Jump to content

Hidden Danger in our daily world

Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Keep in mind that companies, organizations and governments work on a longer time scale than citizens do. The problems of the previous generations for us are not our priorities, we weren't there, and we are quite likely not even aware of them. Of course that means that any group with even the most basic mission plan can get what they want so long as they can stall for time.

 

And yes, indifference. The tried and true medicine for which is loss.

 

Yes, now that you mention it, it is a problem too that we tend to repeat the

same mistakes the last generation already repeated. We could use a

genetical memory or should just listen to what the old fools have to say. ;)

 

I did not really meant a time scale as 'big' as generations though.

More like a few years at maximum.

For example: election/voting of parties.

We always vote for the same few parties and swap them every four years

after the previous one fucked it up again (as they always do it or at least

to us pawns it looks like they do), just to elect them again after their

successor did the exact same thing, again. :?

Share this post


Link to post

I think these types of things should be controlled by the government and not be private.

 

For instance like in World War 2 when car companies were controlled by the government for the better, so I think for safety it's best that resource and manufacturing companies should be controlled by the government or forced to make better environment friendly decisions.

"When a son is born, the father will go up to the newborn baby, sword in hand; throwing it down, he says, "I shall not leave you with any property: You have only what you can provide with this weapon."

Share this post


Link to post
I think these types of things should be controlled by the government and not be private.

 

For instance like in World War 2 when car companies were controlled by the government for the better, so I think for safety it's best that resource and manufacturing companies should be controlled by the government or forced to make better environment friendly decisions.

 

I don't think that would work in today's world. Governments aren't much different from the companies that pay for their campaigns.

Share this post


Link to post

Behind companies are people.

And behind governments are people too.

It comes pretty much to the same, both extremes, power only for

the government or power only for 'private people' would not work

because there will always be someone misusing the power for

their own good only.

A balance should do it, what was it called? Free market economy?

 

Sadly it doesn't work though.

The cause for such problems are rooted to deep in human nature to

be fixed by a solution which is applied on a higher level.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think the problems are rooted in human nature.

I think most of our problems right now are rooted in a lack of individual responsibility and accountability.

Share this post


Link to post
I don't think the problems are rooted in human nature.

I think most of our problems right now are rooted in a lack of individual responsibility and accountability.

 

Hm yes, even some general responsibility would be a nice new change.

Imho the absent of those two are caused by something deeper and older.

But I guess we just have to differ on that. :)

Share this post


Link to post

Just what exactly is this new reactor design that will greatly reduce or eliminate nuclear waste?

 

Advanced 4th generation reactors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

 

Relative to current nuclear power plant technology, the claimed benefits for 4th generation reactors include:

 

Nuclear waste that lasts a few centuries instead of millennia

100-300 times more energy yield from the same amount of nuclear fuel

The ability to consume existing nuclear waste in the production of electricity

Improved operating safety

 

Space probe's wouldn't be able to even use up 0.1% of the current nuclear waste.
So why is there a Plutonium shortage?

 

And the space programs around the world are in a decline, so lets not even go there.

People are stupid. I hope to change that. :geek:

He just kept talking and talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic so that no one had a chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic...

Share this post


Link to post
I don't think the problems are rooted in human nature.

I think most of our problems right now are rooted in a lack of individual responsibility and accountability.

Which is rooted in human nature.

 

Humans are paradoxes. We claim to want to be free and independent, but at the same time we are constantly trying to give other people power over us and the ability to tell us what to do.

 

Kind of the way young teenagers will scream anout how they're individuals, and at the same time tend to be the first to join whatever Collectivist movements come along. "No one tells me what to do or say or think! Now get out of my way, they'll be pissed if I'm late for my Communist Party Meeting!"

 

Likewise, people who are willing to take the blame for their own failings, rather than blame ANYONE else but themselves, are rarer than anyone admits. Hence, the existence of a vast range of scapegoats from "The Jews" to "The Rich" to "Mommy and Daddy" to "The Government," ad nauseum.

He just kept talking and talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic so that no one had a chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic...

Share this post


Link to post
I think these types of things should be controlled by the government and not be private.

 

For instance like in World War 2 when car companies were controlled by the government for the better,

 

You mean like... Volkswagen? You DO remember whose idea that was, right? Little Austrian guy, wannabe painter?

He just kept talking and talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic so that no one had a chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic...

