bush vs kerry - you decide

Megara · Oct 30, 2004

Alltaken said:

Kyoto is a stepping stone towards further tougher limits being placed upon people.
Click to expand...

I agree, except i believe it is flawed.

My country has already begun fullfilling its kyoto agreements to an extent, and is trying to transition the country into the kyoto protocol smoothly.

you talked about the US having 37,000 per capita, and NZ having 21,000 per capita. well i agree NZ is a priviledged country, and that we get more than our fair share of things. i also in my argument think we should be reducing our pollution too.
Click to expand...

well, i'm glad you agree that NZ needs to lower its pollution too. I think all nations do. I am not against america having to reduce its pollution the most, since we do pollute the most, but i think its wrong if we dont force all countries to cut back(some to a greater extent, some to a lesser extent).

but you would need to reduce pollution about 500% more than we would in order to get the same per-capita pollution as we would. there is nothing that would be able to stop this fact.
Click to expand...

No, there is no denying that.

unless of course per-capita really is flawed (i don't understand how its flawed, i'd like to hear why it is flawed) the per capita, GDP, and pollution levels, and countries wealth ALL need to be taken into account for a fair assesment.
Click to expand...

Whether you want to hear it or not, America's role in the world, as an economic leader is more than 5% of the world. To drop America's pollution from 24% to 4.5ish or so would have dire consequences to America and to the world economy. Now you may take that as 'prideful' or whatever, but it is simply fact. There is NOTHING to be proud about when your country is the worst polluter in the world. However, If you were a leader of america and in charge of looking after the wellfare of the nation, could you honestly allow kyoto to go into effect knowing how badly it will hurt your country?

and the funny thing is that the Kyoto-protocol took ALL these things into account. the ecnomic development of 3rd world countries was taken into account so that once a place like china became 1st world it would get all the restrictions that all other countrys have. and if the US ships jobs to china because of relaxed pollution issues, then it would drive china to first world status faster than it could by itself. and would then impose pollution restrictions.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think the world can sustain a world where everyone is a first world nation? There is no chance for china and india, let alone the other 130+ developing nations, to become first world nations without completely destroying this earth.

So what do we do? Keep the inequality? Have an economic redistribution of wealth?

it lets them get away with things that we have already gotten away with. (IMO that in some ways is a bit silly)
Click to expand...

Well, i know you and kyoto are trying to be fair to china and india..but the world isnt going to get healthier by being fair to china and india.

germanys economic standstill.... IMO an economic standstill is better than "growth"

if every country had an economic standstill then we would have a "stable" world. the requirement for a country to always be "producing more" "consuming more" and "growing economically" is a scary reality.
Click to expand...

Inflation, population growth and other factors will not allow an economy to standstill and keep the status quo without a reduction of standard of living.

the emphasis we have on consumption being the marker of our civilisation is really scary IMO.

in the last ten thousand years our consumption of natural resources has grown exponentially compared to our population increase which has also grown exponentially. infact in the last 100 years since the industrial revolution nearly all our consumption has occured.

people lived prior to this, which means our life is not controlled by consumption, we litterally don't need most of what we have now days, (incluiding this computer in front of me LOL)

so germany having an economic standstill to me is not a concern i respect it. if they get into a recestion meaning that they are losing jobs and such then it becomes an issue.
Click to expand...

i agree with the consumption, but how exactly do we end it? There is no way to just wake up and go "alright, i dont need a computer to live...screw televisions and cars..screw universities and everything that consumes..." Our WHOLE WORLD is based on consumption. It is not something that can realistically be changed, IMO.

Well, i think germans would prefer growth..they will be hurting if their economy doesnt grow.

problem with capitalism and globalisation. don't ask the kyoto protocol to undo what the US has pushed through with things such as free trade and other globalising forces.
Click to expand...

what does free trade and globalization have to do with global warming? Are you wishing we go back and live in an agrarian lifestyle?

sure. but i will pay my share of the environmental debt if you pay yours. i don't want to pay yours as well.
Click to expand...

Who determines what each countries environmental debt is? What will it be based on? populations?

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the total value of "final goods and services" produced within a country's borders in a year.

services is a nice thing to ignore LOL.
Click to expand...

