Simon

:lol:

That by his rhetoric it doesnt matter if its tables or papers - his idea is that more consumption will solve our problem with overconsumption that fuels deforestation. :cute:

Yes, and I did not say anything else. Maybe my meaning was ill-formatted.

So he is saying that without any financial gain from these trees we would then just destroy the forests for our own personal pleasure? Lets say that we didn't use any papers. Instead we cut down trees and forest to be able to build houses or chairs or tables etc. Then by his rhetoric this wouldn't be a problem because then more trees would be planted. The problem is that we consume too much paper. But you cant solve consumption with even more consumption.

Friday is the last day to voice your opinion on whether the EPA -- the Environmental Protection Agency -- should regulate carbon dioxide pollution, the primary cause of the climate crisis. This is a big deal. The EPA is taking public comment, before making a ruling. Of course, special interests -- like the oil and coal lobbies -- are working overtime to defeat a positive ruling and have already gotten thousands of comments submitted in opposition. Most people don't know about this opportunity for public comment, so your voice can make a real difference. And with a new president in the White House, it's likely that someone will actually be listening. Submit your public comment to the EPA here: http://www.RepowerAmerica.org/EPA In April 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide if it is harming our health and welfare. After more than a year of delay, the EPA is finally now requesting public comments on whether carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping pollutants are endangering our health and our climate. Join us, and send a message about how crucial it is to reduce harmful carbon dioxide pollution. That you expect the EPA to use its powers to protect our health and welfare. That we can "Repower America" by using energy sources that don't emit carbon dioxide, and make the switch to 100% clean electricity. And that the solutions to the climate crisis are the same ones needed to address our economic and security challenges. This is our chance to go on the public record -- all the comments will be posted on the EPA's website. To post your public comment, just go here. For nearly eight years, the Bush administration has done nothing to address the growing threats we face from global warming. Hurricanes are getting stronger, the North polar icecap is melting, and we've suffered through intense droughts, floods and killer heat waves. The deadline is November 28th. Let's help end the era of delay. Thanks, Cathy Zoi CEO www.RepowerAmerica.org

Obama has announced that he will create a new insitution to battle the economic crisis, while saying that "help is on the way". And the new bailout in the USA alone will cost more than the Marshall Plan, NASA, Vietnam War... So. Where is the new institution that will tackle the climate crisis? And where is the green bailout that will help us and the planet from total destruction? Why are we in the face of total planetary destruction still seeing this complete inaction and complete lack of understanding of the worst crisis ever created by man? I dont understand. :o

I still dont get it. Just because we dont use any paper ( ) doesn't mean that we won't care about the forests and plant more trees. Maybe in his eyes trees becomes worthless and deserves no attention if we cant make any money from them. Sure, industrial tree plantations doesn't have to mean that our forests turns into deserts. But you cant compare them to old-growth forests and their diversity. And industrial tree logging have huge impacts on forests. Just take Sweden as an example. In the early days our forest contained a wide variety of different trees. Back then the most common tree grown in our forests was the pine tree, among others. These days, after industrial tree logging, our Swedish forests are sterile and the more valueable (for the loggers) spruce tree has now almost completely taken over.

It's also worth noting that during the Soviet Union era they passed some of the most advanced environmental protection laws in the whole world. And ecologically the Soviet Union pioneered in various forms of environmental reforms and policies. Unfortunately when Stalin and his Stalinist bureaucracy came in power in the 30's these laws and policies were in practice disregarded and unenforced because the capitalistic goal of expending production. Instead of communistic capitalism we need to transform our societies into eco-socialistic civilizations with a fair and even global developement. Capitalism turns humans from free subjects into objects defined by their capacity to work and consume. Capitalism is all about the generating more money above anything else. I don't know about you, but that is greed for me. And these failed auto companies is a perfect example of greed. They got this coming. They deserve it. Let's not ease their pain or try to prolong their impending death. We got better things to do.

Ah yes. Enjoying the seasons by fueling the destruction of it by decorating your house into an energy-wasting-airport-runway kind of way. :cute:

I have to say I still dont understand his point of view. So he says that if we continue to use more paper more trees will be planted. And if we dont use more paper we will loose more trees? Huh how does that work! Also, industrial tree plantations (that this really are) are biological and genetic deserts when you compared them to the rich natural forests. The variety of plants, animals, insects and fungi is minimized in an industrial tree plantations. And the floor is almost barren in comparision to an old-growth forest's lush carpet of vegetation. And the trees are only viewed as a mere commodity and so natural diversity is destroyed in the hunt for more and more profits. Like I said before. This is just bullshit. :ph34r:

True, but better is not to buy any at all. We dont need more pointless light pollution! :cute:

