Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Bob Gillanders]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

Capitalism put us in this mess.

Why shouldn't Billionaires help get us out of it?

"The richest people on Earth, including Canadian billionaires like Chip Wilson (CEO of lululemon), Daryl Katz (pharmacies), or Galen Weston Jr. (Loblaws) – are putting their interests and the interests of their shareholders ahead of workers, communities, and the planet.

“Sharing” the wealth of billionaires, profiteering corporations, and the 1 per cent is a solution, not only to the climate crisis, but also to addressing the income inequality and lack of supports for people and communities unable to make ends meet in this challenging economic situation."

https://canadians.org/analysis/taxin...=6312875571612

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

Yes, absolutely. Thanks.
It's called progressive taxation.

[Tom O'Donnell]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

Capitalism put us in this mess.

Why shouldn't Billionaires help get us out of it?

"The richest people on Earth, including Canadian billionaires like Chip Wilson (CEO of lululemon), Daryl Katz (pharmacies), or Galen Weston Jr. (Loblaws) – are putting their interests and the interests of their shareholders ahead of workers, communities, and the planet.

“Sharing” the wealth of billionaires, profiteering corporations, and the 1 per cent is a solution, not only to the climate crisis, but also to addressing the income inequality and lack of supports for people and communities unable to make ends meet in this challenging economic situation."

https://canadians.org/analysis/taxin...=6312875571612

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

My wife and I are shareholder of Loblaws. Why shouldn't our interests be placed ahead of those who aren't shareholders?

[Dilip Panjwani]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

interests of their shareholders ahead of workers, communities, and the planet.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

Hi Bob A,
Apparently, the cost of climate damage is already built into the price of the 'extravagant' lifestyles; if not, a Libertarian government would ensure that it proportionately is. And the 'tax-avoidance' is enabled by the power we have vested into our stupid/corrupt governments to pass laws which make these possible. There is no reason for the billionaires to pay for the climate damage being caused by the rest of the community, other than charity.
And Tom is right in questioning why should the billionaires' favorites (share-holders vs others) be determined by anyone else, like you or me or Bob G? Are not share-holders part of the communities?
D

[Sid Belzberg]

Hi Bob A,
Apparently, the cost of climate damage is already built into the price of the 'extravagant' lifestyles; if not, a Libertarian government would ensure that it proportionately is. And the 'tax-avoidance' is enabled by the power we have vested into our stupid/corrupt governments to pass laws which make these possible. There is no reason for the billionaires to pay for the climate damage being caused by the rest of the community.
And Tom is right in questioning why should the billionaires' favorites (share-holders vs others) be determined by anyone else, like you or me or Bob G? Are not share-holders part of the communities?
D

[Bob Armstrong]

There is something that has gone terribly wrong with the way humans have chosen to divide the planet into "nations" and then have set up governments representing them, that then do the exact opposite, and represent covert power (The World Elite).


~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Dilip Panjwani]

There is something that has gone terribly wrong with the way humans have chosen to divide the planet into "nations" and then have set up governments representing them, that then do the exact opposite, and represent covert power (The World Elite).


~ Bob A (T-S/P)

Absolutely right!
So now, Bob A., do you realize: 'That government is the best which governs the least"... The more the power to govern others, the more corruptible the government becomes.... Units even smaller than your LPUs (about 25 person networks of family and friends) best govern themselves... and interact with other networks, under a universally accepted system of 'Natural Laws'... Circles within circles (networks within networks) would mean that if larger circles are formed of 25 smaller ones, just about 7 such steps would cover the entire human population!! Imagine the wonderful interconnectivity across the globe in such a system...

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Dilip:

I find it quite wonderful that a future view of self-government, and redistribution of global power, can both be headed in somewhat similar direction, from what I consider the right (Libertarianism) and from the left (Democratic Marxism).

I hope I have made it clear that D.M. does not espouse the big central government of the USSR-style Communism. That Marxian heresy departed from Marx's concept of "Democracy", and of "Workers' Rights". So maybe D.M. is not quite such an enfant terrible as we are made out to be by the right that wishes to smear all the left with the same brush. Just as the right is multi-faceted, so is the left.

The Problem: We must solve the Climate Crisis by about Jan. 1, 2031, according to the majority of mainstream scientific analysis. And we must do it through the governments we have, likely.

