Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Sporeworks
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   North Spore Injection Grain Bag

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Supporting growth
    #1726960 -

Ive seen the idea put forth that there is no need for the West to exploit underdeveloped countries. These countries so the arguement goes, should be encouraged to join us in the west. How do they do that? Well obviously they consume more and trade more. Everyones happy...

Well according to this article China agree and are planning to quadruple their GDP. Does anyone seriously still think the world could sustain a global capitalist economy? What happens when India follow suit?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,7369,1000618,00.html

Jonathan Watts and Steven Morris
Friday July 18, 2003
The Guardian

Its economy is growing at a staggering rate and its people are beginning to enjoy a better diet as well as a taste of western-style consumerism.
But the head of the UN's environment programme has warned that China's growth - and ambitious plans for the future - are unsustainable.

Klaus Toepfer warned that so-called developed countries will be forced to tighten their belts under China's plan to expand its economy fourfold within the next 20 years.

Take the Chinese government's attempts to get its people to eat more healthily. Beijing has been aiming to encourage every Chinese person to eat 200 eggs a year - a total of 260billion eggs.

To produce that many eggs, a flock of 1.3 billion chickens is needed.

To keep the chickens fed, a grain crop bigger than that produced by Australia is necessary.

The Chinese are also developing a taste for seafood. Should they begin eating fish at the same rate as the Japanese, they would consume the world's entire catch.

Beer is also becoming more popular. But to provide each Chinese person with just three extra beers a year, as much grain as Norway produces annually would be needed.

No wonder Mr Toepfer sounded worried when he addressed young environmentalists in Sydney this week.

"Quadrupling the GDP of a country of 1.3 billion - can you imagine?" he asked them.

He considered the example not of chickens, fish or beer but cars. The number of cars on China's roads rose by almost 40% last year. The country's flagship car manufacturer, First Automotive Works, aims to increase its output fivefold in the next five to eight years.

The Institute of Petroleum believes the demand for oil will rise in China by 500% in the next 25 years. Mr Toepfer pointed out that if China had the same density of private cars as Germany it would have to produce 650 million vehicles. There is simply not enough metal and oil in the world to sustain such numbers.

"It's not a question of whether you are devoted to nature or whether this is an emotional topic. This is the rationality of economics," Mr Toepfer said.

He said China's plans could only come to fruition if developed nations radically changed their consumption habits.

China's growth in the past 10 years has been phenomenal.

While many still live in poverty, a sharply increasing minority can now afford the cars, electronics goods and imported delicacies that used to be seen as luxuries.

According to the Worldwatch Institute, China has already overtaken the US, which uses a third of the planet's natural resources, as the leading consumer of meat, fertiliser, steel and coal.

The adage used to be "all the tea in China". In the future, it may just be "all the chickens" or "all the cars".

----------------------------------------


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: GazzBut]
    #1726969 -

I guess that Chinese & Indians also dream to have 3 SUVs in their garage so the theory that polution has nothing to do with global warming is better be true, otherwise ...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: zeronio]
    #1726983 -

We're fucked!


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: GazzBut]
    #1726995 -

I wonder what will happen to capitalism if we find out that we'll have to limit our consumption?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: zeronio]
    #1726999 -

Well id say we definitely will have to limit our consumption and I can see the capitalists burying their heads in the sand. Where hopefully they will suffocate (joke!) leaving the rest of us to build a sustainable and peaceful world. :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: zeronio]
    #1727085 -

Quote:
I wonder what will happen to capitalism if we find out that we'll have to limit our consumption?


The same thing will happen as always when demand exceeds supply: prices will go up, and then substitute products will become profitable.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: Rhizoid]
    #1727102 -

The problem is that we may have to realise this before demand exceeds supply and look for alternatives prior to that happening.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: GazzBut]
    #1727107 -

We should limit our consumption even if demand does not exceed supply, so the prices of dirty technology should be inflated artificially and then cleaner tech will become profitable.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: zeronio]
    #1727108 -

We could but how do we persuade people that they should? Kidnap hordes of marketing men and ceo's and dose them up with mushrooms maybe?! :grin: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: GazzBut]
    #1727357 -

"The problem is that we may have to realise this before demand exceeds supply and look for alternatives prior to that happening."

thank you. thank you. thank you. at least someone on these boards is making sense.

I've read that our oil resources will be over halfway depleted by 2030. After that, the cost of oil will never go down. Considering that you need energy to do just about anything, this will make everything more expensive.

Of course, there is supposed to be enough mineable hydrogen on the moon to last us thousands of years... but NASA is still busy with that useless space station.

Of course, if we research enough stuff about sub-sub-atomics, we could discover an infinite source of subnuclear energy... But the oil tycoons shut the superconducting supercollider down, so I guess we'll never know.

they are building larger particle accelerators at CERN though...

LONG LIVE CERN!!!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: DoctorJ]
    #1727418 -

There is an estimated 4 billion tons of uranium dissolved in the oceans. This is enough to satisfy all the world's energy needs for millions of years. The price is too high right now because oil is currently cheaper, but that will change when the oil becomes scarce.

And radiation from the sun delivers up to 800 watts per square meter, which means that the total energy needs could be forever satisfied by a 10 million square km array of solar cells (about the area of USA or China), assuming 100% conversion efficiency. But that is probably too expensive.

Controlled hydrogen fusion is slowly getting closer, but we're not there yet.

Who knows what sub-nuclear technology will bring. We haven't even scratched the surface when it comes to ordinary nuclear technology.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: Rhizoid]
    #1727431 -

word. I just wish people would consider long term profitability instead of always tryin to make a quick buck. it would save us a lot of struggle and pain in the long run...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: Rhizoid]
    #1727907 -

Its great that all these alternatives are available to us but I dont think its so great to suck every last drop of oil out of the earth before we seriously turn our attention to these other technologies.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: GazzBut]
    #1727973 -

I think Buckminster Fuller mentioned that real widespread technological change only really happens when people are forced by necessity to change. Bucky was designing more efficient houses 30 years ago and we still haven't caught up with him (we all seem to be obsessed still with gigantic inefficient resource wasting dwellings).

China are also aiming to have a base on the moon by 2010 I think (could be a bit later though), if they can kick-start the migration of industry into space (the X-Prize is heling too), they could trigger another industrial revolution.


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: Edame]
    #1737267 -

Bucky had some great ideas. The world electronic grid was a cracking idea also.

Whats the X-prize?

PEACE


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: DoctorJ]
    #1738039 -

DoctorJ said:
Of course, there is supposed to be enough mineable hydrogen on the moon to last us thousands of years...  but NASA is still busy with that useless space station. 


I wonder what nasa could've accomplished with the war money? :oogle:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1738082 -

mutherfuckers just dont realize...

the only reason space launches cost so much is because we're doing them from earth. A low-g launchpad on the moon would dramatically lower the cost

cant remember where I read this but it would only take 10% of our GNP for about a decade to terraform mars

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: DoctorJ]
    #1738089 -

Yeah, but you still need to get resources up there somehow,,,,i think it would be good to build a craft in space that wouldn't launch on earth...it'd be expensive to take it up in sections, but you could make it like a mobil station or something..


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1738117 -

japan just sent up a much needed lunar probe. they think their might be h2o in the form of ice buried underground.

if there is hydrogen, water, and oxygen on the moon, all we have to do is send robots up there to mine it and separate it into little piles for us when we get there.

i hope that probe finds some shit because h20 costs like $10,000 a gallon to haul into space (weight/fuel cost ratio)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Supporting growth [Re: DoctorJ]
    #1738127 -

Theres lots of things we could do, but i don't understand,why we don't spend more for space exploration....i mean a bit of $$$$$$$$$$$$$ and we'd prolly see some good progress!


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   North Spore Injection Grain Bag

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Why I like the "SUV owners support terrorism" commericals
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 LearyfanS 5,093 72 01/20/03 04:34 PM
by thescientist
* Government Growth, the Party of Lincoln, and George W. Bush Ancalagon 1,105 2 01/17/14 01:34 AM
by theindianrepublic
* Support US war on IRAQ
( 1 2 all )		 LordMorham 4,844 29 09/20/02 09:56 AM
by LordMorham
* War people, why do you support the war?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 rhizo 11,171 145 07/05/06 09:56 AM
by Phred
* roll call... do libertarians support child labor?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 Anonymous 9,001 126 08/27/04 10:11 AM
by silversoul7
* anyone here support the drug war?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Anonymous 5,209 52 03/20/03 03:21 PM
by Anonymous
* Economic Policy made to support poverty in Hawaii
( 1 2 all )		 nugsarenice 4,320 30 05/19/02 06:36 PM
by Phred
* republicans support john kerry?? KingOftheThing 1,186 6 07/31/04 11:57 PM
by JesusChrist

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,165 topic views. 2 members, 2 guests and 12 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 18 queries.