Greta Thunberg's Groupie

[SoulMonster]

Just now, action said:

I would be totally in favor of an environmental union though.

What? The very same person who has previously talked about that we can't change the climate and that there is not even a point in trying, is now in favor of a "environmental union"? You keep on surprising me 

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

I don't know how that is relevant. I was not among those who voted against EU membership, so it has no effect on the validity of my arguments. 

You argue about national insularity pertaining to maritime rights, yet it was this very same national maritime perspective which made Norwegian voters discard the EU in two referenda. Smart country, Norway - much smarter than Heath's United Kingdom. It just demonstrates that even a country as smart as Norway can produce idiots.

[action]

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

What? The very same person who has previously talked about that we can't change the climate and that there is not even a point in trying, is now in favor of a "environmental union"? You keep on surprising me 

where did I say an environmental union can change the climate?

I'm in favor of an environmental union (which will never happen because unrealistic and utopian), not because it can change the climate, but because it could in theory halt destructive forces to the environment.

you seem to confuse the environment, the climate, and the wellbeing of fish. it's a bit of a hodgepodge this way.

[DieselDaisy]

If you want to implement genuine environmentalism then you need to discard the EU. Neoliberal bloated corrupt bureaucracies such as the EU are not the ideal people to instigate the type of reforms envisioned by environmental campaigners (which might hurt them in their wallets truthfully). 

[action]

that someone like greta thunberg (who's still at school or should be) confuses concepts as the environment and the climate (two fundamentally different things) I can understand, but I'd expect better from soulie.

You can immediately do something for the environment. Plant a tree, and the environment benefits.

changing the climate however, I maintain, is an impossible task.

[SoulMonster]

5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You argue about national insularity pertaining to maritime rights, yet it was this very same national maritime perspective which made Norwegian voters discard the EU in two referenda. Smart country, Norway - much smarter than Heath's United Kingdom. It just demonstrates that even a country as smart as Norway can produce idiots.

I would certainly criticize Norway for the foolish decision to not become a member of the EU. But this is entirely irrelevant to what we are discussing. I suppose you have a reason to change the topic again?

But that being said, Norway, with its extreme wealth, can afford to stand outside of the EU much more than I fear will be the case for the UK with its limitations. We will see.

[action]

actually, we do have some sort of environmental unions / tools: MARPOL, CITES, UNFCCC, OSPAR, ITTA,...

but most of these tools are empty vessels, since the political will to enforce them is seriously lacking. They are therefore ineffective and meaningless. While economical institutions like the EU are vastly more successfull.

[SoulMonster]

6 minutes ago, action said:

where did I say an environmental union can change the climate?

I'm in favor of an environmental union (which will never happen because unrealistic and utopian), not because it can change the climate, but because it could in theory halt destructive forces to the environment.

you seem to confuse the environment, the climate, and the wellbeing of fish. it's a bit of a hodgepodge this way.

Right. You accept that we have changed the climate for the worst, but somehow find it impossible to accept we can change it for the better  I got it now.

But when it comes to other environmental issues, then you are open to humans possibly having a positive impact and thus wants us to handle things in European environmental union. Got it.

[DieselDaisy]

3 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I would certainly criticize Norway for the foolish decision to not become a member of the EU. But this is entirely irrelevant to what we are discussing. I suppose you have a reason to change the topic again?

But that being said, Norway, with its extreme wealth, can afford to stand outside of the EU much more than I fear will be the case for the UK with its limitations. We will see.

Countries by GDP 2019 (IMF),

UK: 6th

Norway: 29th

 

 

Edited February 13, 2020 by DieselDaisy

[action]

7 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Right. You accept that we have changed the climate for the worst, but somehow find it impossible to accept we can change it for the better  I got it now.

But when it comes to other environmental issues, then you are open to humans possibly having a positive impact and thus wants us to handle things in European environmental union. Got it.

laws of entropy. you should look them up sometime. I can break a chinese vase very easily, but I can't possible restore it to it's former glory.

[SoulMonster]

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

Countries by GDP 2019 (IMF),

UK: 6th

Norway: 29th

 

 

I wasn't talking about GDP but our wealth, or more precisely, our pension fund which us now the largest national fund in the world (> USD 1 trillion). You could also look at total wealth per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(nominal)_per_capita

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, SoulMonster said:

I wasn't talking about GDP but our wealth, or more precisely, our pension fund which us now the largest national fund in the world (> USD 1 trillion). You could also look at total wealth per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_(nominal)_per_capita

You didn't mention specific criteria when throwing around hyperbolic statements like ''extreme wealth''. 

[SoulMonster]

5 minutes ago, action said:

laws of entropy. you should look them up sometime. I can break a chinese vase very easily, but I can't possible restore it to it's former glory.

Are you saying we can't fight entropy? Oh no!! 

[action]

Just now, SoulMonster said:

Are you saying we can't fight entropy? Oh no!! 

not on a global scale, no

[SoulMonster]

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

You didn't mention specific criteria when throwing around hyperbolic statements like ''extreme wealth''. 

Correct. Yet you seem to think I did, and was talking about GDP. Just google "wealthiest countries in the world" and this is what you get: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/11/28/richest-countries-world-2018-top-25/38429481/

Just now, action said:

not on a global scale, no

So you argue that we can do it locally, but someone, when you combine all this local efforts to the global scale, it collapses? That is very insightful. And how about our global effort of making houses with a different indoor temperature than the outdoors? That's fighting entropy on a global scale, right?

