Jump to content

In a world of Barbies, be a Greta


Dirtyhip

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

Shame she is being exploited for the cause.  What sense  does it makes for her to sail over to save carbon but then have to fly the crew members back and forth?  Silly games. 

  • Heart 1
  • Awesome 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, wilbur said:

Shame she is being exploited for the cause.  What sense  does it makes for her to sail over to save carbon but then have to fly the crew members back and forth?  Silly games. 

Not sure what you are talking about, but possibly you know something I do not.

Regardless of the whole plane, boat, train argument...I think that she is inspiring people to talk and I feel that children can inspire change.  This planet they are being left with is gonna be really sad, if we don't make some changes. 

  • Awesome 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

Not sure what you are talking about, but possibly you know something I do not.

Regardless of the whole plane, boat, train argument...I think that she is inspiring people to talk and I feel that children can inspire change.  This planet they are being left with is gonna be really sad, if we don't make some changes. 

I think what she did at her local government level is very good and admirable.  It is her autism though, that allows her to speak with blunt conviction.  Climate change supporters have since exploited her in order to make their point.  She raised awareness and that is outstanding.  She is though, a 16 year old kid with no scientific background and the denizens for change are buying it rather than listening to scientists. 

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wilbur said:

I think what she did at her local government level is very good and admirable.  It is her autism though, that allows her to speak with blunt conviction.  Climate change supporters have since exploited her in order to make their point.  She raised awareness and that is outstanding.  She is though, a 16 year old kid with no scientific background and the denizens for change are buying it rather than listening to scientists. 

Buying what?  

There are lots of scientists that are concerned, as she is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

Thank you.   There are many climate scientists that have their pants on fire.

This petroleum interval we are in is a speck in time.  It is really strange.  Somehow people were able to live withoot it for eons.  Shirley not as comfortably as us, but they did exist.  Many fewer of them though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

Buying what?  

There are lots of scientists that are concerned, as she is.  

There are a lot who aren't as well.   Carbon Dioxide isn't the problem.  Nitrogen and methane are bigger problems but when you look at the compiled data being used, predictions are useless. 

Here is an example.  Carbon dioxide returns to ground in time.  When scientists look at it the calculate that between 60 and 80% of CO2 returns to ground in between 2 and 200 years.   That is a pretty darn broad range.  So when some idiots claim the world is ending in 12 years, they are lying to you.   Remember, the Green new plan isn't about the environment.  It is about dismantling capitalism.  It is a social movement disguised as a scientific movement. 

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RalphWaldoMooseworth said:

This petroleum interval we are in is a speck in time.  It is really strange.  Somehow people were able to live withoot it for eons.  Shirley not as comfortably as us, but they did exist.  Many fewer of them though.

But Ralph, look at the population the earth now supports.  If we were all burning coal and smudge pots , the atmosphere would be in far worse condition at current population levels. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, wilbur said:

But Ralph, look at the population the earth now supports.  If we were all burning coal and smudge pots , the atmosphere would be in far worse condition at current population levels. 

Allz I am saying is we are going back, like it or not after we burn up all the fossil fuels.  Our only major options will be nukes and solar, which will have a mighty hard time filling the void.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kirby said:

But those fricken little shoes on the floor are killers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kirby said:

She was also medical doctor you know. :) 

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RalphWaldoMooseworth said:

Allz I am saying is we are going back, like it or not after we burn up all the fossil fuels.  Our only major options will be nukes and solar, which will have a mighty hard time filling the void.

Agree.  I will be dead by 400 years or so but I agree. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, wilbur said:

She was also medical doctor you know. :) 

When I was a kid, we had Tammy dolls, which was sort of the poor girls Barbie doll.  In fact, I think my non-wild sister got Tammy and I got Tammy's sister Pepper.  Tammy wasn't nearly as accomplished as Barbie.

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kirby said:

When I was a kid, we had Tammy dolls, which was sort of the poor girls Barbie doll.  In fact, I think my non-wild sister got Tammy and I got Tammy's sister Pepper.  Tammy wasn't nearly as accomplished as Barbie.

