|
|
Post by dan1 on Oct 8, 2019 9:28:43 GMT
This thread has opened my eyes to the correlation between views on climate change and brexit. I'm not sure I took the correlation seriously before now but a handful of posters prompted further reading and the polling suggests it's real. I guess the same applies to views on Trump, another figure that appears to polarise people. Trump, Brexit, and climate change all speak to the divide between liberal, facts-based, outward looking individuals and conservative feelings-based inwards looking individuals. Re: inwards/outwards looking, examples all over the place e.g. Climate change - Outward: "The scientific consensus is really worrying as it looks like we're on a really damaging path" Inward: "Scientists/news are always going on about the end of the world, nothing's ever happened to me. Could do with a bit of warming here right now!" Brexit - Outward: "If we have No-Deal, it's going to be massively damaging to parts of the economy and harm the UK's long-term prospects" Inward: " My job's gonna be ok / I have a fat guaranteed pension, and the news is always full of lies anyway" Trump - Outward: " He's a misogynistic racist who has horrible policies that affect various groups of people severely" Inward "Yeah, but he likes me".I should clarify that there's nothing inherently wrong about being inward-looking. Being inward-looking can protect united cultural values, promote cultural cohesion, and a basis to 'all pull together'. We need both types of people, but what's unfortunately happening at the moment is a culture war between the two led by those with interests in driving us apart. Thanks. It's obvious when you think about it. It rather begs the question of why the apparent shift from evidence based to feelings-based in the liberal democracies (aka the "West") over the recent past. Three contributing factors come to mind.... - demographic shift due to ageing population - rise in dissatisfaction of the way and speed society is changing (anti-neo liberalism) - rise in nationalism as memories of the devastation of WWII fades
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,934 
Likes: 1,199
|
Post by macq on Oct 8, 2019 10:49:58 GMT
Having some food with my wife this evening, sky news (no volume and subtitles) seemed to have a mad woman on from the extinction rebellion crew forecasting Armageddon.. i think.  XR come across to me as a bunch of mostly white, liberal anti-capitalists with a splash of green issues added. Inconveniencing people as their major tactic isn't going to get them anywhere (other than a cell if we're lucky). I'm waiting for them to present even a single achievable, costed option that people will buy into. Clearly lots of low cost things they could suggest, e.g go vegan or don't fly, but the public aren't going to go for those. Not sure for many that its a splash of Green issues but would agree there are signs that animal rights,anti - capitalists etc are quite happy to work in the background for Once and to see others front and centre with the media Like you say as well as aiming at governments/air travel etc lets get the public to switch off their heating for the next 5 months over the winter.Or for everybody (kids as well) to boycott all the fancy trainers/running shoes which MIT a few years back worked out have about 14kg of emissions over their life cycle (with newer eco Ones only saving 10%).Life could change so much but i'm not sure even some of the "lite" protesters/public are even thinking about what they need to give up
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Oct 8, 2019 11:52:09 GMT
"Inconveniencing people as their major tactic isn't going to get them anywhere"
That unfortunately is the problem; nothing moves the deniers and capitalists; the evidence not and not the shouting.
Either a little inconvenience now, or a lot later
|
|
|
|
Post by brianac on Oct 9, 2019 20:29:05 GMT
What about green investing, got a flier email about low carbon investing, read through details, 2 of the top ten equities held were oil companies (Royal Dutch and Chevron)
Did some further checking on other "ethical funds" similar story.
