9 Comments so far

1. rkymtnwest99 February 23rd, 2007 6:08 pm

   I’d settle first for getting control of our government back and for stopping the ongoing murder in the name of American capitalism — THEN we can start talking about changing the way a planet behaves.

   Don’t be silly. First things first.

2. Independent Thinker February 23rd, 2007 7:19 pm

   Too little, too late.

3. orbit7er February 23rd, 2007 10:09 pm

   Americans just do not get it.
   They are blinded by their auto addiction.
   Jeffrey Sachs and so many others crow about
   “30 %” energy savings from more fuel efficient
   cars. That will get us nowhere…by the time
   we reach that point the number of autos will have increased almost that much.
   The US uses 3 times the energy per capita of
   Western Europe or Japan. The major contributor to that difference is the private automobile.
   If the US stopped the continuing exurban sprawl and promoted mass transit we could save not 30% on transportation efficiency but 80-90%.
   Stopping global warming will mean SERIOUS changes such as an increase in gas tax to where gas costs $5 per gallon or more. Investing that money NOT in endless highway expansion and suburban sprawl but in mass transit and livable, walkable communities.
   But that takes time.
   Here in the NY-NJ area they are finally talking about building a second rail tunnel to Manhattan. Unfortunately it will not be completed for 10 years.
   But this change will not be a sacrifice in the long run. Nearly everyone I speak with who has been to Europe loves their transit systems, frequent train service that works, and concentrated livable and walkable communities.
   I do not know for the nation but for New Jersey even with our mass transit transportation accounts for 50% of greenhouse gases. Of that not doubt 95% is cars and trucks. If you want to solve a problem you need to go to the biggest piece.
   The auto addiction is it in this country.
   Wake up!
   Hybrid cars will not dent this problem enough to save us.

4. John Sullivan February 24th, 2007 1:52 pm

   Yet another article on global warming without any mention of overpopulation. This planet cannot be saved unless the birth rate declines to negative population growth.

5. Jeremy Wells February 24th, 2007 3:16 pm

   Decider Bush and the PNAC gang have long decided to refuse to do anything about global warming if profits and power are in anyway diminished. They also realize that that population reduction is best effected by “acts of God” such as Katrina.

   What we are seeing globally and in U.S. is the genocide of the unprofitable. If you as an individual can’t generate a profit as a consumer (privatized health care). You can’t afford profit inflated health insurance? You die!

   As a nation: let us take your resources so our corporations will profit or you will be economically or militarily destroyed.

   The only solution possible… which the people of Venezuela now realize… that capitalism must be destroyed before everyone who is not a millionaire is destroyed.

   To summarize:

   SOCIALISM FOR SURVIVAL!

   Human life and progress is possible only in a world that is ecologically sustainable and in which the global economy is democratically based to provide for universal human needs.

   For centuries capitalist greed has been the motivating force behind slavery, racism, genocide, colonialism, and world wars. Today, with global warming, the U.S. corporate ruling elite threatens to destroy the entire planet to maximize greed and profit for itself. The natural and economic resources essential to the vast majority of peoples for survival are being exploited and privatized for the greed and profit of a few.

   The 500 year reign of barbaric capitalism must end now if humanity is to survive this century.

6. Robert Settgast February 24th, 2007 9:58 pm

   GLOBAL WARMING REMISS
   It is remarkable that it took the Al Gore’s documentary “Inconvenient Truth”, and now the polar bear demise, to alert many to the impending dangers from global warming–which has been obvious to anyone who had made even minor efforts to be informed.

   The evidence linking carbon pollution to warming is as close to certain as science can be. Its causes, consequences, and mitigation requirements have been documented by the scientific community, many dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists, and chronicled in the press for years.

   The dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data used by this administration to conceal and derail corrective measures for this threat and other vital environmental reforms has also been apparent. Contrary to their assertions, measures to reduce greenhouse gases could only improve our economy by lessening our trade deficits, and improving our security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil. We could also regain some of our lost world respect that has resulted from our opposition Kyoto while arrogantly contributing disproportionately to carbon pollution. With our involvement, China & India could then be compelled to join the rest of the developed world.

   Often overlooked is the fact that the same measures needed to mitigate global warming would be necessary even if it were not an issue. Conservation, alternative energy development, anti- pollution refinements, etc are essential for other vital environmental reforms such as air and water quality, reductions in toxic waste generation, land preservation, etc.

