Global warming?

[Woodman]

Stop producing half of the useless shit we currently produce and the stuff we do build, build to last?

Agree, its getting (got) out of hand.

You wanna see the faulty/misused/damaged/goodwill can't be assed arguing with idiot customers so you just give them a new one products that the average retailer throws away.

[Ocean1]

So not worth trying? That's certainly an interesting issue that needs to be dealt with. Alas, until you ask people to be careful, it will likely continue... that and, growth requires population growth. I'm sure Ocean could leap into action showing stats that equate population boom with economic growth. In which case, halving production will half population growth

On the contrary, I'm sure the stats would show what any rational person would expect: economic growth is a function of the growth of productivity.

The recent boom of the non-productive population, on the other hand does nothing but depress economic growth.

Indeed, as I've been suggesting for some time, arseholing the unproductive half of the population would do wonders for not only the consumption of useless shit but the general wellbeing of the other half.

[Voltaire]

Does running an old vehicle that's already had energy used to make it leave a larger carbon footprint than buying a new fuel efficient car? just wondering as I like running old shitters I can fix.

[Ocean1]

Does running an old vehicle that's already had energy used to make it leave a larger carbon footprint than buying a new fuel efficient car? just wondering as I like running old shitters I can fix.

Depends on how much you run it.

I like the German concept: charge a sales tax on everything such that the cost of recycling is built into the purchase price.

[mashman]

What's that got to do with climate change?

It's entirely possible to make shit, disposable or otherwise that affect climate not a jot.

Everything. If we don't make a drastic change, how are we going to know whether we affect the climate or not? It'd be a good thing to know, yeah?

It is. Yet we can't... because people don't have enough money to help pay for the development and production of the many alternatives that are available... and those who are in a position to drive that change won't, unless they make money out of it, because money is their arbiter. Yet the will is there (intent), as are the materials, as are people, as is the knowledge, hmmmmmm, wtf is wrong with this picture.

[mashman]

Agree, its getting (got) out of hand.

You wanna see the faulty/misused/damaged/goodwill can't be assed arguing with idiot customers so you just give them a new one products that the average retailer throws away.

It's a beautiful system innit man .

[mashman]

On the contrary, I'm sure the stats would show what any rational person would expect: economic growth is a function of the growth of productivity.

The recent boom of the non-productive population, on the other hand does nothing but depress economic growth.

Indeed, as I've been suggesting for some time, arseholing the unproductive half of the population would do wonders for not only the consumption of useless shit but the general wellbeing of the other half.

Is that like from a 50's economic propaganda manual?

I know, it's a bummer of a consequence of people not having money to buy the stuff that industry relies on in order to sell stuff and pay for future brand new and much more shiny than the last time stuff.

Arseholing? Can't you retask them? Sorry, don't shoot me, I was sitting in reception and found that idea in a bin marked "Way Too Fuckin HARD" and thought it seemed quite sensible.

[Ocean1]

Everything. If we don't make a drastic change, how are we going to know whether we affect the climate or not? It'd be a good thing to know, yeah?

Circular logic. Until you KNOW how it will affect the climate any drastic change stands as much chance of any change being worse than better.

You need to know first. Which is why the whole climate change industry is anathema to the scientific method: it reeks of contrived results and it denies resources for genuine scientific process.

It is. Yet we can't... because people don't have enough money to help pay for the development and production of the many alternatives that are available... and those who are in a position to drive that change won't, unless they make money out of it, because money is their arbiter. Yet the will is there (intent), as are the materials, as are people, as is the knowledge, hmmmmmm, wtf is wrong with this picture.

Your understanding of development, production and economics.

Removing money from the equation () simply removes the best way to control the effects of manufacture on the environment:

I like the German concept: charge a sales tax on everything such that the cost of recycling is built into the purchase price.

[mashman]

Does running an old vehicle that's already had energy used to make it leave a larger carbon footprint than buying a new fuel efficient car? just wondering as I like running old shitters I can fix.

Then have I got something for you. Think magazines that sell a "part" of some vehicle with each issue

You can look up the plans for the vehicle below on the website of your local 3D printing shop's website, full construction manual. Sign up for the vehicle. When a part is ready for you to be collected, you will be notified. It will take 100 weeks to build. Keep yer shitter til it dies, because you'll be building the future.



Dreams are free. Realities are merely a matter of logistics .

[Ocean1]

Is that like from a 50's economic propaganda manual?

I know, it's a bummer of a consequence of people not having money to buy the stuff that industry relies on in order to sell stuff and pay for future brand new and much more shiny than the last time stuff.

Arseholing? Can't you retask them? Sorry, don't shoot me, I was sitting in reception and found that idea in a bin marked "Way Too Fuckin HARD" and thought it seemed quite sensible.

Hardly surprising that you don't recognise a simple fact when it's presented.

Industry isn't responsible for unproductive losers, dude. Unproductive losers are responsible for unproductive losers.

Why is it my job to "re-task" them? They're responsible for their own productivity, or lack of.

[mashman]

Circular logic. Until you KNOW how it will affect the climate any drastic change stands as much chance of any change being worse than better.

You need to know first. Which is why the whole climate change industry is anathema to the scientific method: it reeks of contrived results and it denies resources for genuine scientific process.

Your understanding of development, production and economics.

Removing money from the equation () simply removes the best way to control the effects of manufacture on the environment:

Does that not depend on the scale of the change?

Why do you need to know first? Why can't you do and then observe globally as you are doing?

Was that sentence finished?

It's not the best way.

[mashman]

Hardly surprising that you don't recognise a simple fact when it's presented.

Industry isn't responsible for unproductive losers, dude. Unproductive losers are responsible for unproductive losers.

Why is it my job to "re-task" them? They're responsible for their own productivity, or lack of.

I was lolling at the language.

[george formby]

Watched this doco last night, gonna watch the rest because I like documentary's. Miracle Planet

The relevant bit about Methane Hydrate starts at 10:30, after the really big volcano and before dinosaur lungs.

[Voltaire]

Then have I got something for you. Think magazines that sell a "part" of some vehicle with each issue

You can look up the plans for the vehicle below on the website of your local 3D printing shop's website, full construction manual. Sign up for the vehicle. When a part is ready for you to be collected, you will be notified. It will take 100 weeks to build. Keep yer shitter til it dies, because you'll be building the future.
Dreams are free. Realities are merely a matter of logistics .

I'm still trying to get over the disappointment of Seamonkeys.

[swbarnett]

But then we would have another thread about how bad war is and how wrong killing people is.

Indeed. Which is why I suggested a planetary colonisation as an alternative.