The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Government in a time of crisis > Comments

Government in a time of crisis : Comments

By Peter McMahon, published 28/5/2007

We will need the smartest and most hard-working governments we have ever had to manage the great changes to come.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Good analogy with WWII since it is that level of commitment that is required to deal with peak oil. However, in a sense it is already too late. The Hirsch report on mitigation of the effects of peak oil states that we need a 20 year WWII-style crash programme of measures to adjust our economy - and with peak oil probably between now and 2010, that means we should have begun 20 years ago:

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

The other question is about "pulling through this". Pull through to where? If anyone believes that we will be able to maintain a fraction of current lifestyles without the energy to support them then they are gravely mistaken. That is why I doubt politicians will ever seriously confront peak oil. They cannot handle it and offer a wealthier future (or even the status quo) to the voters (without lying through their teeth). Even in wartime people strive to get past the conflict and restore "normality". But the war against Peak Oil can never take us back to where we were before.
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Monday, 28 May 2007 10:27:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>We should make no mistake about this: a Coalition government or economically conservative Labor government will be a disaster for Australia. They would put off responding to the crisis until it is too late, and the price for such inaction will be very high indeed.<
We have six months to get this message through to the politicians, Peter. Somehow I doubt they are listening, seemingly more interested at this stage in finger pointing.
>We need to rebuild our social and physical infrastructure to make us a more flexible and capable country. We need to recover social solidarity to ensure the costs of the crisis and the responses to it are shared fairly. We need to rebuild government as the central process in society, genuinely democratic and led by the best people we have.<
Conundrum: how do we ensure the best people are the ones being nominated? There are a number of indicators to suggest that politics are not attracting the best available, and there are a number of good reasons for this. Any suggestions, Peter?
Posted by arcticdog, Monday, 28 May 2007 10:29:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Two of the most important issues in the World today is that of peak oil and Global warming, yet I hear nothing mentioned by either the Coalition or Labor in relation to peak oil and very little on Global warming in the run-up to the polls.
As far as Global warming goes, Labor has a few points on the board, but well behind the Greens. The Coalition has only just jumped onto the band-wagon and only because it smelled a loss of votes if it did not do so. Once re-elected, any current Coalition policy on Global warming will be quickly shelved whilst they get back to the job of destroying the lives of working people, but hopefully, without a Senate majority.
Presently, we have some who believe peak oil began as far back as 2000 and we have others that put peak oil at around 2050. Most who have studied the problem put it happening at between 2010-2035. 2035 is only 28 years away, but well outside the realms of election periods, which is all our present Government and opposition seem to relate to. The Howard led Government is all about making money. The opposition is little different. Howard knows about the threat of peak oil. There was a recent Senate inquiry into the matter. (See link below)
http://www.aph.gov.au/SEnate/committee/rrat_ctte/oil_supply/submissions/sublist.htm
Peak oil doesn't appear to have shown up on the opposition radar at all which is really scary. Perhaps, since they can see no immediate answer to the ever increasing price of crude oil, they prefer to bury their heads hoping it's all a bad dream, but should Labor squeak in, they're the ones that will have to deal with the problem should it become obvious in the next year or so.
Dr. McMahon is quite right. The next Government will need to implement plans to allow for the slow change-over to a World with ever depleting oil reserves, failing economies and a lifestyle far removed from that which prosperous Nations continue to enjoy today.
Posted by Aime, Monday, 28 May 2007 11:03:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In future we can still live a reasonably comfortable life. We need much better and further developed suburban rail systems. For example in Sydney from Martin place under the harbour to Manly, Palm Beach and The Entrance. Our cars need to be downsized for everyone with a shift to hybrid and electric power and maybe we need parking sites in our cities and out train stations which allow electric powered vehicles to be recharged. Like the Canadians and French we need to accept the benefits of the latest designs of atomic power stations, including breeder types which could supply power for millenia, and to obtain as much electric power as we can from the most efficient and consistent renewable resources. Our business and our government horizons must expand from the next quarters results and the next election to planning for energy for the next twenty centuries and beyond.
Posted by Foyle, Monday, 28 May 2007 11:14:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree with you Folye, except the part about "breeder" reactors, but only because I don't know enough about them. ie: Do breeder reactors create un-disposable nuclear waste like conventional reactors? We really don't want to leave our future generations with our mess.
What about a combination of wind, solar, wave (as seen on Catalyst last week) and geo-thermal electricity? Much cheaper and quicker to implement than nuclear surely?
Small electric commuter cars should be considered for short trips and yet our PM openly opposes EV's, siting job losses through lack of required maintenance as his main objection, but he fails to realise that car manufacturing in this country is slowly losing ground to imports. What a boon it would be to see an EV manufacturing plant in a couple of States!
To be honest, I seriously doubt humanity can change in time to meet the demands of "peak oil." Not while big oil companies are reaping huge profits from unfortunate motorists. Collusion between Governments and oil companies the World over, have seen tracks torn up and EV's killed off. That same collusion persists today and will see us all knee deep in sewage before Governments hold out their hands to ordinary people.
It's so sad to think that no political party in this country is strong enough to go against the grain of big money and say enough is enough!
Posted by Aime, Monday, 28 May 2007 12:13:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Why do my hackles rise when I see an article that begins "Everyone knows..."