My sister had a Pepper doll.  I had Major Matt Mason with a jet pack and retractable visor on his helmet.  :) 

  • Awesome 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, wilbur said:

There are a lot who aren't as well.   Carbon Dioxide isn't the problem.  Nitrogen and methane are bigger problems but when you look at the compiled data being used, predictions are useless. 

Here is an example.  Carbon dioxide returns to ground in time.  When scientists look at it the calculate that between 60 and 80% of CO2 returns to ground in between 2 and 200 years.   That is a pretty darn broad range.  So when some idiots claim the world is ending in 12 years, they are lying to you.   Remember, the Green new plan isn't about the environment.  It is about dismantling capitalism.  It is a social movement disguised as a scientific movement. 

Unfettered capitalism is also a bad thing.  Wages have been stagnant for the middle class for years.  If you have cash and investments, our wealth grows.  Most people do not have upward mobility these days.  Unless you have money already, you are slipping down the ladder.

and I had all the Barbie crap.  That early toy taught us to seek out and buy things.  Barbie is early indoctrination for women.  

I had a Topsy Taylor doll.   You could spin her scalp and she could go from blonde to brown.  I also had Donny and Marie and the Cher doll. Cher was very tall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

Unfettered capitalism is also a bad thing.  Wages have been stagnant for the middle class for years.  If you have cash and investments, our wealth grows.  Most people do not have upward mobility these days.  Unless you have money already, you are slipping down the ladder.

and I had all the Barbie crap.  That early toy taught us to seek out and buy things.  Barbie is early indoctrination for women.  

I had a Topsy Taylor doll.   You could spin her scalp and she could go from blonde to brown.  I also had Donny and Marie and the Cher doll. Cher was very tall.

I didn't really have my own doll.  It was shared with 3 other sisters..we did't have enough money.  The doll had lovely blue eyes, crinkly blonde hair...and wore a little Ausstrian-like dirndl.  She was ..Heidi.

I don't remember playing with other girls' Barbies much...  I never had a rag doll either.  We had a huge stuffed toy bear...won from a fair.

In total we had 2 photocopier bulk paper boxes of toys for 6 children.  We played outside a lot when moving to a house with backyard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, shootingstar said:

I didn't really have my own doll.  It was shared with 3 other sisters..we did't have enough money.  The doll had lovely blue eyes, crinkly blonde hair...and wore a little Ausstrian-like dirndl.  She was ..Heidi.

I don't remember playing with other girls' Barbies much...  I never had a rag doll either.  We had a huge stuffed toy bear...won from a fair.

In total we had 2 photocopier bulk paper boxes of toys for 6 children.  We played outside a lot when moving to a house with backyard.

I played with other girls on the street.  We would have Barbie get togethers and play. One time I ripped the head off my friend's Barbie and she flipped out and I got in trouble over it.  I think her and I had an altercation that I finished with a beheading of her doll.  That head popped right off.  

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

I played with other girls on the street.  We would have Barbie get togethers and play. One time I ripped the head off my friend's Barbie and she flipped out and I got in trouble over it.  I think her and I had an altercation that I finished with a beheading of her doll.  That head popped right off.  

While you were ripping off doll heads, I was boss sister..since I was/am the oldest.

Then at 15 yrs. old, I saw the light...if I just let go and be a friendly bystander, I will be liked / loved more.  Childhood was reading lotsa books, daydreaming, skipping rope (Double dutch up to 2,000 rounds), etc.   

I didn't aspire to be Greta. Too shy.  At 11 yrs. old I read biography about Harriet Tubman..the freed black slave woman who started the Underground Railway for the slave escapees into Canada.  This on top, the TV news on non violent Civil Rights movement led by Martin Luther King that I saw on TV....made me more aware....of a lot of stuff.

I've been on this forum long enough....now folks here.....that this is the evil stuff ? I was exposed plus other personal and family experiences in the ugly world of being unfairly misunderstood.

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

Unfettered capitalism is also a bad thing.  Wages have been stagnant for the middle class for years.  If you have cash and investments, our wealth grows.  Most people do not have upward mobility these days.  Unless you have money already, you are slipping down the ladder.

