And we will still have murder, violence, and war regardless of what you, I, or any person on the face of the planet does about it. What's your point, exactly?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ohio Takes Step Backwards
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
And we will still have murder, violence, and war regardless of what you, I, or any person on the face of the planet does about it. What's your point, exactly?
Your comparison falls flat. We can refrain from killing each other by Nobel actions alone.
No one needs other folks money to stop violence.
Renewable energy requires money we just don't have.
The fact that I live green changes nothing.
The fact that if our nation became green changes little.
Big difference spending money we don't have and controlling our behavior.
No one needs other folks money to stop violence.
Renewable energy requires money we just don't have.
The fact that I live green changes nothing.
The fact that if our nation became green changes little.
Big difference spending money we don't have and controlling our behavior.
Dottie if you believe we have a moral imperative to go green why not start with yourself?
Do you drive a hybrid? If not why?
Don't you think if we are going to spend a huge amount of money we should reap some results other than feeling all warm and fuzzy?
I would rather see us provide clean drinking water to every person on the planet for example.
Do you drive a hybrid? If not why?
Don't you think if we are going to spend a huge amount of money we should reap some results other than feeling all warm and fuzzy?
I would rather see us provide clean drinking water to every person on the planet for example.
Rev, whether the money exists or not is unavoidably a far lesser consideration than whether the sustainability can be attained.
If there is in fact such a lack of money, that means only that the problem is that much more urgent and needs that much more sacrifice.
If there is in fact such a lack of money, that means only that the problem is that much more urgent and needs that much more sacrifice.
And having an ounce of environmental ethics isn't a noble action? Caring for species other than your own isn't noble? Caring for the flourishing of future generations of humans and non-humans alike isn't a noble action?
Well, I beg to differ. The comparison doesn't fall flat at all.
Luis, here is how I see it. Mankind is like a cancer on this earth. We are killing this planet. There are too many people on earth and we will continue to grow until the planet cannot sustain us.
The use of chemicals enables us to feed more folks, cheap energy provides goods and services we could not afford otherwise.
The cold hard facts are we are consuming the planet like a cancer.
We cannot even give every man woman and child the basic element of life, clean drinking water.
Third world countries polute and poison our planet while others over populate it.
We have much bigger problems than renewables.
Everyone demonizes me for making it about money but ultimately it is about limited resources.
Fact of the matter is, we will kill our host and then we all will go the way of the dinosaur.
The planet will still be here, we will not.
The problem with socialism is, we run out of other folks money.
Why not have global socialism? Drinking water for everyone.
We flush our toilets with clean water for Gods sake.
You know why global socialism will not work?
Because we have limited resources and we all would be poor.
We could not afford hospital beds for everyone.
The poor among us live like kings compared to some places in the world.
We ignore their problems but have a problem with the class system in our own country.
People who want others to provide things for them are the problem.
Find your own solutions don't depend on others to do things for you.
Why not have global socialism? Drinking water for everyone.
We flush our toilets with clean water for Gods sake.
You know why global socialism will not work?
Because we have limited resources and we all would be poor.
We could not afford hospital beds for everyone.
The poor among us live like kings compared to some places in the world.
We ignore their problems but have a problem with the class system in our own country.
People who want others to provide things for them are the problem.
Find your own solutions don't depend on others to do things for you.
Sure it does your wanting others to do what you find moral instead of applying your morals yourself.
Have you reduced your carbon foot print, I have.
There is a big difference between leading by example and preaching to other folks to do your bidding.
Basically you want others to solve your problems.
That's not moral, it's hypocrisy.
Here is my attempt to get this thread back on topic.
It is about Ohio and their regulations.
Ohio needs jobs, more regulations are counterproductive to that.
Forcing Ohio to a standard the rest of the world does not have to live by is unfair competition.
We live in a world market and making people compete in that market with different regulations will not work or at the very least is unfair.
It is about Ohio and their regulations.
Ohio needs jobs, more regulations are counterproductive to that.
Forcing Ohio to a standard the rest of the world does not have to live by is unfair competition.
We live in a world market and making people compete in that market with different regulations will not work or at the very least is unfair.
I'm so tired of people who live in air conditioned houses runn
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
We cannot always control the behavior of others, but we sure can do what's right ourselves. The shifting of jobs to other countries has been going on for decades now, and we made terrible mistakes in actually encouraging companies to do just that, so I would suggest that there are steps that can be taken to at least somewhat reverse that process as any serious economist could tell you, and many do.
So far I don't really disagree, except that I don't think it is quite that unavoidable.
I got the impression that it was more the other way around, but that is not a cut and dried distinction anyway. It is a matter of degree in both cases.
We do? What would they be?