>>Everyone knows that the coming federal election is an unusually important one<<

Unfortunately, the outcome is already known: politicians will be elected.

Until and unless there is radical change to the way in which we choose to govern ourselves, every election will be equally meaningless. In fact, the longer we continue under the present system where we are forced as an electorate to continually reward failure, the more meaningless they will become.

We fail to hold our government responsible for either the promises it makes, or the promises it breaks. Where's the sense in that?

Where is the sense in calling an election "unusually important", when there are absolutely no repercussions against a politician who lies to us?

Outside parliament, their behaviour would be rightly regarded as criminal. Corruption, extortion, fraud, theft... all have been sanctioned by our parliamentary system, while "privilege" attends the parasites at every turn, as the politicians leech upon us for their allowances, perquisites and lifetime of financial security.

When they are done, where do they go? They "consult to industry", encouraging their successors to find new ways to fill their snouts from the public trough.

"Unusually important?" Not a chance. Just the same old, same old round of overheated words and empty promises.

Wake me when it's over.

Or in time for the Revolution, whichever comes first.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 28 May 2007 1:05:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Usual doom and gloom scenario from the pious souls of the Stoic Left. No doubt it is their hardy stock which will inherit the Eden like post apocalyptic world they yearn for. My only hope is that in the "dark times" before the glory world of Leon and Co we can drive around in old Falcons like on Mad Max. Gotta have some fun!!

Does anyone want to take a bet on what the world will be like in 20 years time ?
Posted by westernred, Monday, 28 May 2007 1:30:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
aime, parliamentary governments can't get elected if they anger large corporations. they are the last group on earth to suggest radical response to new danger.

people like you could drive citizen initiatives to the polls for consideration by the electorate, if we had this power. we don't, because the political level of evolution here is too backward. it's not just the pollies, they are a fair mirror of the electorate.

it's quite possible that it's too late to prevent disaster. but if governor swarzeneggar and rupert murdoch are on board, it's getting harder for the professional know-nothings to claim action against global warming is a lefty scare. there can be change, and maybe the best effort we can make will be decisive. considering that the stakes might be survival, young people better get busy changing things, if they want to be old people.
Posted by DEMOS, Monday, 28 May 2007 2:18:05 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Peak Oil is a much more immeadiate threat than global warming.
At least there is currently a stop in world average temperature rise.

Peak oil gives every sign that it started in 2005 and it just depends on
how big are the lies being told by the Arabs about their reserves as to
when we will get the wakeup call that every man & his dog will not be able to ignore.
I notice the US is having trouble buying petrol to make
up for their low refinery output.

It is little news items like that that are the straws in the wind.
To get the pollies to respond is very difficult. I had the opertunity
to speak to a pollie about it and I got the usual glazed over look.
They are frightened to say to the electorate that they will have to
start planning for petrol rationing.
Yet they offer $2000 to put gas in the car. They mothball old busses
instead of scapping them. They offer $8000 for solar installation.