GDP is the closest thing we have to comparing economic output..if you find a better system, please let me know..

yes we do need to.

alternative fuels only help us maintain our current level of consumption the scary fact is that its our consumption that needs to be reduced in order to maximise our useage of current fuel resources.

if we are always saying "we need new power stations the current supply doesn't full the demand" it really is trying to fix the sewrage problem by building a longer pipeline. or the rubish problem by building a bigger rubbish dump.

efficency of current systems is infact more effective than new systems, and the fact is our current lifestyle (yours and mine) cannot be sustained, even with alternate fuels)

hydrogen fuel cells for cars only act as energy storage, the power to create the hydrogen comes from power stations, if those power stations are run on gas, coal, nuclear, or other polluting sources then the hydrogen is effectivly no better than petrol.

things like biking to work, or walking/ catching buses and trains is making the current system more efficient and bypassing much of the energy use that we currently use. it would reduce the need for new power sources.

the US uses 192,000,000 gallons of petrol (gasoline) per day. 120 million people drive to work every day in the US, and of those 120 million, 108 million drive alone in a car.

if everyone took 2-3 people per car to work, (car pools, more efficient use of resources) then we could make the petrol last for at least 2 times longer, reduce the need for road maintanence, and new highways....
Click to expand...

I agree we need todo something to cut down on the gas consumption in america...

Have you ever seen how big america is? Carpools arent always more efficient, but when feasible, i agree, they should be employed.

New York and other urban centers have good subway/bus systems..

Where i am in vermont, there is no real public transportation and the area is too big not to have a car.

Ontop of that, we get horrible winters in vermont. No one would bike to work when its below freezing and there is snow everywhere...

America relies HEAVILY on cars. Thats why we need to come up with alternative fuel so we can keep cars.

its all a HUGE HUGE problem. and the kyoto protocol was not set up to solve the countries internal economic, social, and infrustructural problems. it was set up by all countries to effect the worlds entire pollution output to save the globe as an entity.
Click to expand...

I have a hard time believing that when it allows countries to pollute more.

I understand why kyoto was setup the way it is, with giving exemptions to the developing world, but it wasnt to be 'fair' to them. You know as well as i do, if you tell the developing world to stop polluting, they will say no. Therefore, it is easy to get them on board by giving them exemptions.

I dont see how you can save the earth by allowing countries to pollute more and more.

my sister is the manager of an australian magazine and alternative technology company. they have a whole pile of resources available to asses your effciency of your house. and provide answers of how to reduce your personal energy consumption by around 70% without compromising your lifestyle in any way.

they have a simple computer based questionare that you fill in on the way around your house to calculate your current energy use, then you type in your energy bill costs, and it will tell you how many hundreds -> thousands of dollars you can save per year by things such as insulation, energy saving light bulbs..... minor changes.

but even with these measures, we will need to change our lifestyles to achieve the ultimate reduction in power and fuel consumption.

Alltaken
Click to expand...

are you willing to lower your lifestyle so that we are all equal in the world?

Listen, we are not disagreeing about what needs to be done, anyone with half a clue realizes we need to cut down on pollution BIG TIME. There has to be a compromise, or otherwise, no American president or congressional member will allow kyoto to pass when they believe it is so detrimental to the country and so blatantly benefits others. Thats not a compromise and many americans see it as a treaty to lynch america while others go scot free.

In retrospect, i wish bush would have stayed in kyoto, like clinton did, so we could try and alter the content instead of just walking out.

Alltaken · Oct 30, 2004

are you willing to lower your lifestyle so that we are all equal in the world?
Click to expand...

yes, actually i bike to university which is about 30-40 minutes one direction, and 45-1 hour the other direction. (that is a pedal bike)

i catch the bus as much as possible if its bad weather.

and i drive the other times, but pick people up at the bus-stop if they want a ride LOL.

Doug

Taylor · Oct 31, 2004

*stands on sidelines waving pom poms* woohoo... go the informed argument... i have no idea what you're talking about but i'm muchos impressed by the level of knowledge shown here.

i just think there should be less pollution... stam. i don't care about countries.

Megara · Oct 31, 2004

i think we can all agree we need less pollution in the world.

Alltaken · Oct 31, 2004

common ground is soo good.....

*BRB just off boyracing in my hummer* ha ha ha

hey tamsyn can i play with your pom poms? HA HA HA

Doug

Log in or Sign up

bush vs kerry - you decide

Megara Banned

Alltaken Member

Taylor Repatriated

Megara Banned

Alltaken Member

Log in or Sign up

bush vs kerry - you decide

Megara Banned

Alltaken Member

Taylor Repatriated

Megara Banned

Alltaken Member

Useful Searches