The dismal science still struggles to get it right!  I really wonder if they will have it fingered oot in a few millenia.Things are probably better today then they were under feudalism where you had no middle class at all, just serfs and barons.  So history would say sloooow progress. :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RalphWaldoMooseworth said:

The dismal science still struggles to get it right!  I really wonder if they will have it fingered oot in a few millenia.Things are probably better today then they were under feudalism where you had no middle class at all, just serfs and barons.  So history would say sloooow progress. :D

 

Well we can't be overly critical of capitalism if some of us have made good money from the stock market. ?

We will be heading to Jasper National Park.  Along the way is the Columbia Ice Fields.  I almost don't feel like walking on it.  ...Too many tourists..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

Unfettered capitalism is also a bad thing.  Wages have been stagnant for the middle class for years. 

This, is the mind set of a wage earner. Fortunately, there are capitalists who create salaried jobs.  Capitalism, is available to anyone willing to take risk and responsibility for themselves.  I am not a socialist though.  I don't believe in income redistribution as It creates a lazy and lethargic society that is never satisfied.  I have and do work both ends of this because I have never had the balls to let go of the salary safety net completely.  :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wilbur said:

This, is the mind set of a wage earner. Fortunately, there are capitalists who create salaried jobs.  Capitalism, is available to anyone willing to take risk and responsibility for themselves.  I am not a socialist though.  I don't believe in income redistribution as It creates a lazy and lethargic society that is never satisfied.  I have and do work both ends of this because I have never had the balls to let go of the salary safety net completely.  :) 

And not grateful /relieved for health care in Canada?  It doesn't entirely cover your wife's health problems...but most likely it has for your children..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, wilbur said:

This, is the mind set of a wage earner. Fortunately, there are capitalists who create salaried jobs.  Capitalism, is available to anyone willing to take risk and responsibility for themselves.  I am not a socialist though.  I don't believe in income redistribution as It creates a lazy and lethargic society that is never satisfied.  I have and do work both ends of this because I have never had the balls to let go of the salary safety net completely.  :) 

Goode pointe!  So maybe we wage slaves are the socialists of capitalism. I never had the balls either, nor the inclination nor inspiration to go into busyness for myself.  My dad did that after years of being a wage slave and it didn't turn oot well - they are totally different worlds.

The exponentialness seems to be a problem!  Going oot on your own tends to slide you toward being either a Zuckerberg for the lucky few or bankruptcy for the larger portion.  A little stability is nice, dammit!.

I gotta admit it is very nice just knowing that you could strike oot on your own if you can capitalize on a good idea, so that is definitely the high point of capitalism.

BTW, we need an economics tag for this discussion lest it be considered political.  Sadly I guess the two things are inextricably intertwined.  Same for climate which is what Hip's post is all aboot.  The interconnectednes of all things is damn pervasive.

Also BTW, it is interesting how the OP has little control over the meandering course a thread takes once it is borne into the world.  Sort of an allegory for people I guess! :D 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, shootingstar said:

And not grateful /relieved for health care in Canada?  It doesn't entirely cover your wife's health problems...but most likely it has for your children..

You say that like you think I don't pay taxes.   I don't shelter funds off shore or participate in laundering schemes.  I also don't take advantage of all tax credits I could.  Last year, I paid 5 times the purchase price of my first house in taxes.  That would pay for a lot of copay in the US system.  

  • Heart 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wilbur said:

This, is the mind set of a wage earner. Fortunately, there are capitalists who create salaried jobs.  Capitalism, is available to anyone willing to take risk and responsibility for themselves.  I am not a socialist though.  I don't believe in income redistribution as It creates a lazy and lethargic society that is never satisfied.  I have and do work both ends of this because I have never had the balls to let go of the salary safety net completely.  :) 

Ironic cause socialism already exists.  

We prop up oil companies, farmers, gas industry, beef industry, dairy industry, wars on behalf of other countries.  We have SOCIAL security, Medicare, Medicaid.  We definitely are socialist for companies.  Give them cash.  Why not give a little weekly to the people struggling?

Soon, the masses will be unable or have less money to buy the goods and services if this continues.

  • Heart 1
  • Awesome 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, wilbur said:

1) This, is the mind set of a wage earner.

2)  I don't believe in income redistribution as It creates a lazy and lethargic society that is never satisfied.  

