our cattle herd indefinitely, to the detriment of our environment, or would you be willing to put a cap on numbers? If you don't want to answer that question then just say so.
gozunda wrote: » Children being used to push politics by elected representatives such ad AOC is truely sickening. Too easy to frighten and mobilise children into repeating what they have been told. Not the first time in history this has been done tbh.
seamus wrote: » This is the usual divisive bollox that gets pushed in the hope that people align themselves on one side or another and so nothing gets done while everyone points fingers at one another. Yes and no. Overpopulation is an issue at our current consumption levels. The only people who want to talk about overpopulation are people who don't want to have to change their own life. It's really simple here lads. You're one of three people. 1. You don't believe climate change is real. In which case you're a moron who needs to go stand in the corner and stop talking. 2. You believe climate change is real but we can't do anything about it. 3. You believe climate change is real and we can do something.If you're in groups 1 or 2, then you need to step out of the fncking way while the adults in the room attempt to salvage the situation. Go crawl into a hole and die or something. Otherwise as things become more desperate, the people who stand in the way of attempts to fix it, will be first against the wall. If you consider yourself part of group 3, then stop standing around criticising people who are trying to help, and put your shoulder to the fncking wheel. Nothing is off the table when it comes to this. We should be doing everything, and not trying to cherrypick the things which won't affect us really. Farmers whinging about city people. City people whinging about farmers. Can you all please just STFU and start doing your part, start supporting every measure that could help even the tiniest little bit.
Pa ElGrande wrote: » https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1099076130089459712Climate Change and the Ten Warning Signs for Cults So you believe in Climate change? Belief - an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof. One has to have faith to accept the doctrines of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW). People who reject this article of faith are guilty of heresy and labelled as deniers. They answer "because the science" without ever explaining what the specifics of the science behind the hypothesis of CAGW is, they say the IPCC (the bible) says this without ever quoting the passage or the revisions to the documents produced. These documents are also littered with ambiguous, obfuscatory or weasel words & phrases such as: – can, clearly, could, conjectured, considered, expected, may, might, perhaps, possibly, projected, robust, unprecedented – “Experts suggest…” “It has been said that …” “Research has shown…” “Science indicates …” “It can be argued…” “Scientists believe….” “A high level of certainty” “Models predict….” etc, Yet somehow these words become certainty in the minds of the true believer and for someone whose condition makes her especially susceptible to this is convinced that the end is nigh and becomes trapped in the cult that is convinced thermageddon is coming.
Pa ElGrande wrote: » I gave you the means to answer your own question. End the subsidies and the free market (i.e. voluntary exchange of property rights) will set the correct population of cattle and sheep in this country. You should also bear in mind that cattle have been present in Ireland for thousands of years, indeed old legends are replete with stories of cattle raids at a time when cattle were a measure of wealth. Like it or not the cow is part of this countrys heritage where do you think the Irish word for road, bóthar is derived? I have a question for you in return - what is the appropriate use of land in this country? and how is your vision to be accomplished?
jackboy wrote: » Wow
Jimmy Garlic wrote: » What have you done to help prevent catastrophic, end times, run for the hills climate armageddon Seamus?
seamus wrote: » https://i.redd.it/whnuvoh4od031.jpg
seamus wrote: » This is the usual divisive bollox that gets pushed in the hope that people align themselves on one side or another and so nothing gets done while everyone points fingers at one another. Yes and no. Overpopulation is an issue at our current consumption levels. The only people who want to talk about overpopulation are people who don't want to have to change their own life. It's really simple here lads. You're one of three people. 1. You don't believe climate change is real. In which case you're a moron who needs to go stand in the corner and stop talking. 2. You believe climate change is real but we can't do anything about it. 3. You believe climate change is real and we can do something. If you're in groups 1 or 2, then you need to step out of the fncking way while the adults in the room attempt to salvage the situation. Go crawl into a hole and die or something. Otherwise as things become more desperate, the people who stand in the way of attempts to fix it, will be first against the wall. If you consider yourself part of group 3, then stop standing around criticising people who are trying to help, and put your shoulder to the fncking wheel. Nothing is off the table when it comes to this. We should be doing everything, and not trying to cherrypick the things which won't affect us really. Farmers whinging about city people. City people whinging about farmers. Can you all please just STFU and start doing your part, start supporting every measure that could help even the tiniest little bit.
gozunda wrote: » I think if you've been reading the thread- that piece of cartoonery has already been dug up a fair few times. Not a particularly good one I would add. Odd how you dont like anyone else putting similar up....
99problems1 wrote: » Overpopulation is the biggest problem though and reduction is the easiest, least painful option. We have two options: ... Just look at it from a distance - spend trillions to reduce emissions. Or spend 0 and reduce emissions.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » Ok so you're not willing to answer it, thought as much. Appropriate use of land... well I think much of it should be rewilded, as the current toxic landscape is killing off everything in the country. I don't see why we should sacrifice the health of our environment to export beef to foreign countries. If jobs and some money are lost than so be it, we'll manage I'm sure.
seamus wrote: » Probably because I put it up myself. I'll reuse it every time I see fit, thanks. It's a common theme from the same few heads. "What are YOU doing then, huh? huh?" It's a fallacious argument which proposes anyone who is not flawlessly perfect and beyond criticism is not allowed to criticise anything. This is the default go-to of selfish simpletons who doesn't want to discuss the issue at hand and would rather not have to change anything about themselves. The implication is that if you're not out on the streets fighting off rapists, then you must implicitly support them. Which is plainly stupid. The specifics what I may or may not be doing for "my part" is irrelevant. I'm not standing in the way and I am supportive of all endeavours which can make any kind of difference. Which is the point I made.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