Tell those electors that they won't be able to go zooming around in their
hotted up Commodores or Falcons, ha you got to be kidding !
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 28 May 2007 2:55:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I doubt "everyone" does know the importance of the upcoming election - at the moment we are being bias fed by the media that the result is a foregon e conclusion (and therefore noone needs to think about the issues involved).
To suggest that the Coalition is not concerned about the environment is ridiculous. The ALP is promising the heavens as well as the earth in regard to the environment (and a number of other issues). The reality is that they will do as the unions want - and that is the view of more than one well informed political commentator. Some people may not see that as a bad thing, others may see it as a disaster waiting to happen. What we can be fairly certain about is that the economic reality of climate change and oil issues is not going to sit with comfortably with the mortgage, the two cars and the outher accoutrements of 21st Century living in a "rich" country. As one who has never been able to afford a mortgage or even a car (although I do have a 'fridge and a microwave oven) I will be interested to see whether people are prepared to do without to help the climate...my guess is - not.
Posted by Communicat, Monday, 28 May 2007 3:36:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I read an article recently pointing out that the relatively simple "life-style" we lived only 30 or 40 years ago was more than adequate. It provided most of us with all the material comforts that we needed to live a prosperous life. Back then we didnt feel deprived nor were our insatiable desires constantly stimulated by 24 hour wall to wall advertising.

One of the most thorough-going books ever written by an Australian re the origins & consequences of our squanderous, fear based "life-style" is Economia by Geoff Davies.

http://www.geoffdavies.com

Published by ABC Books----boo hiss!
Posted by Ho Hum, Monday, 28 May 2007 4:07:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hear, hear! Geoff Davies' "Economia" is a ripper read and really shows the non-existent theoretical foundations of modern economics. (i.e. It shows that, as a "science" it has no basis in reality.) Jim Puplava of financialsense.com is telling people to begin moving their investment positions into cash now to await a collapse of world stockmarkets. Apparently, the workers in investment firms are moving their money into safer positions while continuing to spout the "all is rosy" message to the punters they advise. Much comment from Puplava and others (see kitco.com) about how US Government economy stats bear little correspondence to reality. Interesting times approaching rapidly methinks!
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Monday, 28 May 2007 4:28:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles is spot on ... "Unfortunately, the outcome is already known: politicians will be elected."

There is currently a dearth of decent people to 'lead us out of' the serious mess our society is increasingly confronted by. At the government level, we are lied to and misled at every turn by a tiny minority of well-rewarded 'people's representatives' who make non-transparent and unaccountable decisions behind the closed doors of a cabinet ... advised and sheltered along the way by equally well-rewarded 'public managers' and a plethora of parasitic 'lobbyists' from national and trans-national industries and shareholders in search of a quick buck in the various forms of government largess or Corporate Welfare!

And although we are given the opportunity once every 3 or 4 years to get rid of those who fail to represent us (only to be replaced by others of the same class and motivation), we are NEVER able to remove from office those who 'manage' (control) the system on a day-to-day basis, formulating and enforcing 'policy' while the politicians are out-n-about kissing babies and doing 'photo ops' beside sports 'stars' and foreign 'royalty'!

Meantime, 'executive' employees of giant national and inter-national corporations reward themsevles with obscene income and 'exit packages', even when the company is going down the toilet, often throwing thousands of decent employees on the scrapheap, to be picked up by the 'low-wage' scavengers!

“the secret of liberty is to enlighten men as that of tyranny is to maintain their ignorance.” – Robespierre
Posted by Sowat, Monday, 28 May 2007 4:32:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
in other words, sowat, we need democracy, and soon.
Posted by DEMOS, Tuesday, 29 May 2007 8:37:47 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
right on DEMOS ... however the insatiably greedy minority who rule over us and exploit our labour and mutually endowed natural resources are highly unlikely to give up their privileged lifestyles and power without a struggle.

'We the people' will never achieve true democracy without an organised, concerted campaign to oust them and the sycophantic 'muddle management' class within the media, public service (joke!), academe, finance industry and so on who support them.
Posted by Sowat, Tuesday, 29 May 2007 9:17:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The current government has a decade of successes to support its claim to be the right government for Australia at this time.