Ho hum
Brian
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Oct 9, 2019 21:42:27 GMT
There are a few ITs that look in principle ok with good persistent returns, but they sell at a high premium and have ongoing costs which some don't like, eg FSFL or UKW. There are a few ETFs, eg INRG, which was flat until January, since when it increased massively.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Oct 9, 2019 21:56:21 GMT
"Inconveniencing people as their major tactic isn't going to get them anywhere"That unfortunately is the problem; nothing moves the deniers and capitalists; the evidence not and not the shouting. Either a little inconvenience now, or a lot later I think i got the jist of your post (bolded) and i agree.. ... as for the deniers and capitalist's ... most if not all of them are neither.. the issue is simple, climate change is happening, is human activity to blame? .. if so then the whole world has to take action to create an attempt to stop it getting worse.. or.. is climate change happening naturally.. in which case.. human activity needs to find a way of working with it to minimise the impact..and indeed benefit from it..(solar power) either way, worldwide changes, ultimately, probably over the next 50yrs or more are the only way to combat it one way or the other... smelly left wingers bringing the capital to a stand still is gonna help 0%.
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 1,199
|
Post by macq on Oct 9, 2019 22:17:23 GMT
What about green investing, got a flier email about low carbon investing, read through details, 2 of the top ten equities held were oil companies (Royal Dutch and Chevron) Did some further checking on other "ethical funds" similar story. Ho hum Brian I use Impax IT (IEM) but also worth a look might be Baillie Gifford Positive Change or Montanaro Better World
|
|
scc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 214
Likes: 163
|
Post by scc on Oct 9, 2019 22:20:04 GMT
Thanks. It's obvious when you think about it. It rather begs the question of why the apparent shift from evidence based to feelings-based in the liberal democracies (aka the "West") over the recent past. Three contributing factors come to mind.... - demographic shift due to ageing population - rise in dissatisfaction of the way and speed society is changing (anti-neo liberalism) - rise in nationalism as memories of the devastation of WWII fades - Poorer scientific literacy and increasing distrust of experts. - Easier to live in self reinforcing (social) media bubble - Tools for societal manipulation getting cheaper, better understood and can be deployed from anywhere. - Disneyfication of politics - the lower common denominator story is easily understood and travels well. Resurgence of Flat Earth as a belief is practically the poster child for this. Apparently, it's YouTube and its algorithms which is largely to blame.
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Oct 9, 2019 23:32:52 GMT
"Inconveniencing people as their major tactic isn't going to get them anywhere"That unfortunately is the problem; nothing moves the deniers and capitalists; the evidence not and not the shouting. Either a little inconvenience now, or a lot later I think i got the jist of your post (bolded) and i agree.. ... as for the deniers and capitalist's ... most if not all of them are neither.. the issue is simple, climate change is happening, is human activity to blame? .. if so then the whole world has to take action to create an attempt to stop it getting worse.. or.. is climate change happening naturally.. in which case.. human activity needs to find a way of working with it to minimise the impact..and indeed benefit from it..(solar power) either way, worldwide changes, ultimately, probably over the next 50yrs or more are the only way to combat it one way or the other... smelly left wingers bringing the capital to a stand still is gonna help 0%. Thanks Martin, The boldfaced line wasn't mine but taken from an earlier post by a denier. The phrase "deniers and capitalists" was chosen to contrast the deniers' disrespectful talk of "neo-liberal lefties".
|
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 1,214
|
Post by travolta on Oct 10, 2019 7:16:57 GMT
Sure is . Mankind is such a tiny blip in the history of Earth,we should enable as many earthlings to enjoy themselves as much as possible in our short,insignificant hubris.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Oct 10, 2019 7:32:53 GMT
They all turn up in their nylon tents and designer fashion highly carbon producing products in a 3 litre carbon pumping hearse.
It Just makes me want to light a bonfire 🔥 in the garden.
If they spent their time of which they have plenty since the seem to make no contribution to society except to breed highly carbon producing children and used £40k a day they get planting trees on moorland it would have a greater positive effect than pissing off hard working people who then can’t afford more carbon neutral food and have to buy cheap high carbon footprint processed foods.
Cause and effect it costs to be low carbon nation and stifling people’s ability to afford those measures is self defeating.
Children are are not the solution they are the cause. If world population declined we would not have the problem.
They all love Labour as they will give unlimited benefits to the “ It’s my right to have kids” brigade. Who will pump out generations of carbon producing society sponging unemployed generations.
