| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, 09:32 - Jan 23 with 5148 views | Guthrum |
that she should go to college and study economics before talking about divestment from fossil fuels, really cuts to the heart of the problem.
On the one side we have people who consider jobs and economic growth above environmental protection, on the other those who are more concerned about securing the future of the planet than mundane economics. Until the one can somehow be linked to the other (which you would have thought should be possible, given the economic effects of climate change), there is no common ground.
Currently the former group are in the positions of power, so the climate activists are on the back foot. Tho the ground is shifting as financial institutions change the emphasis of their investments. |  |
| |  |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 09:39 - Jan 23 with 2954 views | lowhouseblue |
errr … studying economics is a great tool for contributing constructively to debates about things like climate change (other less good subjects are also available). you can use your economic skills for good or evil.
but your premise is wrong. studying economics does not mean that you 'consider jobs and economic growth above environmental protection'. studying economics gives you the tools to argue the exact opposite if you so choose, and indeed also to argue against further investment in fossil fuels. you are confusing studying economics with promoting one particular economic view. that doesn't follow. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 09:51 - Jan 23 with 2921 views | Radlett_blue |
Climate change is real & the world does need to take action before the polar ice sheets melt to the extent that they are no longer reflecting sufficient of the sun's energy & then it may really be too late. However, getting the WORLD to take action is a near impossible task as every country has a different agenda as their own political leaders focus on staying in power, as most actions designed to slow climate change will have adverse short term consequences for most of their citizens. |  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 10:16 - Jan 23 with 2864 views | Guthrum |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 09:39 - Jan 23 by lowhouseblue |
errr … studying economics is a great tool for contributing constructively to debates about things like climate change (other less good subjects are also available). you can use your economic skills for good or evil.
but your premise is wrong. studying economics does not mean that you 'consider jobs and economic growth above environmental protection'. studying economics gives you the tools to argue the exact opposite if you so choose, and indeed also to argue against further investment in fossil fuels. you are confusing studying economics with promoting one particular economic view. that doesn't follow. |
I wasn't denigrating the study of economics.
I was using Mnuchin's comments as an illustration of the gulf between the climate movement and its chief critics. The fact he considers Thunberg an economic illiterate because she puts the environment before growth. This despite the potential economic effects of climate change (and opportunities in dealing with it, e.g. the development of renewables). [Post edited 23 Jan 2020 10:19]
| |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 10:32 - Jan 23 with 2814 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Quite.
Whilst bullying Ms Thunberg for her right-on-trend, but somewhat lop-sided views is not entirely popular it IS actually a little less cringeworthy that seeing the likes of MIchael Gove pretending to be raptly interested in a schoolgirl's lecture. |  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 10:54 - Jan 23 with 2749 views | lowhouseblue |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 10:16 - Jan 23 by Guthrum |
I wasn't denigrating the study of economics.
I was using Mnuchin's comments as an illustration of the gulf between the climate movement and its chief critics. The fact he considers Thunberg an economic illiterate because she puts the environment before growth. This despite the potential economic effects of climate change (and opportunities in dealing with it, e.g. the development of renewables). [Post edited 23 Jan 2020 10:19]
|
i think thunberg is an economic illiterate even though she is right about climate change. she brings much needed emotion and urgency but i wouldn't look to her for economic analysis. amongst academic economists i don't think there is much of a gulf - very few would be denying the urgency and lots have very interesting things to say about how best to respond. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:13 - Jan 23 with 2704 views | Guthrum |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 10:54 - Jan 23 by lowhouseblue |
i think thunberg is an economic illiterate even though she is right about climate change. she brings much needed emotion and urgency but i wouldn't look to her for economic analysis. amongst academic economists i don't think there is much of a gulf - very few would be denying the urgency and lots have very interesting things to say about how best to respond. |
I'm not having a go at economists, certainly not academic ones!
I'm pointing out the gulf between the likes of Mnuchin, Trump, Scott Morrison et al., who put growth and jobs in traditional industries ahead of climate action and the likes of Thunberg, Attenborough, etc., who go the other way, caring less about the short term effects upon people's lives (and livelihoods) of saving the planet. That is why they are at loggerheads and not on speaking terms (thus developing solutions becomes harder).
Tho I can't help feeling that reverting to naturally declining things such as coal mining for a short term jobs and earnings boost is the epitome of short sightedness. | |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:14 - Jan 23 with 2701 views | Darth_Koont |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 10:16 - Jan 23 by Guthrum |
I wasn't denigrating the study of economics.