When the federal opposition were last in power they lied about the tax cuts which were “Law”, created the “recession we had to have”, assured us that no Australian child would live in poverty etc.

So “Who is the smartest and most hard working political party, best equipped to lead the country in tough times ?”

Slam dunk: the one which reduced the public debt and enabled people to save for their own future; not the one who taxed to the hilt whilst building a public debt to hang around the necks of our grandchildren .

A “green economy” is still an “economy”, needing prudent and fiscally sound management. You can be as “green” as you want but it will be too late when you are going to bed at dusk because the greens have legislated to shut down the power stations and lighting oil is rationed and available only to the upper echelons of “party officials”

Sowat: commenting on democracy and quoting Robespierre in the same breath is a dangerous pursuit, bearing in mind how the concentration of power affected his “reasoning” and the outcome of that reasoning being the latter of the French “Terrors”.

As for “'We the people' will never achieve true democracy without an organised, concerted campaign to oust them and the sycophantic 'muddle management' class within the media, public service (joke!), academe, finance industry and so on who support them. “

You read like Robespierre. Your strategy, remove the muddlers, is revolution justified by supposed social justice / progress.

Same argument was used by Pol Pot in Cambodia.

Pol Pot, restarted the Calendar, like Robespierres new calendar.

Destroy the “muddlers” and teachers and “educated classes” Robespierres great terror and Pol Pot’s “Re-Education” camps.

Invoke the terrors of the guillotine, gulags and killing fields.

It has all been said by fools before and tyrants from Robespierre to Stalin to Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot have lead all those fools into the abyss.
Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 30 May 2007 10:20:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Col Rouge,
Perhaps you can explain to me why the government is loath to
mention peak oil. They will chat on about global warming but not even
acknowledge the existance of the looming problem.
They had 20 years at most to prepare for peak oil starting in 1985.
Oh, bit late now isn't it ?
If they are lucky they might have five years instead of 20 years.

They are not prepared to take the people into their confidence.
In a few years at the current depletion rate of our own supplies we
will be importing 75% of our oil. Where will our surpluses be then ?

I suspect they are fully aware, but are too timid to mention it.
The problem is too serious to just pretend it will go away.
It won't and the longer they ignore it the more expensive and
difficult it will be to mitigate the disasterous effects.
Posted by Bazz, Wednesday, 30 May 2007 2:25:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Crisis! What crisis? Peak oil is a myth, since shortages of easily accessible oil (which will occur) will result in higher prices which in turn will make it economic to recover oil from tar sands or other currently uneconomic resources.
As for the climate change crisis, we've been pumping large volumes of CO2 into the atmosphere for some 200 years, so what makes anyone think that we have to solve the problem in the months prior to the next federal election or even in the next term of government? The reality is that a problem that's been 200 years in the making will, like the salinity crisis in Australia, take decades before we find the right answers and implement them.
This election is no different to any other of the post-war period. We still have to choose the party that we hope will make the right short- and long-term decisions for the future of our nation and its citisens.
Posted by Bernie Masters, Monday, 4 June 2007 10:27:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz in nineteenth Century England, there were economic doomsayers predicting the end of civilisation as known due to pending exhaustion of coal resources.

These prophets were no different to the greenhouse brigade of today who focus their profound lack of vision on “all things remaining equal” and fail to appreciate that even whilst they speak new innovations and inventions are ensuring that “all things are no longer equal”

I am a great believer in how individuals are paramount. All ideas and innovations are first visualised in one persons imagination before they evolve into development and the factories which churn them out or implement them into the market of users and consumers.

Example in recent years, the power requirements of a modern colour TV or radio is significantly lower than the powre needs of their valve based predecessors. Rechargable battery technology has leapt foreward and solar cells did not exist 50 years ago. In around 1965 an executive left important papers in his office in London and went to a meeting in New York. He realised and had his secretary jump on a plane with the papers and deliver them to him using a later flight. Nowadays he would have them either faxed or emailed.