First of all, it's not the workers fault that GM and the other failed auto companies are in this mess. So why should they have to lower their salaries, when their FAILED bosses makes $8000 every hour and can keep all their 8 personal company jets? Don't blame this mess on the unions or the workers. Instead blame should be directed at the rich ("capitalistic pigs") bullys that think they can get away with all of this without even making a single personal sacrifice. And to answer Mountainhiker. Of course this is capitalism's fault! Capitalism cannot exist without constantly expanding the scale of production and income. And any interruption in this process will take the form of an economic crisis. So capitalism is greed. And greed is capitalism. Henry Ford II once explained why the US automakers prefer to make gas-guzzling cars, he simply stated that "minicars make miniprofits". And John Z. DeLorean, former GM executive, have said that: "When we should have beeen planning switches to smaller, more fuel-efficient, lighter cars in the late 1960s in response to a growing demand in the marketplace, GM management refused because 'we make more money on big cars' ". Now back then people already knew how stupid and inneficient private motorism was. But they all ignored it because otherwise their profits wouldn't be so high. Bradford Snell once stated in a famous report to a US Senate committe that: "motor vehicle travel is possibly the most inefficient method of transportation devised by modern man." But nevertheless the central US national transportation policy during most of the twentieth century has been a corporate strategy geared towards the high profits that comes with private motorism. Wasteful federal fundings for highways has been added with declining government subsidies for public transportation. And its not just the US government that should be blamed here. GM and the other major auto companies in USA deliberately dismantled US earlier mass transportation system. GM and the others (also with the help from Standard Oil and Firestone Tire) systematically bought up many of US electric streetcar lines and converting them to busses. As a result the number of streetcar lines dropped from 40000 in 1936 to 5000 in 1955. At the same time GM used it monopolistic control over bus production and the production of locomotives to ensure the growing displacement of bus and rail traffic by private motorism. They essentially undercut themselves in intercity mass transit in order to make higher profits off increased private motorism. And so USA today have to rely more than any other country in the world on private motorism and trucks for the ground transport of people and goods (with disastrous consequenses for the environment). Private motorism today in US account for the insanse 90% of all travels.

You are calling me ignorant? If there is someone here who should be called ignorant its the rich bullies that think they can get away with all of this without even making a single personal sacrifice. These failed bosses will continue to run their failed companies and continue to make $8000 every hour and can keep all their 8 personal company jets. And the workers and the ordinary people will always bear the burden. But nothing will change to the better if we allow these "foot-dragging, planet-eating spongers" to continue. Henry Ford II once explained why the US automakers prefer to make gas-guzzling cars, he simply stated that "minicars make miniprofits". And John Z. DeLorean, former GM executive, have said that: "When we should have been planning switches to smaller, more fuel-efficient, lighter cars in the late 1960s in response to a growing demand in the marketplace, GM management refused because 'we make more money on big cars' ". Now back then people already knew how stupid and inefficient private motorism was. But they all ignored it because otherwise their profits wouldn't be so high. Bradford Snell once stated in a famous report to a US Senate committee that: "motor vehicle travel is possibly the most inefficient method of transportation devised by modern man." But nevertheless the central US national transportation policy during most of the twentieth century has been a corporate strategy geared towards the high profits that comes with private motorism. Wasteful federal funding for highways has been added with declining government subsidies for public transportation. And its not just the US government that should be blamed here. GM and the other major auto companies in USA deliberately dismantled US earlier mass transportation system. GM and the others (also with the help from Standard Oil and Firestone Tire) systematically bought up many of US electric streetcar lines and converting them to busses. As a result the number of streetcar lines dropped from 40000 in 1936 to 5000 in 1955. At the same time GM used it monopolistic control over bus production and the production of locomotives to ensure the growing displacement of bus and rail traffic by private motorism. They essentially undercut themselves in intercity mass transit in order to make higher profits off increased private motorism. And so USA today have to rely more than any other country in the world on private motorism and trucks for the ground transport of people and goods (with disastrous consequences for the environment). Private motorism today in US account for the insane 90% of all travels. These ignorant car companies don’t deserve the people’s money. Let's not waste our money on easing their pain. It will just prolong their pending death. But sure, I agree with you that if we weren't in this financial crisis, created by the capitalistic greed that exists in these failed auto companies, the choice here would be so much easier.

No, you still dont get it. The problem is not that GM and the other failed auto companies pay their employees reasonable salaries. It's because they make gas-guzzling cars that no one wants to buy. You can't make any money if you can't sell the things you make. If there is anyone in GM and the other auto companies that should get their salaries cut, based on their work and results, it's the people who run them.

Looks good, and I do have a pack of chickpeas laying around here. Thanks! :)

No no no. It's not the workers or the unions fault. The problem is that these company leaders are too dumb and too expensive for their company. These auto companies are not failing because the others have a cheaper workforce. They are failing because they make stupid gas-guzzling cars that no one wants to buy.

Well, I wouldn't say the whole UN has a "fuzzy vision". And remember, UN is made out of its members. And if UN is losing "credibility" that is mainly because of it's members, i.e, USA, Russia, etc. So the ones really losing "credibility" are the different countries in the world that no longer care about UN's core values and ideas. The UN is just as strong and just as weak as it's members are.

True, but with McBush they would have an easier time to reach their goals.

"Until they show us the plan, we cannot show them the money," Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said at a hastily called news conference in the Capitol. Oh yeah! Now, how likely is it that these failed auto companies will come up with any plan assuring the money would make them economically viable?

I have not yet read the whole article, so maybe I shouldn't even comment? Either way here comes a few quick thoughts: 1. It's local - and not global (and so far not an recurring event). 2. Are we talking about young or old ice here? The older ice is thicker and contains less salt than younger ice does. That means they can last longer during warmer periods. 3. It's Alaska - home of Palin the climate denier and oil industry. :cute:

I dont really know if you can call an organization which purpose is to promote the use of nuclear energy as a "credible source" when it comes to the Chernobyl disaster. :cute:

The estimated tax above are VAT charges. In Sweden, VAT is split into three levels: 25% for most goods and services including restaurants bills, 12% for foods (incl. bring home from restaurants) and hotel stays (but breakfast at 25%) and 6% for printed matter, cultural services, and transport of private persons. Some services are not taxable for example education of children and adults if public utility, and health and dental care, but education is taxable at 25% in case of courses for adults at a private school. Dance events (for the guests) have 25%, concerts and stage shows have 6%, and some types of cultural events have 0%. Now wouldn't a game from Steam fall into the cultural services and products category, with only 6% VAT charges? :huh:

Indeed, those pictures do look goodie. But I wonder how they tastes like. :cute:

Ah so I thought. Well, it is easy to mix those two countries togheter ;)