nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Jimmy Garlic

Climate saint Greta Trunburg is settling sail for UN climate talks in New York to demand that governments socially engineer and tax the little people into oblivion to save the planet. Accompanied by her film maker father who lives vicariously through her, a filthy rich aristocrat from Monaco and some German bloke the trip will no doubt vastly increase the wattage of her halo before she lectures us all about impending climate Armageddon in New York. Hopefully snaps from the trip will make it into Hello! Magazine.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Sean.3516

KyussB wrote: »

All money is plucked from thin air - we live in fiat economies - that's how money creation works.

Then why can’t the govt simply print out all of the money it needs then? You know the answer but I’ll explain it anyway.

Yes. It’s true that money is merely a symbol, a metric by which we measure the value of products/services/labour.

But what give it it’s value is the fact that it represents something real. What gives the individual euro it’s value is that it was at some point exchanged for labour or the products of labour.

If you are the government you may have the luxury of printing out more money but if you do that, you may have more money, but the value of the individual euro will have decreased proportional to how much more money you just printed. This is how people’s savings become worthless when govt starts printing more money. (See Germany, Zimbabwe)

Changing the metric doesn’t change the absolute value of the thing the metric measures. It just screws over the people who rely on the stability of that metric.

If you run deficit budgets and borrow into oblivion you eventually have no choice but to print more money once other countries realize you’re credit is worthless.

SJW Lover

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Perhaps because she’s forcing people to confront some very uncomfortable truths?

What truths? You think we have stolen her childhood?

Tell me how

SJW Lover wrote: »

What truths? You think we have stolen her childhood?

That action needs to be done.

Why are you ignoring her message of the last year and focusing on one element of her speech yesterday?

SJW Lover

Tony EH wrote: »

Commentary is fine. But that takes a bit of brain power.

Hurling abusive nonsense at a 16 year old kid because she pulled some stunt to raise a conversation about a topic she cares about is just people being twats.

If this tread is anything to go by, what passes for "commentary" these days leaves a lot to be desired.

She's talking crap. Engaging in soundbites and generalities with zero solutions put forward. She is presenting a case against 5 countries yet ignores the two countries causing a significant amount of the damage in China and India - there's some commentary for you. What is your commentary on it? She's a young girl so any old crap gets a free pass?

SJW Lover

Tell me how wrote: »

That action needs to be done.

Why are you ignoring her message of the last year and focusing on one element of her speech yesterday?

What message? Climate change is a thing? I already knew that. I'd be much more interested if she had some workable solutions. Her screaming yesterday and over the top dramatics were embarrassing.

hetuzozaho

SJW Lover wrote: »

.she is presenting a case against 5 countries yet ignores the two countries causing a significant amount of the damage in China and India - there's some commentary for you.

https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1176525238206640136

If you're on twitter you could follow her. Save you all this upset.

Tell me how

SJW Lover wrote: »

She's talking crap. Engaging in soundbites and generalities with zero solutions put forward. She is presenting a case against 5 countries yet ignores the two countries causing a significant amount of the damage in China and India - there's some commentary for you. What is your commentary on it? She's a young girl so any old crap gets a free pass?

A - She has said people must listen to, empower and act on the advice of scientists. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

B - She ignored countries which haven't ratified the UN charter on the right of the child. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

She is presenting the same message as David Attenborough. Do you disagree with his view?

KyussB

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Then why can’t the govt simply print out all of the money it needs then? You know the answer but I’ll explain it anyway.

Yes. It’s true that money is merely a symbol, a metric by which we measure the value of products/services/labour.

But what give it it’s value is the fact that it represents something real. What gives the individual euro it’s value is that it was at some point exchanged for labour or the products of labour.

If you are the government you may have the luxury of printing out more money but if you do that, you may have more money, but the value of the individual euro will have decreased proportional to how much more money you just printed. This is how people’s savings become worthless when govt starts printing more money. (See Germany, Zimbabwe)

Changing the metric doesn’t change the absolute value of the thing the metric measures. It just screws over the people who rely on the stability of that metric.

If you run deficit budgets and borrow into oblivion you eventually have no choice but to print more money once other countries realize you’re credit is worthless.

In simple terms, as long as you're using newly created money for something productive - i.e. are increasing GDP with it - then the value is the same.

Once GDP is maxed out (roughly once Full Employment is reached) - and it won't max out until the entire EU reaches these conditions, because we use the Euro (our balance of trade would just adapt) - then in order to prevent excessive inflation, you have to take resources (labour and materials, depending on what work the money is funding) from other areas of the economy - and you do this by depressing the lower priority areas of the economy, using taxes (you do NOT tax labour i.e. the average joe to do this, as that doesn't do anything useful).