Who pays ? The prudent workers who restrict their families to what they can afford.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Oct 10, 2019 8:13:41 GMT
I think i got the jist of your post (bolded) and i agree.. ... as for the deniers and capitalist's ... most if not all of them are neither.. the issue is simple, climate change is happening, is human activity to blame? .. if so then the whole world has to take action to create an attempt to stop it getting worse.. or.. is climate change happening naturally.. in which case.. human activity needs to find a way of working with it to minimise the impact..and indeed benefit from it..(solar power) either way, worldwide changes, ultimately, probably over the next 50yrs or more are the only way to combat it one way or the other... smelly left wingers bringing the capital to a stand still is gonna help 0%. Thanks Martin, The boldfaced line wasn't mine but taken from an earlier post by a denier. The phrase "deniers and capitalists" was chosen to contrast the deniers' disrespectful talk of "neo-liberal lefties". Getting into name-calling are we corto ? Not a good look. I accept the premise of man-made climate change, but I don't accept the idea that we have to abandon capitalism and go back to the stone-age. Not necessary and not going to happen. As to capitalism - that nasty idea that's taken more people out of poverty than any other system in history. Btw, do you invest in P2P? If so, isn't that supporting capitalism?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2019 8:57:03 GMT
If you are interested in investing in organisations that are trying to help you might consider
TRIG, a buyer of solar and wind facilities across Europe, good steady income stream and a growing share price
ITM, one of the top water electrolysis companies in the world making Hydrogen. H2 is a vector of energy and is being used to power cars and trucks, add to methane/gas pipelines and in actual gas production facilities to help "green" chemical production. The share price is up around 20% due to Linde/BOC buying a big share of the company. Other shareholders include Peter Hargreaves and part of the JCB family.
I'm not sure why we spend so much time blaming other people for our climate crisis. We all consume often taking no count of the CO2 or CH4 released into the atmosphere as a result (to name but two), that some of us are more worried than others doesn't mean we should be silly. We all need to move forward together and to do that we need more education in the subject.
Please read up more.
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Oct 10, 2019 9:32:22 GMT
Thanks Martin, The boldfaced line wasn't mine but taken from an earlier post by a denier. The phrase "deniers and capitalists" was chosen to contrast the deniers' disrespectful talk of "neo-liberal lefties". Getting into name-calling are we corto ? Not a good look. I accept the premise of man-made climate change, but I don't accept the idea that we have to abandon capitalism and go back to the stone-age. Not necessary and not going to happen. As to capitalism - that nasty idea that's taken more people out of poverty than any other system in history. Btw, do you invest in P2P? If so, isn't that supporting capitalism? The right wingers are name calling all the time - the meme "going back to the stone age" for example. No activist claims that. 20% child poverty in this country; the richest 400 Americans now paying less tax than the average; 20 firms behind a third of carbon emissions; 2 of them prominent in a "green" fund (as claimed on this thread somewhere) You may have incorporated the general fact that climate change is real; but you are still in denial about the nature of capitalism.
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Oct 10, 2019 9:39:43 GMT
They all turn up in their nylon tents and designer fashion highly carbon producing products in a 3 litre carbon pumping hearse. It Just makes me want to light a bonfire 🔥 in the garden. If they spent their time of which they have plenty since the seem to make no contribution to society except to breed highly carbon producing children and used £40k a day they get planting trees on moorland it would have a greater positive effect than pissing off hard working people who then can’t afford more carbon neutral food and have to buy cheap high carbon footprint processed foods. Cause and effect it costs to be low carbon nation and stifling people’s ability to afford those measures is self defeating. Children are are not the solution they are the cause. If world population declined we would not have the problem. They all love Labour as they will give unlimited benefits to the “ It’s my right to have kids” brigade. Who will pump out generations of carbon producing society sponging unemployed generations. Who pays ? The prudent workers who restrict their families to what they can afford. What a hate speech. You are seriously confused.
|
|