   The environmental and social damage from our indifference to (and even denial of) carbon pollution and its effects can only worsen if we allow these destructive policies of this reckless and unlearned president and his financial supporters to continue.
   Robert Settgast
   San Rafael, CA
   rhsettgast@hotmail.com

7. rtdrury February 25th, 2007 2:08 am

   The above posts are right on target. Global warming is one of several catastrophic results of laissez-faire capitalism, where all social concern are cast aside as industrialists take control over markets, governments and people forthe sake of profit. The potential of the individual is not tapped in such a scenario. Natural public filtering/cleansing of policy is not applied. Obviously, a society under such assault falls far short of its potential. Apologists for laissez-faire capitalism point out the incompetence and corruption in government regulation of markets while failing to point out the much greater incompetence and corruption by producers that manipulate/control markets.

   The waste and misallocation of resources by such producers is astounding. Consider that two thirds of all fossil fuel extracted has been wasted by these producers. Provided an objective view of reality, the public becomes the much wiser allocator of resources because the public is very good at identifying and rejecting recklessness and wastefulness. The best public policy is to greatly reduce the laissez-faire element. The best way is for the people to cultivate their individual and local self-sufficiency and take civic responsibility. Self-sufficiency is easy. Grow your own food and build your own shelter. Trade only with the locals, eliminate debt/taxes. This reduces power concentration/abuse. Civic responsibility requires developing an objective view of reality and doing one’s part to ensure that public policy serves the public interest. The best approach seems to be conditional engagement with government. When it serves your interests, engage. And when it doesn’t, disengage. The same holds for any institution or organization. Prevent them from exploiting you. There are many side benefits.

   Americans have great difficulty accepting responsibility for their federal government’s errant behavior. No surprise, because Americans were taught to deny their civic responsibility and focus on consumption. This was required by laissez-faire capitalists to achieve their power agendas, which fuel global warming and resource wars, and destroy the rule of law. Americans have only a foggy notion that their prosperity is leeched away by the capitalist hierarchy and its bogus enterprises. Irresponsible laissez-faire schemes include consumption growth for the sake of profit, enabling grotesque inefficiencies, in energy conversion and most everywhere else. Another example of such squander is in the inputs (fuel, labor, heavy machinery and concrete) to freeway shipping, with terrible overall value compared to rail freight. By pursuing industrial efficiencies, we not only reduce environmental impact but we also free ourselves from unnecessary slavery so we have more time for education and civic responsibility, to build a more just and prosperous society.

   Someone posted that hybrid cars are not going to put a dent in global warming. True, but we never expected them to. Instead, we apply common sense efficiencies in the entire energy chain. The most efficient approaches, e.g. rail transport, must be subsidized. Consumption tax is needed to minimize mass squandering of resources. In theory these two elements could be integrated into the market by educating and empowering the people to make market demands in society’s better interests. This approach is highly preferable because we want markets to be functional, in general, for obvious reasons. When people need personal transport, the engines should be series diesel electric hybrid. They go three times farther on a unit of fuel than gasoline direct drive and may be built in small local shops. The biodiesel should be produced from high yield oil trees with permaculture methods on local farms. Its production cost is 1/10 that of gasoline after accounting for the oil wars paid for by taxation on working Americans. These trees sequester carbon, with many additional benefits, and are highly space/resource efficient, extremely so compared to laissez-faire capitalist agriculture. Renewable sources, electric/thermal cogeneration, and halt to pork-barrel road construction are additional elements in a sound energy policy. We want to eliminate the resource wars, the waste, destruction and enslavement. Strong local economies with fully engaged citizens, free from enslavement to far-flung capital, is the answer.

   As one poster said, the reign of capitalism has spanned several centuries, and terrible wars and massive oppression have been perpetrated by capitalists growing and protecting markets and stealing and controlling resources. None of it is necessary for the people’s prosperity. The people should achieve and maintain full control over market demand, resource allocations and public policy. Our reward will be full prosperity on 15 hour work weeks, a clean, thriving environment, and maximum peace, justice, and security for all.

8. bnwakuxuvuci December 12th, 2007 10:06 am

   titvowowanevy…

   exxynorivani…

9. bnxatezuvazy January 1st, 2008 8:02 am

   titpukusowute…

   exhaxewitezi…

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)