Nothing remains equal except, it seems, the lack of imagination of the doomsayers.
Fortunately through mass communication, the world relies of the imagination of but a few, the marketing skills of a few more and hopefully a government with enough intelligence to "not want to repair what is not broken" to counter-balance whole nations of the mindless and unimaginative (and of course, be rewarded according to their contribution)
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 5 June 2007 10:43:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry Col Rouge, I don't understand the connection to electrical demand.
I am talking about oil supplies, ie liquid fuels.
If you think oil depletion is a myth then I suggest you take it up with
the oil producing companies and countries. They are fully aware of what
peak oil is. Australia peaked in 2000, the North Sea in 1999,
Iran has peaked, the US peaked in 1970, 65 of 98 oil producing countries
have peaked so what is mythical about that ?

In 2000 we produced about 800,000 barrels a day, which was just about
what we used. We are now down to around 500,000 barrels a day.
The difference between our increased demand and our depleted output
is made up by imports. Nothing mythical about the multibillion dollar
bill we are paying for those imports.
The only argument about peak oil is when not if.
It all depends on how big a liars are the Arabs.
You should really have a look at what has happened.
The peak of oil discovery was way back in 1964.
We have never discovered more oil than we used since 1983.
Anyone who thinks a finite resource can be used indefinately is
either a madman or an economist.
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 5 June 2007 11:56:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz “Sorry Col Rouge, I don't understand the connection to electrical demand.

I am talking about oil supplies, ie liquid fuels."

I was illustrating, using electricity as an energy media.

So to put it another way, we, as consumers, consume “energy”. My illustration was intended to convey that energy “productivity” in regard to electricity had improved significantly in the past 50 years.

But to be more specific to your comment; developments in engine efficiency now produces cars which travel further on gallon of fuel than models built in say the 1940’s. Another illustration – some of the gas we now use as an energy source used to be burnt off at the well head or in process, thus we have a better utilisation of absolute energy through capture of previously wasted resources.

Whilst I am sure a finite resource cannot be used indefinitely I am equally sure that the ways of utilising what remains of that finite resource is tied up with competitive market forces and improving the economic viability of alternatives, as that finite resource becomes scarcer and its base price increases.

Example, the production cost of hybrid cars would deem them non-viable / uneconomic whilst oil prices were at $15 / barrel. However, with oil at $60+ / barrel, everything changes.

Research and risk capital for alternative sources of energy or capital intensive improvements in process, be they renewable of otherwise, whilst oil was priced at $10 / barrel were not worth investigating but oil is now 6 times more expensive and every alternative that much more worthy of research and potential development
Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 6 June 2007 10:00:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Col Rouge;
Well yes everything you say is correct about the effect on
making other fuels and harder to get oils more economical as prices rise.
The problem is however all these alternatives, including replacing the
car fleet with more efficient vehicles needs time and we do not have
that sort of time.

Have you read the Hisrch report ? This change over and development of
alternatives was addressed in that and the minimium required is 20 years.

You can find the report on the ASPO web site; www.aspo.net
Posted by Bazz, Wednesday, 6 June 2007 11:00:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz: I think people are more resilient and flexible in responding to a crisis that you may be giving them credit for. During World War 2, the USA and England changed their economies massively in less than a couple of years in response to the actions or threats of Japan and Germany. Here in Western Australia, the Water Corporation has responded in less than 5 years to our so-called water crisis. Japan in less than 10 years after WW2 took all the necessary steps to start down the path of being one of the world's economic powerhouses.
The shortages of oil caused by peak oil being reached will not happen over night. Prices will rise over several years as oil shortages start to bite over the same time frames. This will give human beings lots of time and opportunities to respond positively to the challenges that we will have no choice but to resolve sustainably.
Posted by Bernie Masters, Wednesday, 6 June 2007 11:14:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bernie,
You said . . . "This will give human beings lots of time and opportunities to respond positively to the challenges that we will have no choice but to resolve sustainably." . . . and that builds to the author's point. How do people adapt if they don't even know there is a need to do so? On what grounds would they constrain their lifestyles? For as long as Government, of any persuasion, ignores the inevitability of our future, we will be late to respond and so experience greater stress - social and economic - than we need to.