The way to think about the value of money, is in terms of physical resources and labour, and maximizing GDP (which combines labour with resources). Money is not an impediment to getting work done - hitting maximum GDP/output (i.e. using all available resources/labour) is the real impediment - and once you reach that point, it's just a matter of prioritizing what work is more important (depress areas of work/the-economy that are less important, to prioritize areas of work/the-economy that are more important).

That's the correct way to think about money and how it works. Thinking that money prevents reaching full economic output, i.e. leaves loads of people and resources idle and unused when there is loads of useful work to do - that is backwards thinking, a complete waste of potential, and is not how economies are meant to function.

hetuzozaho

SJW Lover wrote: »

What message? Climate change is a thing? I already knew that.

And do you get upset about everything you already know about that people are trying to bring attention to?

Seems a strange thing to get upset about.

I already knew that... Hmm. I guess with AI they'll be able to tailor our media a bit better haha

I've already seen Tarrantinos new movie!! Wha whaaaaa

Noveight

Noble cause and she’s dead right but it’s hard to stomach the theatrics tbh.

Hego Damask

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The man's a living legend : )

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176339522113679360?s=09

Absolute legend!
only way to deal with this madness ... oh yeah and this guy nailed it (except for the hoax part don't agree with that)

https://twitter.com/i/status/1176397321086652417

SJW Lover

hetuzozaho wrote: »

https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1176525238206640136

If you're on twitter you could follow her. Save you all this upset.

This only highlights how pointless the whole Greta crusade is. If she wont go after the big guns then she is peeing into the wind. Of course, she would get short shrift from China so it is much easier to go after other countries on this.

iamwhoiam

Tell me how wrote: »

A - She has said people must listen to, empower and act on the advice of scientists. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

B - She ignored countries which haven't ratified the UN charter on the right of the child. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

She is presenting the same message as David Attenborough. Do you disagree with his view?

I don’t think its the message that annoyed people but the delivery of it

SJW Lover

Tell me how wrote: »

A - She has said people must listen to, empower and act on the advice of scientists. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

B - She ignored countries which haven't ratified the UN charter on the right of the child. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

She is presenting the same message as David Attenborough. Do you disagree with his view?

A. Who said it was difficult to understand?

B. Again, not difficult to understand but beautifully highlights the utter pointlessness of her crusade.

Why the condescension on this? The point is her message is too simplistic and why the hell is a 16 year old kid in front of the cameras doing this. To pluck at our heartstrings?

Tell me how

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I don’t think its the message that annoyed people but the delivery of it

I wish it was that simple.
One example.

weldoninhio wrote: »

Sorry but you are talking nonsense. There is zero evidence, never mind irrefutable, that humans have any effect on climate change. Many theories, many projections, but zero actual evidence of a link.

hetuzozaho

SJW Lover wrote: »

This only highlights how pointless the whole Greta crusade is.

All subjective I guess. I didn't think so. I felt it highlighted how ill informed you are and your desire to just complain.

iamwhoiam

Tell me how wrote: »

I wish it was that simple.
One example.

Fair point !! Not the majority I imagine

easypazz

Tell me how wrote: »

That action needs to be done.

Why are you ignoring her message of the last year and focusing on one element of her speech yesterday?

There really is no point in taking action. This beast is out of control. My kids want their sun holidays, plastic goods all around them, smartphones, oil heating on demand, fresh towels for showers every day, clean clothes every day, food flown in from all over the world etc. etc.

When they get older they will want all of the same consumer goods, cars, holidays, plastic goods etc.

They are the same as every other child and adult. We all want it all.
I really don't see any point in worrying about this, because we are going to destroy the planet and nothing can stop it.

Even if we all drive electric cars the metal and batteries etc. will still have to be mined out of the ground somewhere.

We will still want cheap luxurious bath towels from Vietnam and india etc. shipped half way around the world.

At best the proposed steps will merely slow things down.

Tell me how

SJW Lover wrote: »

A. Who said it was difficult to understand?

B. Again, not difficult to understand but beautifully highlights the utter pointlessness of her crusade.

Why the condescension on this? The point is her message is too simplistic and why the hell is a 16 year old kid in front of the cameras doing this. To pluck at our heartstrings?

You possibly don't have the capacity to understand it.

That's not a dig at your intellect by the way, it's just an acknowledgement of it. You have demonstrated an incapacity to comprehend a fairly simple situation.

I do believe your choice of username is indicative of your motivation in taking part in the discussion.