It is indeed about limited resources, but that is exactly why it is not about money. Money is sort-of-decreed into existence. It is an abstraction that is only useful or limited because we want to perceive it as such.
Actual limited resources are far more important and difficult to manage.
That may very well be, and it may even be unavoidable. But that is hardly reason not to take measures to avoid the brunt of the resulting suffering. There is an awful lot of things that can be done to minimize that suffering, and our major obstacle so far is our own lack of desire to deal with the matter in a sober manner.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
It was based on what you posted.
Actually, a lot. My one neighbor accused me of planting so many trees and shrubs because he thought maybe I was trying to hide from my wife. Of course I denied that.
I also supported the Sierra Club and have made donations to have trees planted in Israel.
Everything we do has an effect one way or another. As an old Buddhist saying goes, when a butterfly flaps its wings, it changes the weather the world over. It's just plain old simple cause-and-effect.
Again, an evolution, not a revolution-- I have not proposed shutting down power plants. Even a move to using more natural gas has the effect of cutting carbon emissions versus coal roughly in half, and we got plenty of natural gas.
You're making an assumption here that is not supported by anything I have said in this thread. Or elsewhere on RF, for that matter.
Even if it was true, it's irrelevant in that it in no way discounts the merit of the argument given it's ad homenim.
Also, setting an example can go a long way.
There is of course no guarantee that it will... but failing to set such an example does ensure a lot of things, few if any of them desirable.
Heck, aiming for a sustainable future must be better than the alternative - which far as I can see amounts to just hoping to postpone the point of utter despair without really having much of an idea of how much longer that will remain a practical possibility.
Quite frankly, we all deserve better than that. Every single one of us.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I grew up with a father who was in the Army during WWII, and I actually didn't even meet my own father until I was 3 because he was in the Pacific theater under MacArthur. One thing he constantly drove home to me was this: ****** or get off the pot! IOW, just don't sit there doing nothing about what needs to be done-- do it!
I see this same rule needing to be applied here, namely stop worrying about what others do, just do what we can do ourselves. And by ourselves, I also mean not just us personally, but also what can be done at the local, state/province, national levels, and also internationally as well.
Pollution kills many Americans each year, and much of that can be avoided. We know what global warming can potentially do, so just sitting around waiting for others to be responsible is illogical. There are many steps that can be gradually introduced that can help ameliorate these problems, but they ain't going to be dealt with if we just sit back and make excuses of why we shouldn't be acting on all different levels. Again, we need an evolution in this area, not a revolution.
So, sorry to be so wordy, and maybe I just should have said "I agree with you".
Avi1001
reform Jew humanist liberal feminist entrepreneur
Some of us are optimistic that the use of fracking and horizontal drilling will result in continued generation of large amounts of natural gas and oil, which is often found with the gas. Nuclear power will continue to grow. This could help our economy for the next 10-20 years, maybe longer, but ultimately we will have to develop renewables. There are simply not enough petroleum and nuclear resources, renewables will utumately be required.
I believe the recent discovery of new sources of natural gas and oil is what is stabilizing the stock market. There really aren't many other reasons for optimism. Changes in the banking system mortgage lending practices were needed, and had some effect. If the economy continues to strengthen, the banks may slip back to their old, aggressive lending practices. We have learned this lesson before......remember the "Great Depression".
We will have to work with other countries to reduce carbon emissions and move toward renewables. It will take a long time. If we continue to melt our ice caps, we will run out of heat sinks. Lets hope we do not damage our environment, in the meantime, in ways that risk sustainability. The earth is a large experiment in sustainability. If we fail, we have no other choice but to leave, or face extinction. Stephan Hawkings suggests we start planning to leave.
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I hear ya, and I agree in general, but the "final verdict" is not yet in on fracking and the safety of nuclear reactors. With those two we need to proceed with caution.
For example, there have been numerous earthquakes recently in Oklahoma, which is not along a fault-line, which some geologists believe could have been generated by fracking. Also, we've seen the dangers with nuclear reactors, and are you aware of the fact that there are art least a couple of these reactors here in the U.S. that are actually right next to fault-lines?
They all leave as you said but the prices of homes keeps going up and up so I guess aliens from Arcturus are staying.
As far as the debt goes, the current budget is paying down the debt by a decent amount.
Kansas, on the other hand, has a problem Expert forecast: Kansas will be in the red within a year without changes | CJOnline.com
I am utterly optimistic about the future while not ignoring the current problems. Things are changing for the better albeit too slowly for my taste.
Just take China and pollution. The Chinese Communist government recognizes that pollution is a threat to social stability which they prize over all and are starting to clean it up as just one example.
I think we can extend Churchill's comment on Americans to people in general: "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else."