Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

My advice for rescuing the world is probably to create some sort of world food initiative...

As well as provide low income housing, programs for low income individuals and family, some sort of available psychiatric help for those who cannot afford it, fixing the legal system, create flexible caps on pollution rates.

[NullForceOmega]

Large scale solutions can only be implemented when the necessary infrastructure to support them exists, that infrastructure does not exist at this time.  You cannot solve the large interconnected issues if you cannot solve the smaller scale issues that make up the large ones.  As a group you keep talking about trying to alter fundamental aspects of the system without regard to the fact that you have to tear down the system and rebuild it to support your solution.  If we cannot fix little things, then big things are beyond us.

[Radio Controlled]

It is more telling that there are more people who want to actually "correct" NullForceOmega who, for all they know, isn't even wrong in his point of view from his situation. (Yes, being in dire straights DOES narrow your priorities significantly)

Then they actually care about the topic.

Which yeah, is typical Bay12 "You're the problem" mentality... but that is to me the more interesting thing about this topic.

No one just lets NullForceOmega live. He MUST be wrong. You all must be justified in your thinking.

When really what he says doesn't affect your arguments in anyway. It is why I originally painted it as more of a "Your entitled".

He literally asked for plausible ideas one can employ. We give him one, and later provide proof against his baseless claim.

Either way, if he is in a position where he cannot do a lot to improve things, then I will never say he is at fault. We are not in here to blame people, this is not a competition to be most eco-friendly. We are asking that people do what they can, within reasonable limits, because a lot of people can do more but simply choose not to.

[Eagleon]

Large scale solutions can only be implemented when the necessary infrastructure to support them exists, that infrastructure does not exist at this time.  You cannot solve the large interconnected issues if you cannot solve the smaller scale issues that make up the large ones.  As a group you keep talking about trying to alter fundamental aspects of the system without regard to the fact that you have to tear down the system and rebuild it to support your solution.  If we cannot fix little things, then big things are beyond us.

I have a difficult life too. I'd like to hear some ideas from your end. But maybe that's part of the problem, it's difficult to gain working perspective over these issues when you're facing poverty and an utter lack of expendable time.

[Neonivek]

Well I am just going to say this

There is nothing you really can do. You might be surprised but the residential sector doesn't "pollute" all that much. Heck even the old "Conserve electricity" is basically outright meaningless because of how much the residential power grid is dwarfed by the industrial one.

Anything that needs to be done needs to be done on a less personal level. Meaning you have to actually "fight city hall"

SURE you could switch to vegetarianism and go "Yep I did my part" except that your diet is only possible because people eat meat. We couldn't support the same population on a healthy vegetarian diet.

You could use less electricity but with how power is generated nowadays you aren't actually "using up more resources" by doing so.

You could recycle... but we.. that has a lot of other problems.

[Arx]

Pure vegetarian diets require vitamin supplements, i.e. processed goods.  I'm already scraping the bottom of the barrel for enough cash to function on with a wife an two kids, don't try to convince me to radically alter basic nutrition requirements, vegetarianism is expensive in the US.  I don't drive anywhere, though my wife drives to and from MSU daily, I said low-cost, as in I can do it with materials on hand or very cheaply acquired.

I am a vegetarian that lives healthily, without any shortages, and I don't take supplements. It also doesn't need to cost a lot more, HOWEVER, it does take some more effort to maintain a balanced diet. If the food prices are radically different where you live, the situation might be different, but I cannot assess that without knowing exactly where you live and what the prices of various goods are over there.

And to support the anecdote here are some sources on the most common lacking nutrients and how to get them from a vegetarian diet.

Large scale solutions can only be implemented when the necessary infrastructure to support them exists, that infrastructure does not exist at this time.  You cannot solve the large interconnected issues if you cannot solve the smaller scale issues that make up the large ones.  As a group you keep talking about trying to alter fundamental aspects of the system without regard to the fact that you have to tear down the system and rebuild it to support your solution.  If we cannot fix little things, then big things are beyond us.

That's why I'm suggesting small lifestyle changes.



Fo another of those, car pooling. Colleagues and fellow students don't normally bite or just want to get you into their car to kidnap you.

[Radio Controlled]

Large scale solutions can only be implemented when the necessary infrastructure to support them exists, that infrastructure does not exist at this time.  You cannot solve the large interconnected issues if you cannot solve the smaller scale issues that make up the large ones.  As a group you keep talking about trying to alter fundamental aspects of the system without regard to the fact that you have to tear down the system and rebuild it to support your solution.  If we cannot fix little things, then big things are beyond us.

Supply and demand. More people become vegetarian, then the industry will adapt to meet the new demands.

Well I am just going to say this

There is nothing you really can do. You might be surprised but the residential sector doesn't "pollute" all that much. Heck even the old "Conserve electricity" is basically outright meaningless because of how much the residential power grid is dwarfed by the industrial one.

Anything that needs to be done needs to be done on a less personal level. Meaning you have to actually "fight city hall"

3 things: that is again avoiding personal responsability by pointing to others/other institutions. And, if political activism is indeed the way forward, then what you can do is: political activism. Thirdly, I doubt the basis of this claim, because agriculture is such a big polluter.