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

Correct. Yet you seem to think I did, and was talking about GDP. Just google "wealthiest countries in the world" and this is what you get: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/11/28/richest-countries-world-2018-top-25/38429481/

I just did and lo and behold the second link,

https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/

The United Kingdom at 6th and Norway - well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you chaps didn't make the top 20.

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I just did and lo and behold the second link,

https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/

The United Kingdom at 6th and Norway - well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you chaps didn't make the top 20.

As I think we had already established - but apparently we hadn't - there are different ways of looking at wealth, GDP being one of them. Again, I was talking about our pension fund which us now the largest national fund in the world (> USD 1 trillion).

[DieselDaisy]

Heck, the United Kingdom is a member of the G4, G7, G8 and G10 whereas Norway does not even qualify for the G20 haha!! 

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

Heck, the United Kingdom is a member of the G4, G7, G8 and G10 whereas Norway does not even qualify for the G20 haha!! 

You cannot rile me up about Norway's limitations. I have no problems accepting Norway's miniscule stature among gigantic nations. I simply don't care so that strategy won't work. But I see how that can be hard to fathom to someone as nationalistic as yourself.

But it is undeniable that we have been blessed with huge natural resources (to no credit to ourselves!) which makes it a lot easier for us to stand outside of the EU than many other countries, Britain included. We have demonstrated that we can survive well alone. The question is, can the UK? And again, the vast majority of economists forecast a smaller UK economy as a result of Brexit. We will see how you can adapt to standing on your own, but you certainly won't have as much wealth (as the Norwegian pension fund) to help weather coming that storm. 

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

But it is undeniable that we have been blessed with huge natural resources (to no credit to ourselves!) which makes it a lot easier for us to stand outside of the EU than many other countries, Britain included. We have demonstrated that we can survive well alone.

And you would consider destroying one of those resources, fisheries, by joining the CFP?

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

And you would consider destroying one of those resources, fisheries, by joining the CFP?

You destroyed your own fisheries by over-fishing which helped lead to strict quotas that didn't support the same size of the fisheries as before. If you hadn't been part of the EU and had to adapt CFP, you could have risked ecological collapse through over-fishing which could have hurt your fisheries more than the sustainable policies of the CFP. So I reject the underlying assumptions.

That being said, I hope Norway's fisheries are taking better care of the fish stocks than you were pre-CFP. If not, and we are ruining our fishing too like you were, then I would welcome CFP because I care more for the fish stock and sustainable ecology than the transient needs of fishing communities who have now become dated and need to change.

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, SoulMonster said:

You destroyed your own fisheries by over-fishing which helped lead to strict quotas that didn't support the same size of the fisheries as before. If you hadn't been part of the EU and had to adapt CFP, you could have risked ecological collapse through over-fishing which could have hurt your fisheries more than the sustainable policies of the CFP. So I reject the underlying assumptions.

That being said, I hope Norway's fisheries are taking better care of the fish stocks than you were pre-CFP. If not, and we are ruining our fishing too like you were, then I would welcome CFP because I care more for the fish stock and sustainable ecology than the transient needs of fishing communities who have now become dated and need to change.

Well we have long since established you despise poor people, and have a quasi-fascist viewpoint on government.

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Well we have long since established you despise poor people, and have a quasi-fascist viewpoint on government.

When did you establish that I despise poor people? The very fact that I think Brexit is a stupid idea is the fact that it will hurt poor people (rich people will always survive). You, on the other hand, don't care about poor people, but only at "getting back at the EU" for what you mistakenly think it did to your specific community.

A "quasi-fascist viewpoint on government"? That's hilarious  

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

When did you establish that I despise poor people? The very fact that I think Brexit is a stupid idea is the fact that it will hurt poor people (rich people will always survive). You, on the other hand, don't care about poor people, but only at "getting back at the EU" for what you mistakenly think it did to your specific community.

A "quasi-fascist viewpoint on government"? That's hilarious  

Caring more about ecology than ''fishing communities''? You truly are the most repulsive person I have ever come across. 

[SoulMonster]

Just now, DieselDaisy said:

Caring more about ecology than ''fishing communities''? You truly are the most repulsive person I have ever come across. 

Haha. Is that your evidence that I don't care about poor people? If we ruin fish stock we hurt people for eternity because people might never be able to fish those species again. And those we hurt would tend to be poor people, not rich people who don't work as fishermen and can afford expensive, imported fish. Furthermore, over-fishing affects other species too and can have devastating effects on humans long-term by screwing up our fundamental basis for sustenance. If we instead just regulate the quotas to sustainable levels, we hurt some people right now, sure, because they were used to fishing much more and now they will have to scale down with some having to find other jobs, but we preserve fish quotas and ecosystems for eternity. You do understand that it is better to help an infinite amount of people in the future than a limited number of people right now, right? That it is better to preserve ecosystems through regulation than opening up to a free-for-all world where humans can just do what they want, right? Where people can fish as much as they want, shoot whatever they want, cut down as many trees they want, pollute as much as they want. Well, I don't think you do. Not because you are not intelligent enough to understand simply principles most small kids can grasp, but because that would be to imply that the CFP might have been for the best, and nothing is as hard as to admit one has been carrying a grudge for no good reason. To have to realize your world-view was askew. That your whole foundation for your hateful opposition to the EU was erroneous. To admit being so fundamentally wrong.