• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

Yep, capitalism = Greed and profit. I just don't see how we save the planet in the long term with the world's economic model and growing population.
The point of corporations is to treat large businesses as if they are people.
If so, they should mostly be institutionalised as sociopaths, and most of them locked up as mass murderers.
 
The point of corporations is to treat large businesses as if they are people.
If so, they should mostly be institutionalised as sociopaths, and most of them locked up as mass murderers.

Who the founders and directors? Or shareholders of major Corps and businesses be institutionalised? That's how massive corporations get away with it at the moment.

We are all part of the same hypocrisy. Our pension funds are invested within these massive corporations.

The population of the world is growing and the need to keep feeding them and supporting an ageing population in western countries.

It's a diametrically opposed thinking we have. The hiding of wealth part of human greed and nature by those who have wealth.

How we as a planet can agree to a long term global solution to climate change, with these diametrically opposed interests, I have no idea. I just don't see it happening unless total catastrophe forces global leaders and corporations to adapt and change.
 
I especially agree with this one about capitalism, I honestly don't believe there can be anything such as sustainable capitalism and responsible capitalism. Ultimately capitalism is about greed and profit. It is about always have more and sustainability will require some level of reduction where necessary when there are shortages. Simply I believe that some people might try to practise sustainable and responsible capitalism, but at some point they will be forced to choose between profits and sustainability and at that point there is only going to be one winner.

This is tripe.

Fundementally, the long term preservation of profits neccesitate environmental sustainability, so if your assertion that greed is the driving factor is true, capitalism will also be a driving force in the long term fight against climate change.

https://www.adamsmith.org/research/its-easy-being-green - the link at the top for the full paper, it's a good read
 
Fundementally, the long term preservation of profits for tobacco companies neccesitate not killing your customers with cancer.
And yet here we are.
Almost like it's too ingrained (and too late0 to do anything about it.
 
This is tripe.

Fundementally, the long term preservation of profits neccesitate environmental sustainability, so if your assertion that greed is the driving factor is true, capitalism will also be a driving force in the long term fight against climate change.

https://www.adamsmith.org/research/its-easy-being-green - the link at the top for the full paper, it's a good read
Not against Nuclear being part of the overall solution to UK energy capacity but the link Dodges the question of how to long term dispose of nuclear waste in the long term which is one of the objections to nuclear energy.
 
This is tripe.

Fundementally, the long term preservation of profits neccesitate environmental sustainability, so if your assertion that greed is the driving factor is true, capitalism will also be a driving force in the long term fight against climate change.

https://www.adamsmith.org/research/its-easy-being-green - the link at the top for the full paper, it's a good read
You need to go work for some large cooperation's (and even smaller ones) they all pay lip service to long terms plans in favour of the short term and looking after the share price in the present. And its make sense most senior management not the top are looking for their next foothold in the ladder not the long term outcomes of the team. They are hyper focused on the short term because that's what they are being assessed by and will make the determination if their career progresses or stagnates. Most people are spending a small number of years in a position before moving onto the next one this has been compounded by retention being poor to what it once was because in term of real advancement and wage increases its better to leave your current company than to stay with the one you already belong to.

I have zero trust on the follow through to any long term plans because of how often I've seen short term companies shoot themselves in the foot so figures look good for shareholders.

This isn't an anti-capitalism rant just when faced with reality its failings are all too apparent in this kind of case. The same could be said for full blow communism.

In these areas government regulation always works better because even if it is more prudent for business to conduct certain practices they'll only do it if they have to.
 
This is tripe.

Fundementally, the long term preservation of profits neccesitate environmental sustainability, so if your assertion that greed is the driving factor is true, capitalism will also be a driving force in the long term fight against climate change.

https://www.adamsmith.org/research/its-easy-being-green - the link at the top for the full paper, it's a good read
I might get time to read the whole paper at some point but based on the summary I don't see how you get to a conclusion that capitalism is the solution to climate change.

First let's start with long-term preservation of profits. Yes, technically you are right, but very few if any companies at all are looking so long term in regards to sustainability. We are talking decades, not years. Climate change is not going to suddenly create a mass extinction event like in 'The Day after Tomorrow'. Yes companies are slowly becoming greener, but not to the extent needed and only so long as profit margins aren't lost. It's why environmentally friendly initiatives and products like electric cars have taken so long to develop, because companies only do it when it is financially viable.

Now in the summary it starts with innovation, yes capitalism and investment does drive innovation, especially cost reduction. However, this links to the next point, which is that the market system leads to good stewardship. (Bullshit) as the article I linked showed, companies exploit until resources dry up then move on. Look at the amazon, despite a few attempts, more and more trees are lost every year and not replaced. In the long term this will be a disaster and destroy the ecosystem of the rainforest if it continues. That is not good stewardship. On top it says it leads to producing more and wasting less. Yes you waste less, but overall production doesn't lower. If you save on resources, you don't leave those resources there, you just use them to make more. This argument is flawed, because it implies that resources are not used, when they will be used, just for in something else. As for the protection of land and resources, I imagine they go into more detail in the main paper, but any protection is only to allow exploitation later. The implication that companies protect land and resources to preserve them is nonsense.