I was using Mnuchin's comments as an illustration of the gulf between the climate movement and its chief critics. The fact he considers Thunberg an economic illiterate because she puts the environment before growth. This despite the potential economic effects of climate change (and opportunities in dealing with it, e.g. the development of renewables). [Post edited 23 Jan 2020 10:19]
|
Indeed.
Funnily enough, I had a very similar discussion with my 77-year old Dad and 17-year old daughter at the weekend. I was in the middle trying to bring their different views together, her pushing the environment above all else and him pushing the economic growth angle. Friendly enough and I agreed with both but the sticking point was my Dad who couldn't consider solutions that limit growth as an option.
He's an ex-scientist and was talking about the dangers of greenhouse gases back in the mid-70s but his faith in the traditional economic model and that science would find a way meant that he couldn't agree that actual sacrifices might need to be made instead. Beyond us all recycling more and following the existing environmental regulations.
We got to the point where I was saying that we do make economic sacrifices when we go to war, and that should be how we consider the climate change issue. But he made the admittedly fair point that war is largely about maintaining and boosting trade and influence. In his mind, it's an impossible situation and we'll just have to wait for science to catch up.
I think that's the issue really. We've got too many people like Mnuchin who have ridden to the top of the current system and we need them to make the necessary changes. Or India or China or Brazil etc. who need to grow rapidly to compete on the terms we've set, and to keep continuing our own growth.
You're right that producers and consumers can make a difference by choosing "Green" but I think that's too little too late. It's predominantly a branding/market opportunity that only certain premium producers and consumers can adhere to - and ultimately they're almost all still beholden to shareholders to keep growing and the profits coming in for execs and shareholders.
The system itself is a train without brakes, even with increasing regulation, tech innovation and an voting population that starts electing more and more hardcore environmentalists into power. But that's all decades away for most countries. Which means that grassroots movements like Thunberg who can influence personal sacrifice on a global scale are needed. But also civil action/disobedience like Extinction Rebellion might well be the most viable option to kickstart the war that is needed. It worked for the civil rights movement despite the initial backlash. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:15 - Jan 23 with 2700 views | Decoy_Octopus |
Prince Charles had it right when he ended his speech. What's the point of gaining extra wealth if all you can do is watch it burn in catastrophic conditions.
Why bother arguing over economics and what will make more money if the planet is b******d, where will people spend it? |  | | |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:23 - Jan 23 with 2665 views | Darth_Koont |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:15 - Jan 23 by Decoy_Octopus |
Prince Charles had it right when he ended his speech. What's the point of gaining extra wealth if all you can do is watch it burn in catastrophic conditions.
Why bother arguing over economics and what will make more money if the planet is b******d, where will people spend it? |
Agreed. Although IMO that doesn't really strike at the heart of the problem which is how people see themselves and their lives. In that sense, it's less about the end result which pretty much everyone says they want to avoid and more about the short-term sacrifice that almost no-one is willing to make.
I'm not hardcore enough myself and struggle with it. And the sacrifices I make are still about making me feel better about myself so I know deep down that they're not really sacrifices. | |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 12:00 - Jan 23 with 2559 views | Guthrum |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:14 - Jan 23 by Darth_Koont |
Indeed.
Funnily enough, I had a very similar discussion with my 77-year old Dad and 17-year old daughter at the weekend. I was in the middle trying to bring their different views together, her pushing the environment above all else and him pushing the economic growth angle. Friendly enough and I agreed with both but the sticking point was my Dad who couldn't consider solutions that limit growth as an option.
He's an ex-scientist and was talking about the dangers of greenhouse gases back in the mid-70s but his faith in the traditional economic model and that science would find a way meant that he couldn't agree that actual sacrifices might need to be made instead. Beyond us all recycling more and following the existing environmental regulations.
We got to the point where I was saying that we do make economic sacrifices when we go to war, and that should be how we consider the climate change issue. But he made the admittedly fair point that war is largely about maintaining and boosting trade and influence. In his mind, it's an impossible situation and we'll just have to wait for science to catch up.
I think that's the issue really. We've got too many people like Mnuchin who have ridden to the top of the current system and we need them to make the necessary changes. Or India or China or Brazil etc. who need to grow rapidly to compete on the terms we've set, and to keep continuing our own growth.
You're right that producers and consumers can make a difference by choosing "Green" but I think that's too little too late. It's predominantly a branding/market opportunity that only certain premium producers and consumers can adhere to - and ultimately they're almost all still beholden to shareholders to keep growing and the profits coming in for execs and shareholders.