Share this post


Link to post
I don't think the problems are rooted in human nature.

I think most of our problems right now are rooted in a lack of individual responsibility and accountability.

Which is rooted in human nature.

 

I don't think it's the human norm to avoid responsibility and accountability. Parenting is proof of that much at least. Parents, generally become protective of their children. Even going so far as to take responsibility for them when they do bad things.

I think the lack of responsibility and accountability is rooted in society and the nature of larger groups, not the nature of the individuals in general. When a person becomes a part of an organization, any responsibility or accountability pertaining to incidents that relate to the organization is placed on the organization as a whole. This can lessen the responsibility of the individual. The tendency of people to abandon ship at companies while shoving the responsibility and accountability onto the people below them is a decent enough example. And like you said, ethnic labels, social classes, etc. They also fit the bill as "groups" Perhaps that really is rooted in Human nature. I don't know, my own nature is telling me otherwise but I guess that's possible. If that's the case is it really human nature if not all human beings possess it? Or is avoiding responsibility and accountability really just a choice that different people with different experiences answer differently.

 

Anyway, back to the Nuclear power plant.

Even if the new design reduces the time it takes for the waste to decay, the waste itself is still a problem. It cannot be simply stored on site. It has to be buried and that leaves hundreds of years for the waste to breach its immediate containment, then breach the containment of it's surroundings and finally end up in our ground water. Which I shouldn't need to emphasize on how bad that would be.

Also, with Nuclear power it's not a matter of what could go wrong. Even if the chances are less than for someone to be hit by lightning, it's the exceptions that are the problem. As even just one or two exceptions can fuck up the entire planet. Why stick to that risk when it's a non-renewable resource to begin with. doesn't it make more sense to use a resource that is renewable and then invest to make it as efficient as possible?

Share this post


Link to post
I think these types of things should be controlled by the government and not be private.

 

For instance like in World War 2 when car companies were controlled by the government for the better,

 

You mean like... Volkswagen? You DO remember whose idea that was, right? Little Austrian guy, wannabe painter?

What the hell does that change, so what if it was that little moustache guy ;) . He was a smart politician (One of the best there ever was really, remember from what shithole he saved Germany?) and a stupid warlord. And also he hated Jews which doesn't prove anything though, maybe that he developed a childhood hate against them which can happen.

 

Besides, I believe your president did the same with Ford.

 

As far as the government, I would trust it for such things as cars and resource exportation. I mean, developing new eco-friendly technologies for this might also be economy friendly and I really don't see how the government can misuse this power even more than private companies already do (Unless it's total war again where wages and work hours will be unfair of course)

"When a son is born, the father will go up to the newborn baby, sword in hand; throwing it down, he says, "I shall not leave you with any property: You have only what you can provide with this weapon."

Share this post


Link to post

@Wonsul

I agree that there will be fuck-ups, but i dont think it will be because of protocol or chance (If handled and designed appropriately, i think it would be almost impossible for disaster.), but rather a certain party not following protocol and leaving things to chance. From past exprience, even strictist of international law wouldn't stop this. :(

Share this post


Link to post
What the hell does that change, so what if it was that little moustache guy ;) . He was a smart politician (One of the best there ever was really, remember from what shithole he saved Germany?)
You have a VERY strange definition of "saved," given that after he was done, Germany was a bombed-out ruin, occupied by foreign powers, divided, depopulated, and with permanent damage to their national psyche. This is like saying that you can "save" someone from poverty by shooting them in the head.

 

Besides, I believe your president did the same with Ford.

You believe entirely incorrectly. Ford is not, and never has been, state-owned.

 

As far as the government, I would trust it for such things as cars and resource exportation.
You mean in exactly the same way the Soviet government managed Ukraine's grain exports in 1932? ;)

He just kept talking and talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic so that no one had a chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic...

Share this post


Link to post
What the hell does that change, so what if it was that little moustache guy ;) . He was a smart politician (One of the best there ever was really, remember from what shithole he saved Germany?)
You have a VERY strange definition of "saved," given that after he was done, Germany was a bombed-out ruin, occupied by foreign powers, divided, depopulated, and with permanent damage to their national psyche. This is like saying that you can "save" someone from poverty by shooting them in the head.

 

Besides, I believe your president did the same with Ford.

You believe entirely incorrectly. Ford is not, and never has been, state-owned.

