The three presidential candidates, actually all of Congress, in fact, pretty much all of us, miss the point: We talk about the economy, the mortgage crisis, the war, illegal immigrants, and numerous other serious, but not world ending, issues. The most demanding, most pressing problems of the time go virtually unmentioned:
1. We have got to get rid of all nuclear weapons. Starting with the U.S. All other countries must than follow. This is way too damn risky. One mistake, one gung-ho idiot with an itchy trigger finger, and it's all over.
2. We have to stop global warming. There are no if's, and's, or but's about this. There is no liberal conspiracy. This is a winner take all, or lose all, proposition. Our reliance on fossil fuels has to end. The oil companies and coal companies have made enough. It's either get with it, or parish.
3. Population growth has to be controlled, There are too many of us. Six billion and counting. Number two cannot be accomplished unless the population is controlled.
4. We have to give attention to other environmental issues, like the oceans, the coral reefs, the forests, soil, right down to the flora and fauna. We cannot keep destroying these things in the name of profit and consumerism. Our children, their children, and their children's children deserve better.
If we don't get these four things under control, and fairly soon, nothing else will matter.
|
"Number two cannot be accomplished unless the population is controlled."
What does population control have to do with taking a crap?
I'm not sure how you're tying in crapping with global warming, but I suppose 6 billion people crapping could cause some heat.
You know the difference between Number One and Number Two, don't you?
I got you. That went right over my head.
It would take China or Russia about one second after we got rid of our weapons to BLOW us out of existance.
number 2. How do you propose we stop global warming.? Most of global warming is caused by Deforestation in South America and coal mining in China. How do you make these counties stop doing that.?
number 3. Are you suggesting population control? That was tried by China, not very succesful.
number 4. environmental issues.?
What would be your suggestions as to how to accomplish any of these four suggestions.??
These are good suggestions, but how would you accomplish this.??
Check out my post on the world food crisis.
Very good points. These are difficult questions. That's why they need to be talked about. No talk, no action. Nuclear weapons were a bad idea. As it works out, we are the only country that has ever used them, and we insist other countries not have them. That is a debate we will never win. We need to start getting rid of ours, giving other countries the incentive to get rid of theirs. The greenhouse effect is also a very complicated issue. Coal burning facilities are on the rise, particularly in underdeveloped countries. More population, more greenhouse effect. The two are tied together. China has had some moderate success in population control. How to keep people from screwing is a difficult task. It seems to happen so quickly!
You have probably seen the figures by now: the price of rice has risen by three-quarters in the past year, that of wheat by 130%(1). There are food crises in 37 countries. One hundred million people, according to the World Bank, could be pushed into deeper poverty by the high prices(2). But I bet you have missed the most telling statistic. At 2.1bn tonnes, last year’s global grain harvest broke all records(3). It beat the previous year’s by almost 5%. The crisis, in other words, has begun before world food supplies are hit by climate change. If hunger can strike now, what will happen if harvests decline?
There is plenty of food. It is just not reaching human stomachs. Of the 2.13bn tonnes likely to be consumed this year, only 1.01bn, according to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), will feed people(4).
I am sorely tempted to write another column about biofuels. From this morning all sellers of transport fuel in the United Kingdom will be obliged to mix it with ethanol or biodiesel made from crops. The World Bank points out that “the grain required to fill the tank of a sports utility vehicle with ethanol … could feed one person for a year”(5). Last year global stockpiles of cereals declined by around 53m tonnes(6); this gives you a rough idea of the size of the hunger gap. The production of biofuels this year will consume almost 100m tonnes(7), which suggests that they are directly responsible for the current crisis. In the Guardian yesterday the transport secretary Ruth Kelly promised that “if we need to adjust policy in the light of new evidence, we will.”(8) What new evidence does she require? In the midst of a global humanitarian crisis, we have just become legally obliged to use food as fuel. It is a crime against humanity in which every driver in this country has been forced to participate.
Take care.
Lulublue
Sweden is raked #1 for "greenness". The U.S. is ranked #66. Sweden also outscores us when people attempt to rank democracy. The highest I have ever seen us is around #15. We're not near as great as we think we are.
Yeah. Rather than bee's wax, it's bull wax. And lots of it.
Good post. Thanks.
Lulublue