Quote from: Zarathustra on June 18, 2015, 02:22:03 PM

Quote from: vokain on June 18, 2015, 02:17:10 PM

Quote from: Zarathustra on June 18, 2015, 02:12:03 PM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on June 18, 2015, 12:34:16 PM

And you are incorrect to assume that Zaradude was arguing about environment. He is not.

I was arguing about the climate of the environment, just as Nassim Taleb:

But the skepticism about models that I propose does not lead to the same conclusions as the ones endorsed by anti-environmentalists, pro-market fundamentalists, quite the contrary: we need to be hyper-conservationists ecologically, super-Green, since we do not know what we are harming with now.

I think we can all agree that "green initiatives" can lead to greater environmental harm through subsidies and waste, and that systems like carbon credits probably serve to enrich and empower such regulators, but it is still crucially importantly to be aware of our individual and collective impact upon Mother Earth (for example, realizing everything's means to their ends) regardless of said political pandering.

I think we can all agree that Nassim Taleb is saying: We should not enrich the atmosphere with additional carbon, since we do not know the result of such crazy experiments.

I'm behind you 100% but who is "We" in the statement above. We is not you and me it's the central controllers, who arguably are corrupted by TPTB. its not that we need to convince the central controllers to manage how we pollution by electing a centralized authority. that idea is now broken. But that we need the correct incentives to pollute sustainably.

the problem is real when you look at the science I was a skeptic well over a decade ago until a simple experiment proved it empirically and changed my viewpoint, basically that Co2 absorbs infrared energy and then radiates the stored energy over time.

the problem is not that the managers are doing a bad job managing Co2 or any pollutants for that matter the real problem is economic. We need 3% exponential economic growth every year to stay flush, this results in an acceleration of the consumption of raw materials, and benefits those who consume the most resources before inflation so they can profit off consumer spending post inflation. We can thank Milton Friedman for the idea.

The thing the managers fear the most is deflation, in a deflation scenario deferred consumption is rewarded. this mode of being would drastically reduce pollution and the exploration of natural resources.
the solution is very different from what we have now, and the change is something we ether embrace or gets forced on us, our managers (the controllers who should be defining a sustainable system) are just shuffling deck chars on the titanic. TPTB_need_war, types are just messing up the water for the rest of us so the actual PTB can maintain control.

our environmental problems are not so much a byproduct of progress, but a byproduct of a sick economic system. if we the collective who need the environment all made sacrifices without correcting the economic problem, the cancer would just grow to consume what we don't. the idea of cap and trade is also a faker it's worse than the money problem because financial institutions can manipulate carbon credits into existence.

The People's Cap-And-Trade by James D'Angelo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCtf9eumuhU is the first proposal I think has merit in reducing unsustainable ecological impact - Bitcoin being the first.