 

As far as the government, I would trust it for such things as cars and resource exportation.
You mean in exactly the same way the Soviet government managed Ukraine's grain exports in 1932? ;)

1.

 

From the prosperity of the empire during the Wilhelmine era (1890-1914), Germany plunged into World War I, a war it was to lose and one that spawned many of the economic crises that would destroy the successor Weimar Republic. British economist John Maynard Keynes denounced the 1919 Treaty of Versailles as ruinous to German and global prosperity. The war and the treaty were followed by the Great Inflation of the early 1920s that wreaked havoc on Germany's social structure and political stability. During that inflation, the value of the nation's currency, the Papiermark, collapsed from 8.9 per US$1 in 1918 to 4.2 trillion per US$1 by November 1923. Then, after a brief period of prosperity during the mid-1920s, came the Great Depression, which fostered the social insurrection that fascist candidate Adolf Hitler capitalized on in order to win the 1933 election for German Chancellor.During the Hitler era (1933-45), the economy developed a hothouse prosperity, supported with high government subsidies to those sectors that tended to give Germany military power and economic autarky, that is, economic independence from the global economy. During the war itself the German economy was sustained by the exploitation of conquered territories and peoples. With the loss of the war, the country entered into the period known as Stunde Null ("Zero Hour"), when Germany lay in ruins and the society had to be rebuilt from scratch.

 

Source: Wikipedia, Economic history of Germany

 

In this case I was talking about him before he started the war, had he not screwed up the war (Which is not a politican's job but a generals but he still took it which is one of the main reasons he lost) Germany would be one of the most powerful empires to this day. Wait a second, in any case, it still is though..... lol.

 

2.

Franklin Roosevelt took GM over in 1943-5 to make the hardware to beat the Nazis.

Source: http://www.planetthoughts.org/?pg=pt/Whole&qid=2782

 

3. Very funny. But... ok you got me here, you proved a government can be just as corrupt as private corporations.

But we are talking about a government that is elected democratically right now. In the current developed governments we are not allowing a dictator (especially one that goes against the will of his people, his ideology and even his own friends aka fucking stupid bitch Stalin, sorry about that) to take over the government again. Exception is Russia, but luckily the dictatorship there is supported by most of the people and it tries to server the people, I know that since I have friends from there. That one is collapsing as the years go by anyways. In this case when I say the government should take over those companies I mean it should pass laws for these companies to ban all the things they do not thinking about the future and enforce them properly, I do not care how they do it.

"When a son is born, the father will go up to the newborn baby, sword in hand; throwing it down, he says, "I shall not leave you with any property: You have only what you can provide with this weapon."

Share this post


Link to post
1.

In this case I was talking about him before he started the war, had he not screwed up the war (Which is not a politican's job but a generals but he still took it which is one of the main reasons he lost) Germany would be one of the most powerful empires to this day. Wait a second, in any case, it still is though..... lol.

 

Hitler could only build up Germany's economy the way he did by re-arming for war. Yes, wars are usually great economic stimulators. But that kind of stimulation is temporary and unsustainable... especially if you don't fight. Hitler's economic plan committed him to war long before the shooting actually started, and his military incompetence guaranteed he would lose that war. Then germany was rebuilt by a little thing called the Marshall Plan, and its new prosperity is ultimately founded on that (Incidentally, the former East Germany is still far more economically depressed than the Western section of the country, due in large part to economic policies similar to the oned you advocate here.

 

2.

Franklin Roosevelt took GM over in 1943-5 to make the hardware to beat the Nazis.

Source: http://www.planetthoughts.org/?pg=pt/Whole&qid=2782

To be brutally honest, some random envirohippie site is NOT a legitimate history. What you have there is a "widely believed fact" that happens not to be true.

 

GM essentially ceased civilian production, and produced a massive amount of material for the military in WWII. But they did so because the military was PAYING them to. Also because several GM execs were in the Roosevelt administration.

 

However, GM's VP Graeme K. Howard was a committed Nazi. Even wrote a book about it.

 

Also, GM is not Ford.

 

The Nazis, however, took over Opel, GM's European branch, and did exactly what you propose.

 

 

In this case when I say the government should take over those companies I mean it should pass laws for these companies to ban all the things they do not thinking about the future and enforce them properly, I do not care how they do it.