Now the point about socialism failing. This is one of the most pathetic arguments relating to capitalism. "Well socialism and communism don't work." It's a flawed argument and the same one the conservatives have been using. It's the argument of, "well here is an example of something worse, so ours must be good." Just because you are not the worst, doesn't make you good. The implication that capitalism must be the solution because other models and systems have failed previously is ridiculous. it also shuts down any conversation for trying to learn from the past and develop different newer systems that could be better.

Now as to the 3 main points. Well yes nuclear energy could help relieve the reliance on fossil fuels. As @The_Blindside said though it ignores the issue of nuclear waste over the long term. The paper assumes that nuclear energy is a magic bullet and there is no evidence to say it definitely is. On top while Britain itself might be safe for reactors. Japan has shown there are places that aren't safe and climate change is not a UK issue, but a global issue. The world needs to develop safe, renewable energy sources, which this paper doesn't answer. Next carbon tax. Well that's just taxing coal to make it less financially viable. Not sure how that is the market being good for the environment because the proposal is essentially using taxation as a way of regulating the industry and that is actually more socialism than capitalism, because if it was capitalism then you wouldn't have any regulations at all. So number 2 for me is not a benefit of a market economy as it is about central government restricting one area of the market intentionally, not letting it develop independently through the market which is what this paper is trying to suggest should happen. Finally clean free trade. Again I'd probably need to read in detail to find the nuance of their argument, but it seems strange that the solution to high carbon footprints is to import rather than develop methods to lower the carbon footprint of products made in the UK. This is especially confusing when apparently "The market system naturally drives towards good environmental stewardship — through the profit mechanism that rewards innovation that produces more using less resources and waste". Surely if this were the case we wouldn't have to rely on importing because while importing in some circumstance may have a lower carbon footprint, transportation still does have a high carbon footprint and so is not a long term solution, especially not until transportation stops using fossil fuels. Further once restrictions are removed then production would probably be scaled up and that would likely increase the carbon footprint making the whole situation redundant.

Also nowhere does this paper mention the issue of overpopulation which is a huge issue. A capitalist, market economy that caters to consumers demands can only react one way to this. More.

Basically none of this convinces me that capitalism and a market economy is good for solving climate change. Yes it can help and maybe even have some impact, but ultimately, it can't solve the problem, because it is the problem. Capitalism is the exploitation of resources for profit. While companies can get more efficient at exploiting they cannot stop and that's the point. At some point humans will need to choose to stop exploiting certain resources in order to preserve the planet and needing to make a profit will always be counter intuitive to that.
 
If you can keep your job when all around you
Lies ravaged from what it is you've done;
If intellect and common sense confound you
And if integrity you have but none;
If you can lie and not be tired of lying,
And pretend you act for the public good,
But then leave the people to their dying
And say you did, sadly, all you could;

If you can dream – of nothing more than power;
If you can think – but only of yourself;
If you believe this country's finest hour
Is when the chosen few can gain more wealth;
If you can flout the law with bluff and bluster,
And not care whether you are believed,
Or deny with scorn every single blunder
And not care how many you may deceive;

If you can stir up hatred, fear and violence
To create division to suit your ends;
And answer cries for help with silence,
And then laugh about it with your friends;
If you can stretch this country to its limit
Or until it is you've had your fun,
Yours is this land and everything that's in it,
And – as you wished – you'll be PM, my son.

Brian Bilston
 
Plus it's going g to be hard to yell project fear and sunlit uplands after us.



Why is the pig cull not getting any news?
 
I was really furious when I just heard it :mad: I don't know any [adequate] Pole who would be for "Polexit". All my Polish relatives, friends and acquaintances are strongly against it and most of them are strongly against PiS party (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_and_Justice ). I remember, when I just moved to Poland, my Polish relatives told me that it was a "crap party" and later I understood why and now also strongly dislike them as well as I dislike a current Polish leader(also for personal reasons). Last elections I've regretted I couldn't have voted (for Rafał Trzaskowski, current Mayor of Warsaw https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafał_Trzaskowski ) because I didn't have a Polish citizenship that time. But next elections I'll definitely vote :mad:
 
I was really furious when I just heard it :mad: I don't know any [adequate] Pole who would be for "Polexit". All my Polish relatives, friends and acquaintances are strongly against it and most of them are strongly against PiS party
Should say don't read into this too much if my friends/collegue circle was anything to by Britain would of voted 95% to remain in the EU.
 
FBSi8JWXEAATIH_
 

Latest posts

Top