SJW Lover

hetuzozaho wrote: »

All subjective I guess. I didn't think so. I felt it highlighted how ill informed you are and your desire to just complain.

Ill informed? Her tweet shows she is sticking a plaster on a headless corpse. Keep wetting yourself in the wind

hetuzozaho

SJW Lover wrote: »

Ill informed?

Yes. You didn't know why. Now you do.

Tell me how

easypazz wrote: »

There really is no point in taking action. This beast is out of control. My kids want their sun holidays, plastic goods all around them, smartphones, oil heating on demand, fresh towels for showers every day, clean clothes every day, food flown in from all over the world etc. etc.

When they get older they will want all of the same consumer goods, cars, holidays, plastic goods etc.

They are the same as every other child and adult. We all want it all.
I really don't see any point in worrying about this, because we are going to destroy the planet and nothing can stop it.

Even if we all drive electric cars the metal and batteries etc. will still have to be mined out of the ground somewhere.

We will still want cheap luxurious bath towels from Vietnam and india etc. shipped half way around the world.

At best the proposed steps will merely slow things down.

I disagree with the negative view that there is no point in doing anything. but, even so, in relation to the part in bold. Should we still not try to slow things down.

I'm certainly not going to suggest you need anyone to tell you how to raise or educate your kids but have you discussed the situation with them and asked them do they think action needs to be taken? Are they comfortable with the idea that maybe their children will be born in to an irreparable situation.

SJW Lover

Tell me how wrote: »

You possibly don't have the capacity to understand it.

That's not a dig at your intellect by the way, it's just an acknowledgement of it. You have demonstrated an incapacity to comprehend a fairly simple situation.

I do believe your choice of username is indicative of your motivation in taking part in the discussion.

Oh the irony! I am fully aware of the dangers associated with climate change and think that something needs to be done. Sounds like you're having trouble understanding yourself.

I am noticing that the insults seem to be coming from only one side of this Greta argument.

hetuzozaho

easypazz wrote: »

There really is no point in taking action. This beast is out of control. My kids want their sun holidays, plastic goods all around them, smartphones, oil heating on demand, fresh towels for showers every day, clean clothes every day, food flown in from all over the world etc. etc.

When they get older they will want all of the same consumer goods, cars, holidays, plastic goods etc.

They are the same as every other child and adult. We all want it all.
I really don't see any point in worrying about this, because we are going to destroy the planet and nothing can stop it.

Even if we all drive electric cars the metal and batteries etc. will still have to be mined out of the ground somewhere.

We will still want cheap luxurious bath towels from Vietnam and india etc. shipped half way around the world.

At best the proposed steps will merely slow things down.

Unfortunately I agree with this! Someone convince me otherwise.

I agree with greta and the science but...
I love things!

whisky_galore

Tell me how wrote: »

A - She has said people must listen to, empower and act on the advice of scientists. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

B - She ignored countries which haven't ratified the UN charter on the right of the child. (Why is this so difficult to understand?)

She is presenting the same message as David Attenborough. Do you disagree with his view?

DA would be a far better spokesperson. I don't know if there's anyone who doesn't like him. Its not the message it's the medium.

Tell me how

SJW Lover wrote: »

Oh the irony! I am fully aware of the dangers associated with climate change and think that something needs to be done. Sounds like you're having trouble understanding yourself.

I am noticing that the insults seem to be coming from only one side of this Greta argument.

Fox News hasn't had to apologise for anyone advocating for climate action last I checked...

gozunda

Hego Damask wrote: »

Absolute legend!only way to deal with this madness ... oh yeah and this guy nailed it (except for the hoax part don't agree with that)

https://twitter.com/i/status/1176397321086652417

On calling for kids to do more than simply skip school and pontificate to others...

None of this will happen because you are selfish, badly educated, virtual signalling little turds...

SJW Lover

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Yes. You didn't know why. Now you do.

Eh, no. The point remains. Not going after India or China means her crusade is entirely pointless. Your heart strings were plucked by this kid. Manipulated. Mission accomplished.

Tell me how

whisky_galore wrote: »

DA would be a far better spokesperson. I don't know if there's anyone who doesn't like him. Its not the message it's the medium.

David Attenborough isn't going to have to live with the consequences, it really is more pertinent for Greta to be getting aggrieved at this.

If David was as forceful as Greta, posters here would be saying 'easy for him to say, he's had a life of flying all over the place and now is telling us we shouldn't do it'.

SJW Lover

Tell me how wrote: »

Fox News hasn't had to apologise for anyone advocating for climate action last I checked...

What does Fox News have to do with you insulting me?