You're making the incredibly silly assumption that a government is any better at planning for the future than companies are. This is also not true. Also, it's Fascism, which we've extablished is bad.

He just kept talking and talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic so that no one had a chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic...

Share this post


Link to post

I can generally accept your post but

Fascism is bad??

 

Fascism is a state of government where everything the government does is in self-interest where they don't care about any foreign governments opinions.

That is all it is.

 

If for example "Utopia" was fascist then it would be no problem.

 

If North Korea was fascist they would act like they are right now. (They are fascist)

 

EDIT: Sorry they aren't actally fascist due to one reason, the people don't like their own leader.

"When a son is born, the father will go up to the newborn baby, sword in hand; throwing it down, he says, "I shall not leave you with any property: You have only what you can provide with this weapon."

Share this post


Link to post
I can generally accept your post but

Fascism is bad??

 

Fascism is a state of government where everything the government does is in self-interest where they don't care about any foreign governments opinions.

That is all it is.

 

If for example "Utopia" was fascist then it would be no problem.

 

If North Korea was fascist they would act like they are right now. (They are fascist)

 

EDIT: Sorry they aren't actally fascist due to one reason, the people don't like their own leader.

 

(The North Korean system is also "bad" by any reasonable definition.)

 

Actually, no. There are a lot of competing and conflicting definitions of Fascism, but none of them include ignoring the opinions of other states OR worshipping the leader.

 

(And how can you say NK doesn't like ol' Kim? They have parades and crap for him all the time!) :D

 

They do, however, generally include government directly controlling corporations (or vice-versa, but that's more along the lines of Corporatism.)

 

According to the Anarcho-Capitalists, "Fascism is a system in which the government leaves nominal ownership of the means of production in the hands of private individuals but exercises control by means of regulatory legislation and reaps most of the profit by means of heavy taxation. In effect, fascism is simply a more subtle form of government ownership than is socialism."

 

(Underlined portion is relevant here.)

 

Left OR Right, it's strictly Authoritarian, (as is what you propose,) which puts it on the "bad side" of the political compass.

He just kept talking and talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic so that no one had a chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic...

Share this post


Link to post

No, honest to god, the most basic definition of fascism I always accepted and hear from our own fascist leader in Ukraine on a show of politics is when the government and the people revive their culture in an extremist active egoistic way. Fascism belongs to the group dictatorships and differs from other dictatorships wherefore other dictatorships concentrate on personal dictator means or a new ideology, fascism tries to promote the culture of the nation in an extremist way (Ignorant to any other interests but the Aryans interests for example and willing to defend the interests) and sticks to the old ideology of the country. Socialism is NOT fascism, that is one thing I know for sure. There is a way to mix both but it's very complicated. Germany right now is what you would call Democratic Socialism state leaning towards fascism. While Canada is a democratic socialistic state leaning towards multiculturalism. This is only possible when a country isn't fully socialistic or fully fascist. For example if you have 100 % Fascism you can't be socialistic in any way but if you are 50% fascist there is room for 50% Socialism.

 

The North Korean people certainly don't like their leader, those parades are obviously forced. Besides North Korea doesn't follow it's old "cultural" ideology, instead it tries to put a new one on it's people. :D

 

I would actually go as far as saying USA is a bit Fascist as you stick so badly to the old constitution and you don't care about NATO too much and the president acts on behalf of the people's will. Of course it is limited and you do have a democratic state. I mean you are somewhere on the left of the fascist-socialist scale where fascism is left and socialism is right.

 

The other thing I forgot to mention is that I believe Hitler didn't just revive the economy by preparing for war, I think he actually revived the manufacturing, automobile, airplane, industry and made Germany be self dependent.

 

Oh and I didn't know Ford and Gm were seperate :(?

 

But anyways, all this aside, don't you think amendments in the rights of private companies on manufacturing and resource exportation should be change enforced?

"When a son is born, the father will go up to the newborn baby, sword in hand; throwing it down, he says, "I shall not leave you with any property: You have only what you can provide with this weapon."

Share this post


Link to post

Soo, with my limited knowledge about this put aside.

 

Why dont we just put "solar farm things" in the sahara or something similiar?

There has to be a pretty big minus with it, long "transport" of the energy? :|

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

This website uses cookies, as do most websites since the 90s. By using this site, you consent to cookies. We have to say this or we get in trouble. Learn more.