Again, in a capitalist society, the consumer has the power, in theory, to change things by actively choosing certain alternatives. Usability of this may vary by area.

o vegetarianism and go "Yep I did my part" except that your diet is only possible because people eat meat. We couldn't support the same population on a healthy vegetarian diet.

Unless you can provide some proof or sources, this claim is baseless. So, for sport, I claim the exact opposite.

[Levi]

We should move the conversation to a "I can't save the world" thread, that way this one could still be interesting.   

[NullForceOmega]

And what, Radio, do you propose we do with the millions of head of cattle that now function as part of our basic infrastructure?  Set them free to die of disease and over grazing within a year?  Terminate them then figure out how we're going to dispose of untold tons of rotting meat?  What are you going to do about the fertilization requirements of the vegetables you need to grow to feed your populace?

You have no plan.  This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that you're off in lala land.

[Angle]

I do agree that the personal level stuff, while sorta useful, is just too small to mean much. That's why I was suggesting that we need some way to take large scale action. Did anyone see my post beside Graknorke?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

So alright - We've got a LOT of problems that need to be addressed - Environmental problems, Social problems, Cultural problems, you name it. To make things worse, these problems are all tangled up, meaning that in order to solve one, you frequently need to at least make inroads on several others, and a solution to one might actually end up exacerbating another if you're not careful.

As such, we need more than individual solutions. We need a system for developing lots of cohesive solutions, while considering all relevant problems, and for applying these solutions on a large scale. It's gonna be quite a challenge. Right now, the only things that come close to being able to do this are governments, and unfortunately most of those can be counted squarely on the "problem" side of this equation. So obviously, we're going to need to look elsewhere for coordination. Luckily, I have an idea.

You've possibly seen me ranting about this elsewhere on the forum, but I'll repeat: It's a project of mine called Agora, you can find it in my sig. It's basically a new kind of internet forum, designed to allow large numbers of people to talk about complicated subjects without the conversation crushing itself under it's own weight, like it would on a traditional forum. Instead of linear threads, posts can be in response to any number of other posts, and can have any number of other posts in response to them. As such, the forum assumes a web structure. This, in concert with a system for ranking posts, means that the conversation can split and converge to cover all relevant topics, and that  replies that contribute more to the conversation will be more highly ranked, while those that contribute less will be lower ranked. This means that a lot more people can contribute to the conversation, and that it's a lot easier for newcomers to catch up to the conversation - They need only read the posts in their direct conversational line, and can ignore the rest, while in a traditional forum they'd have to read pages & pages, only a small fraction of the posts on which are relevant to any given pat of the conversation.

This is of course merely a tool for communication, and only a beginning, at that. There are loads and loads of problems that'll need to be solved, but I think it'll give us a step up.

[Radio Controlled]

And what, Radio, do you propose we do with the millions of head of cattle that now function as part of our basic infrastructure?  Set them free to die of disease and over grazing within a year?  Terminate them then figure out how we're going to dispose of untold tons of rotting meat?  What are you going to do about the fertilization requirements of the vegetables you need to grow to feed your populace?

You have no plan.  This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that you're off in lala land.

We slaughter and eat them, of course. They are here, it would be a waste of resources not to. What, did you think a change like this happens overnight? Don't be ridiculous, as I said, as supply for vegetarian products rise and meat based products decrease, the industry will adapt.

Also, do you realise that a lot of farmland in the US is being used to grow crops to feed animals to slaugher? We could convert this already in use farmland into growing crops for direct consumption. Remember, animals waste a lot of resources for the same amount of nutrition.

[NullForceOmega]

Those same animals also provide most of the fertilizer for said crops, so if we kill them, we have to use alternatives that will without a doubt require processing, shipping, storage, and have as large or larger footprints than the damned cattle.  No, obviously it doesn't happen overnight, or in fact at all, because there is no popular support for the idea, and there probably never will be.  To be clear, the very first result when googling ' percentage of vegetarians' states that only 3.2% of the adult population in the US are vegetarians, why?  Because very few people are willing to adopt the vegetarian diet.

[Angle]

As I said, complicated interrelated problems that need to be solved as a cohesive whole. I still think we can solve them, but it'll be difficult. In order to do so, I think we need some way of effectively harnessing lots of brainpower, hence my project.

[Baffler]

The majority of modern fertilizers are actually either mined phosphates or based on ammonia made using the Haber process nowadays. At least here in the USA.

[Radio Controlled]

Those same animals also provide most of the fertilizer for said crops, so if we kill them, we have to use alternatives that will without a doubt require processing, shipping, storage, and have as large or larger footprints than the damned cattle.  No, obviously it doesn't happen overnight, or in fact at all, because there is no popular support for the idea, and there probably never will be.

We use synthetic fertilisers on a large scale. We couldn't have modern agriculture without it. These do not need animals to produce them (well, human workers, but whatevs). Secondly, again, animals are so innefficient that they consume more resources than their fertiliser gives back to the soil. Hell, where I live there are problems with getting rid of excess animal crap!

Also, this was a discussion about what you can do. Saying 'I don't wanna go veggie because not enough other people will' is again making excuses to avoid your personal responsibility.

As I said, complicated interrelated problems that need to be solved as a cohesive whole. I still think we can solve them, but it'll be difficult. In order to do so, I think we need some way of effectively harnessing lots of brainpower, hence my project.

Do you need testers that badly?