Cont’d…….
Then there was October mass starvation of mutton birds along coast from Rockhampton Qld to South Australia and around Tasmania, starvation being the cause, wildlife experts in 4 states shocked by severity of mortality, all not reported by the ABC or major media except Channel 10.

Governments could work with the UN and the UN could work more closely with governments in order to specifically deal with the now existing worldwide collapse of sustainable world ocean seafood supply.
It’s not about extinction, it’s about availability and affordability of essential protein.
Continuing failure to want to see the fundamental problem is amounting to intractable criminal negligence to assist humanity and the environment.

I assume no economic fallacy. Of course local governments can not afford to manage the entire oceans.
Action is required by world authority and that action would best involve stimulating UN and national budgets. It can be done.
There is need to comprehend the enormity of the problem and seriousness of impact and consequences involved, then such international economic stimulation can be understood.

Look, I came forward in 1982 and warned of world ocean fish depletion and some people laughed, but they don’t now, just ask actor Jack Thompson.
By all means chuckle about the economic stimulus but remember I am too proud to get egg on my face with stupid nonsense statements.

Good productive socio-economic solutions can end the presently downhill ongoing mess including consequences that are compounding

Well everything is a thing "of the world", so according to your theory, everything is the responsibility of the UN: food, water, clothing, transport, communications, entertainment. All the lipstick in the world is "the world's" supply of lipstick, so therefore the UN is responsible for the supply of lipstick.

It's a ridiculous argument.

Notice by the way, that you are unable to specify what knowledge would be needed, and what would need to be done. All we get is open-ended appeals to magic: oops "economic stimulus", as if economic production were a genie and only government could rub the lamp.

But thanks for demonstrating the complete nonsense that underlies the assumptions in the UN's favour.

"There is need to comprehend the enormity of the problem ..."

What makes you think your comprehension is equal to the task, when, if it were right, full socialism would be a more productive system? It's moral and economic gibberish.

Elizabeth
At what stage, short of shooting people, do you renounce the use of aggressive violence to enforce the gender policies you advocate?

@ Jardine K.Jardine,

I agree with you there Jardine K, your lipstick etc argument is ridiculous.

It is amazing some people are so anti UN with unsubstantiated claims of 'corruption'.

No alternative for the future eh. Just useless go nowhere waste of time criticism.

Truly amazing.