The system itself is a train without brakes, even with increasing regulation, tech innovation and an voting population that starts electing more and more hardcore environmentalists into power. But that's all decades away for most countries. Which means that grassroots movements like Thunberg who can influence personal sacrifice on a global scale are needed. But also civil action/disobedience like Extinction Rebellion might well be the most viable option to kickstart the war that is needed. It worked for the civil rights movement despite the initial backlash. |
My feeling is that we're going to have to rely greatly on technological solutions (some of which already exist, just need further development). Merely reducing waste is not enough and moving beyond that into cutting useage is problematic without some way of reducing and/or relocating population (which, as things stand politically, would just result in major warfare) plus redistribution of resources. It's not as simple as just returning to some pre-industrial age (which was, in any case, not half so bucolic as some idealists portray it).
However, that is also one of the more exciting prospects. The idea of a "Green Industrial Revolution", with possibilities for investment, job creation and, yes, economic growth. | |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 12:30 - Jan 23 with 2491 views | BackToRussia |
Some people just want to see the world burn. Especially if they make a huge amount of money and they remain completed unaffected while it does so.
Funny that. |  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 12:35 - Jan 23 with 2476 views | Darth_Koont |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 12:00 - Jan 23 by Guthrum |
My feeling is that we're going to have to rely greatly on technological solutions (some of which already exist, just need further development). Merely reducing waste is not enough and moving beyond that into cutting useage is problematic without some way of reducing and/or relocating population (which, as things stand politically, would just result in major warfare) plus redistribution of resources. It's not as simple as just returning to some pre-industrial age (which was, in any case, not half so bucolic as some idealists portray it).
However, that is also one of the more exciting prospects. The idea of a "Green Industrial Revolution", with possibilities for investment, job creation and, yes, economic growth. |
Yes. I'm definitely sure technology will be at the heart of the long-term solution - and it is exciting to see how we get ready for that.
But not sure that resolves the short-term issues of say the next couple of decades. On a global scale, I think that'll need a shift in what we produce and consume and how much, not just improving the energy, emissions and waste needed to do that.
Simple things (though not for cattle farmers and many consumers) like perhaps taxing beef so that it becomes a limited luxury item and all the environmental costs are paid for up front. There can be a green tax on other goods too but that won't be anything like as high for the vast majority of other food stuffs. The irony is that cheap hamburgers etc. don't really even taste like proper beef so with the right economic incentives and alternatives it can't be that hard to change that mass behaviour. | |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:05 - Jan 23 with 2404 views | NthQldITFC |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:14 - Jan 23 by Darth_Koont |
Indeed.
Funnily enough, I had a very similar discussion with my 77-year old Dad and 17-year old daughter at the weekend. I was in the middle trying to bring their different views together, her pushing the environment above all else and him pushing the economic growth angle. Friendly enough and I agreed with both but the sticking point was my Dad who couldn't consider solutions that limit growth as an option.
He's an ex-scientist and was talking about the dangers of greenhouse gases back in the mid-70s but his faith in the traditional economic model and that science would find a way meant that he couldn't agree that actual sacrifices might need to be made instead. Beyond us all recycling more and following the existing environmental regulations.
We got to the point where I was saying that we do make economic sacrifices when we go to war, and that should be how we consider the climate change issue. But he made the admittedly fair point that war is largely about maintaining and boosting trade and influence. In his mind, it's an impossible situation and we'll just have to wait for science to catch up.
I think that's the issue really. We've got too many people like Mnuchin who have ridden to the top of the current system and we need them to make the necessary changes. Or India or China or Brazil etc. who need to grow rapidly to compete on the terms we've set, and to keep continuing our own growth.
You're right that producers and consumers can make a difference by choosing "Green" but I think that's too little too late. It's predominantly a branding/market opportunity that only certain premium producers and consumers can adhere to - and ultimately they're almost all still beholden to shareholders to keep growing and the profits coming in for execs and shareholders.
The system itself is a train without brakes, even with increasing regulation, tech innovation and an voting population that starts electing more and more hardcore environmentalists into power. But that's all decades away for most countries. Which means that grassroots movements like Thunberg who can influence personal sacrifice on a global scale are needed. But also civil action/disobedience like Extinction Rebellion might well be the most viable option to kickstart the war that is needed. It worked for the civil rights movement despite the initial backlash. |
I think that's a superb illustration of the situation, and the underlying fears, desires and delusions which drive people's visible attitudes. Thank you. [Post edited 23 Jan 2020 13:14]
|  |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:09 - Jan 23 with 2385 views | NthQldITFC |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 11:13 - Jan 23 by Guthrum |
I'm not having a go at economists, certainly not academic ones!
I'm pointing out the gulf between the likes of Mnuchin, Trump, Scott Morrison et al., who put growth and jobs in traditional industries ahead of climate action and the likes of Thunberg, Attenborough, etc., who go the other way, caring less about the short term effects upon people's lives (and livelihoods) of saving the planet. That is why they are at loggerheads and not on speaking terms (thus developing solutions becomes harder).