 

1) And economists:

https://www.amazon.com/Price-Inequality-Joseph-Stiglitz-2013-04-08/dp/B017PNRV7E/ref=sr_1_4?crid=23P0KTBQN2AUT&keywords=stiglitz+price+of+inequality&qid=1569072652&sprefix=stiglitz%2Caps%2C160&sr=8-4

2) Actually, part of has been happening is anti-capitalist. The first thing a country does when it wants to become capitalist is to tax large blocks of capital, to get it moving. We are creating a de facto class of royalty.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

 

Soon, the masses will be unable or have less money to buy the goods and services if this continues.

Yes, the Henry Ford principle that he wanted his workers to be able to afford the cars they were building.  Sadly I think Henry sort of lost his way after that as he got more and more "corporate" and controlling.

I agree, the Apples and Comcasts and health care industries of the world are bleeding their cash cows dry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dirtyhip said:

Ironic cause socialism already exists.  

We prop up oil companies, farmers, gas industry, beef industry, dairy industry, wars on behalf of other countries.  We have SOCIAL security, Medicare, Medicaid.  We definitely are socialist for companies.  Give them cash.  Why not give a little weekly to the people struggling?

Soon, the masses will be unable or have less money to buy the goods and services if this continues.

Canada was a largely socialist country.  Most industries had crown corporations and I admit, they were useful in developing an under developed nation.   Socialism has a place to a degree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, wilbur said:

You say that like you think I don't pay taxes.   I don't shelter funds off shore or participate in laundering schemes.  I also don't take advantage of all tax credits I could.  Last year, I paid 5 times the purchase price of my first house in taxes.  That would pay for a lot of copay in the US system.  

I'm willing to pay taxes for what we get for services for our health , Wilbur.

After talking to several different Canadians for same companies I was with them, and  who worked in the U.S. for approx. a decade, the paper work, bureaucracy, co=pay arrangements, uber justifications and waste of time with health insureance companies... they were grateful to be back and working in CAnada (and pay their taxes).  1 of them was a nurse in the U.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wilbur said:

Canada was a largely socialist country.  Most industries had crown corporations and I admit, they were useful in developing an under developed nation.   Socialism has a place to a degree. 

And a dash of it  was sort of helpful in recovering from the depression in the US.  Getting the mix right and preventing corruption, abuse, and waste are of course the bugaboos that the Soviet Union demonstrated so clearly.

  • Heart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shootingstar said:

I'm willing to pay taxes for what we get for services for our health , Wilbur.

After talking to several different Canadians for same companies I was with them, and  who worked in the U.S. for approx. a decade, the paper work, bureaucracy and waste of time with health insureance companies... they were grateful to be back and working in CAnada (and pay their taxes).  1 of them was a nurse in the U.S.

Some people down here are brainwashed that the CA system of healthcare is no good and that you guys often come here for services.  I don't think this is the case most often.  Maybe rich people come down if they don't want to wait for a surgery.  Not sure.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dirtyhip said:

We prop up oil companies, farmers, gas industry, beef industry, dairy industry, wars on behalf of other countries.  We have SOCIAL security, Medicare, Medicaid.  We definitely are socialist for companies.  Give them cash.  Why not give a little weekly to the people struggling?

You are suggesting a "give a man a fish" solution.  It doesn't work long term.  The subsidies prop up the business, allowing it to compete globally, where expenses like salaries, benefits, land, and taxes are substantially lower.  Workers still benefit from those subsidies in employment security and a higher standard of living than under=developed countries have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dirtyhip said:

Students have less hope.  Debt for them is massive.

This is a revolting development.  Why aren't there more news stories aboot who is benefittng from all this massive debt?  Colleges have totally abused our youth and their parents.  For my parents and my generation college was affordable and not ruinous.  The product has not really changed, but the priced has soared, thanks in large part to the easy money available from our gubment. 

  • Heart 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wilbur said:

You are suggesting a "give a man a fish" solution.  It doesn't work long term.  The subsidies prop up the business, allowing it to compete globally, where expenses like salaries, benefits, land, and taxes are substantially lower.  Workers still benefit from those subsidies in employment security and a higher standard of living than under=developed countries have. 

In my opinion, focusing upward mobility of companies is the best interest of the share holders.  So, they try to make me (shareholder) happy by paying Bob less and cutting his benefits back and removing doughnut Fridays.  How is this good for Bob.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...