I don't know what winter is like in NZ, but up here in Canada, the moronic climate initiatives we see cause predictable outcomes like it becoming outrageously expensive to just do luxurious things like not dying of cold in -40C winters. The current proposals are genocidal.
The problem is that we're childish, and think we can have our cake and eat it too -- there's no way to produce enough energy without an environmental impact. We need to pick between multiple options that all have positives and negatives, and certain lobbies have people telling us to ignore the negatives of their current big and shiny proposals that will cost more money than exists on earth, while doubling down on the negatives of far more practical options that aren't big and sexy.
That isn't to say that there aren't viable options. In Canada, half the provinces rely on carbon neutral energy sources, and most of those rely entirely on hydroelectric. In Quebec and Manitoba, the plentiful hydroelectric power costs low enough that people can heat their homes with that instead of burning fossil fuels. If Manitoba can do it, then the other provinces can too. The problem is that there's an immediate environmental impact to large scale hydroelectric projects, and a cost that doesn't make anyone immediately rich (especially if the project becomes part of a crown corporation to distribute the benefits of a public good instead of going to some private company).
Without becoming wiser, all we'll do is waste energy and materials making lobbyist's masters rich instead of actually doing anything to make anything better.
The problem is that we're childish, and think we can have our cake and eat it too -- there's no way to produce enough energy without an environmental impact. We need to pick between multiple options that all have positives and negatives, and certain lobbies have people telling us to ignore the negatives of their current big and shiny proposals that will cost more money than exists on earth, while doubling down on the negatives of far more practical options that aren't big and sexy.
That isn't to say that there aren't viable options. In Canada, half the provinces rely on carbon neutral energy sources, and most of those rely entirely on hydroelectric. In Quebec and Manitoba, the plentiful hydroelectric power costs low enough that people can heat their homes with that instead of burning fossil fuels. If Manitoba can do it, then the other provinces can too. The problem is that there's an immediate environmental impact to large scale hydroelectric projects, and a cost that doesn't make anyone immediately rich (especially if the project becomes part of a crown corporation to distribute the benefits of a public good instead of going to some private company).
Without becoming wiser, all we'll do is waste energy and materials making lobbyist's masters rich instead of actually doing anything to make anything better.
I don't disagree.
The thing is, we're doing it out of order. First we produce the viable alternative, then we can look at eliminating the thing. What we're doing instead of taxing the thing out of existence and all poor people are allowed to do is die.
A lot of the technologies we need don't need to be developed, they've existed for 100 years and we just need to use them. Hydroelectricity and lots of street cars could change everything.
The thing is, we're doing it out of order. First we produce the viable alternative, then we can look at eliminating the thing. What we're doing instead of taxing the thing out of existence and all poor people are allowed to do is die.
A lot of the technologies we need don't need to be developed, they've existed for 100 years and we just need to use them. Hydroelectricity and lots of street cars could change everything.
Fully agreed that companies have way too much influence in politics in general where they should have none.
The scariest thing is that it isn't just politicians they have influence over, it's people. Just a handful of companies own all the TV networks, and many of the most influential websites report back to establishment media masters. We see certain people getting signal boosted, but who did that? Oh, look at that it's our corporate overlords or their partners in government. It's a situation where entire world issues are the puppets of the same company yelling at each other.
That's the biggest thing to remember: They've got overwhelming money, they can pay entire rooms full of the smartest people in the world to just sit and figure out how to get you to agree to whatever they want. They don't even need to be honest about what they're doing, so they might pretend they're against a certain thing because that's the easiest way to get what they want.
In that sense, it might be good for the world to muzzle corporations entirely. They aren't people, they're legal constructs, and as legal constructs they shouldn't have a voice. if their owners want to have a political opinion, they can speak themselves.
The scariest thing is that it isn't just politicians they have influence over, it's people. Just a handful of companies own all the TV networks, and many of the most influential websites report back to establishment media masters. We see certain people getting signal boosted, but who did that? Oh, look at that it's our corporate overlords or their partners in government. It's a situation where entire world issues are the puppets of the same company yelling at each other.
That's the biggest thing to remember: They've got overwhelming money, they can pay entire rooms full of the smartest people in the world to just sit and figure out how to get you to agree to whatever they want. They don't even need to be honest about what they're doing, so they might pretend they're against a certain thing because that's the easiest way to get what they want.
In that sense, it might be good for the world to muzzle corporations entirely. They aren't people, they're legal constructs, and as legal constructs they shouldn't have a voice. if their owners want to have a political opinion, they can speak themselves.
- replies
- 3
- announces
- 5
- likes
- 9
The Internet always should have been decentralized. The centralization we've seen has been a huge mistake. The good thing is how amazing the tools we have available to us are. Stepping away from social media, I've got a lot of great things to say about Nextcloud, and that can be self-hosted by any size organization.