Tho I can't help feeling that reverting to naturally declining things such as coal mining for a short term jobs and earnings boost is the epitome of short sightedness. |
I think 'the epitome of short sightedness' is the epitome of an understatement! | |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:21 - Jan 23 with 2351 views | factual_blue |
How many times a day do people call him 'Munchkin', despite repeatedly saying to themselves 'don't call him Munchkin, don't call him Munchkin...'? |  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:28 - Jan 23 with 2328 views | r2d2 |
People might listen if she didnt look and dress like a 10 year old. She hardly commands the stage when she is on it. These powerful men arnt going to listen to someone who looks like they just crawled out a dustbin. |  | | |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:26 - Jan 23 with 2215 views | BlueBadger |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:28 - Jan 23 by r2d2 |
People might listen if she didnt look and dress like a 10 year old. She hardly commands the stage when she is on it. These powerful men arnt going to listen to someone who looks like they just crawled out a dustbin. |
In all afirness, Trumpy-wumpy writes and talks like a toddler. And idiots listen to hm. |  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:32 - Jan 23 with 2193 views | Darth_Koont |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:28 - Jan 23 by r2d2 |
People might listen if she didnt look and dress like a 10 year old. She hardly commands the stage when she is on it. These powerful men arnt going to listen to someone who looks like they just crawled out a dustbin. |
She has Asperger's.
It's the message, not how it's delivered. Although a teenage girl with Asperger's is what it has taken. | |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:43 - Jan 23 with 2173 views | Swansea_Blue |
Linking the two is exactly what’s been happening with carbon trading, etc. Granted, that mindset doesn’t often filter down to the public debate.
It seems a little bit like the Brexit argument to me. Deniers seem to only ever talk about the cost of environmental measures, but never the value of the benefits.
Years ago, I was slightly involved in one of the early legal cases brought by a developing country against the developed world, for compensation for natural disasters exacerbated by climate change. We were tasked with providing details on a particular hazard and the associated costs. Fiendishly complicated once the lawyers get involved; an interesting topic, but made incredibly dull at the same time (as only lawyers and accountants can manage - apologies to any lawyers/accountants!). [Post edited 23 Jan 2020 19:47]
|  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:49 - Jan 23 with 2156 views | vapour_trail |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 10:16 - Jan 23 by Guthrum |
I wasn't denigrating the study of economics.
I was using Mnuchin's comments as an illustration of the gulf between the climate movement and its chief critics. The fact he considers Thunberg an economic illiterate because she puts the environment before growth. This despite the potential economic effects of climate change (and opportunities in dealing with it, e.g. the development of renewables). [Post edited 23 Jan 2020 10:19]
|
Lowhouse took a sudden dislike for GT after she lunched with Corbyn. |  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:52 - Jan 23 with 2136 views | jeera |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:28 - Jan 23 by r2d2 |
People might listen if she didnt look and dress like a 10 year old. She hardly commands the stage when she is on it. These powerful men arnt going to listen to someone who looks like they just crawled out a dustbin. |
" She hardly commands the stage"
The kid has commanded the world stage in no small part for months. Christ, what do you want?
Aesthetics? Style over substance?
That certainly goes some way to explaining the voting patterns of the nation if that's how people think. |  |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:53 - Jan 23 with 2136 views | Darth_Koont |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:49 - Jan 23 by vapour_trail |
Lowhouse took a sudden dislike for GT after she lunched with Corbyn. |
To be fair, it doesn't really fit the Brexit Party/populist position he's arrived at.
Lowers will be selling guns to Indonesian warlords within 5 years. | |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:57 - Jan 23 with 2123 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 13:28 - Jan 23 by r2d2 |
People might listen if she didnt look and dress like a 10 year old. She hardly commands the stage when she is on it. These powerful men arnt going to listen to someone who looks like they just crawled out a dustbin. |
Notwithstanding her autism, which you may not have known about, her power isn’t based in convincing the men* in suits, but rather in reaching out to the electorate. They can’t control her messages, so they’ll be nervous about her impact.
*powerful women are also available | |
| |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:57 - Jan 23 with 2123 views | vapour_trail |
| Mnuchin's comment about Thunberg, on 19:32 - Jan 23 by Darth_Koont |
She has Asperger's.
It's the message, not how it's delivered. Although a teenage girl with Asperger's is what it has taken. |
There really is no point in bothering with the droid.
It has malfunctioned. It needs melting down (in a carbon neutral fashion). | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