You said previously . . "we've been pumping large volumes of CO2 into the atmosphere for some 200 years" . . . and that argument too ignores a fundamental reality. 200 years ago there was a relatively miniscule world population with only a small minority of them partaking in CO2 emitting practices. Globally the rate of CO2 emission, like the rate of oil, gas and coal consumption continues to increase. Consumer demand for oil will be met in those countries that have the military or financial power to secure and control them. Take a quick look at Australia's national debt and military status and consider whether we will have access to the oil we have grown so accustomed to.

Then consider whether the Australian population will reduce any time soon. Check out the SA (Labour) Premier, Mike Rann's idiotic goal to increase state population by 33%, or the (Liberal) Treasurer, Peter Costello's glee at rising birth rates. Its all irresponsible smoke and mirrors. They make travelling snake oils salesmen look downright honest.

So it doesn't matter what a politician says, and we should have little faith in what they will do. But ordinary folk like us, acting locally to prepare for the coming power-down, can at least be ready for the inevitable decline in economic strength and living standards.

This is not doom and gloom. Its realistic and positive action.
Posted by Greenlight, Wednesday, 6 June 2007 2:15:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Greenlight "200 years ago there was a relatively miniscule world population "

You make a good point.

The issue is not so much we, as individuals, produce too much CO2 but there are just too many of us producing CO2.

We come back to the real problem, how to fix the world population?

I note a mere 60 years ago Australia had 1/3rd the population it has today.

Every effort and resource deployed toward resolving "greenhouse gases / global warming / environmental degradation" is a complete waste of effort.

The real focus, the only thing which will solve anything, is to divert all those resources and efforts into answering the simple question -

"How do we reverse the world population explosion?"

Answer that and the rest of the problems, almost miraculously, dissappear.

I have a few ideas, maybe

Hold back on the cure for AIDS,

Stop messing with the balancing influence of high infant mortality rates.

Ban the Roman Catholic Church and any other institution which preaches anti-contraceptive strategies.

Locally

Abandon the Baby-Bonus

Tax incentives for Tinks (Two Incomes, No Kids)

Ultimately though, it is a world wide problem which can only be resolved by world wide action. The few of us in Australia really don't matter. The billions in China and India do but we should still expect to contribute to population decline if we want to ask other nations to do so.
Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 6 June 2007 2:41:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Greenlight: Thanks for the comments. My response is that, if people don't know what to do, then there really can't be much of a crisis that needs resolving. I'm not trying to be flippant. My experience is that most politicians and government lead from behind; they follow the demands of the broader community. If the community doesn't demand action and solutions to a crisis, then there won't be much leadership coming out of our pollies. Conversely, if as seems to be the case now with climate change the community is leading the government, just remember that government is the biggest industry in Australia: I can't tell you the national figures but in WA the state public service employs more people than any single company and the state budget is $16 billion. If politicians believe that they have to come up with answers, they've got the resources to be able to do this very quickly.

I note that the question of population growth has now been raised. I really can't see any cure for population growth except for the solutions we've learned from the last couple of hundred years: economic prosperity which causes people to have less children. My conclusion may not be a popular one but I believe that we morally and ethically don't have a choice about whether to control human population: we can't, unless we want to do it the same way as Mao or Stalin or Pol Pot to Hitler. The decision not to have children will be taken as always by the individual mother and/or father and we have to give people the economic conditions (the prosperity) whereby they choose not to have more.
Posted by Bernie Masters, Wednesday, 6 June 2007 3:13:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well Col & Bernie it would be nice if we could just leave it till
everyone could see the problem. By the time it is obvious to everyone
it will be too late. Thats why, in theory, we have leaders that are
supposed to listen to the whistle blowers, look into the problem and
act on what the experts tells them.

During the war there was enough time to get everything going as they
had the energy available.

Now we will be competing against other countries for the energy and
our oil companies are all owned by US & European companies.
They will not compete with their head offices for oil.
The Oil Depletion Protocol would allieviate that but I am not too
optimistic that it will be implemented.

If the optimists such as yourselves are correct then 20 years might
just be enough time if we started two years ago.
Us pessimists look at the shape of the global oil production curve
as it has flattened out for the last 2 1/2 years and shake our heads.
Posted by Bazz, Wednesday, 6 June 2007 6:03:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy