Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Whilst we're all on here debating the merits of LTNs to (apparently) improve air quality and drive down emissions, at the same time multi millionaires are blasting into space having joy rides that in one flight potentially will do more damage to the atmosphere then all the cars in London.


Where is Alanis Morissette when you need her vocals most ?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/289841-isnt-it-ironic/
Share on other sites

Obviously every little helps (Credit: Tesco), and the presence of the latter does the opposite of negate the need for the former.....but it is frustrating nonetheless. I have had cause to travel to China quite a lot during my career, mostly touring heavy industrial facilities....so always found it perverse to think about grandma in the UK rinsing out her used marmite pots to put into the recycling, when at the same time you can step outside in Tangshan and not be able to see across to the other side the road because of pollution....


So as I said, more angering than ironic...so perhaps less 'Ironic' and more 'You Oughta Know'.....

Yes and no: none of us wants to believe that the un-greenest thing one can do is to have more than one child, perhaps two, yet this barely gets any attention. People prefer to focus on the small things (recycling jam jars) and the big things (hypersonic space flight for rich folk) and make an ironic acknowledgement, because it's easier than thinking about all the crap that people buy and don't need/use, or the food that is wasted or the countless short journeys made by cars, etc.

But we need poorer parts of the world to have high birth rates as we need their offspring to look after us as our population ages (that is not sarcy, that is fact).


And we need poorer parts of the world to grow cash crops, mine minerals, open sweat shops, so we can continue our good standard of living.


We can also bring in geopolitical instability.


Its a fuggin mess, not sure what they answer is, perhaps a global pandemic to reduce the population.

The awkward thing about bringing people over to look after us as we age, is that eventually they will age and require looking after which means we need more people to come over and look after them and when they age ....


It's a vicious circle and the ideal solution is going back to extended families where the younger generation all help to look after the older generation. But the western world moved away from that in the pursuit of happiness through home ownership and as a result ...

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> The awkward thing about bringing people over to

> look after us as we age, is that eventually they

> will age and require looking after which means we

> need more people to come over and look after them

> and when they age ....


robots and a virtual world - but then what

malumbu Wrote:

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

> The alternative for an aging population, where

> there is limited immigration from 'younger'

> countries with high birth rates is robots. Which

> is what is happening in Japan. I'm not a font of

> all knowledge, just went to a presentation on it

> once.



What


Replace us all with "replicants" as in the film surrogates ?


Wow that way leads to madness then machines demanding equal rights and before you know it ... we will be employed to look after aging robots and ...oh you get the picture 😱

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...