Of course, it is my view that immediate wholesale election across nations of their own Democratic Marxist Party offers the best hope for suicide-avoidance.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Dilip Panjwani]

Of course, it is my view that immediate wholesale election across nations of their own Democratic Marxist Party offers the best hope for suicide-avoidance.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

That would be a sad way of suicide-commission, not hope for suicide-avoidance.
Workers (and everybody is a worker) have more fair rights under Libertarianism than under Marxism (except perhaps the right to strike and disrupt, which is like a right to harm oneself and others at the same time, which no one should have)

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

Is there any hope?

Americas - Province of Quebec, Canada

"Young Quebecers are the least optimistic about the climate crisis: survey"

https://montrealgazette.com/news/que...G_HeadlineNews

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Tom O'Donnell]

Hi Dilip:

I find it quite wonderful that a future view of self-government, and redistribution of global power, can both be headed in somewhat similar direction, from what I consider the right (Libertarianism) and from the left (Democratic Marxism).

I hope I have made it clear that D.M. does not espouse the big central government of the USSR-style Communism. That Marxian heresy departed from Marx's concept of "Democracy", and of "Workers' Rights". So maybe D.M. is not quite such an enfant terrible as we are made out to be by the right that wishes to smear all the left with the same brush. Just as the right is multi-faceted, so is the left.

The Problem: We must solve the Climate Crisis by about Jan. 1, 2031, according to the majority of mainstream scientific analysis. And we must do it through the governments we have, likely.

Of course, it is my view that immediate wholesale election across nations of their own Democratic Marxist Party offers the best hope for suicide-avoidance.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

Left-libertarianism - Wikipedia

"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy distinguishes left-libertarianism from right-libertarianism, arguing:

Libertarianism is often thought of as 'right-wing' doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons. First, on social—rather than economic—issues, libertarianism tends to be 'left-wing'. It opposes laws that restrict consensual and private sexual relationships between adults (e.g., gay sex, non-marital sex, and deviant sex), laws that restrict drug use, laws that impose religious views or practices on individuals, and compulsory military service. Second, in addition to the better-known version of libertarianism—right-libertarianism—there is also a version known as 'left-libertarianism'. Both endorse full self-ownership, but they differ with respect to the powers agents have to appropriate unappropriated natural resources (land, air, water, etc.).^[22]"

[Dilip Panjwani]

Left-libertarianism - Wikipedia

"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy distinguishes left-libertarianism from right-libertarianism, arguing:

Libertarianism is often thought of as 'right-wing' doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons. First, on social—rather than economic—issues, libertarianism tends to be 'left-wing'. It opposes laws that restrict consensual and private sexual relationships between adults (e.g., gay sex, non-marital sex, and deviant sex), laws that restrict drug use, laws that impose religious views or practices on individuals, and compulsory military service. Second, in addition to the better-known version of libertarianism—right-libertarianism—there is also a version known as 'left-libertarianism'. Both endorse full self-ownership, but they differ with respect to the powers agents have to appropriate unappropriated natural resources (land, air, water, etc.).^[22]"

Thank you, Tom.
As far as our air and water resources are concerned, and their pollution is considered, I agree with the Left-Libertarians. As mentioned in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: What we might call equal share left-libertarianism—advocated by Henry George (1879) and Hillel Steiner (1994), for example—interprets the Lockean proviso as requiring equally valuable shares of natural resources for everyone. Thus, while individuals are morally free to use or appropriate natural resources, those who thereby acquire more than their share (understood in terms of per capita value) owe compensation to others.
And that is why I mentioned in my post earlier that 'the climate-damage cost' should be built into the price of the extravagant lifestyles (or polluting lifestyles) of those who pollute...
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy also mentions: John Tomasi (2012, p. 127) argues that many libertarians and classical liberals are committed to a kind of distributive condition requiring that societies must be expected to work to the benefit of the least well-off. This seems to overstate the matter considerably, but it is certainly true that many libertarians see their policies as promoting the general good, and this plays an important role in their justification. Hence, libertarians are wont to point out that being poor in a free society is much better than being poor elsewhere, that markets in general do not work to the detriment of the poor, and so on.

[Bob Armstrong]

Left-Libertarianism

Thanks for enlightening the ignorant........I had never heard of this distinction.

It is a critical one for non-Libertarians to know. It explains to me what I have previously considered to be Libertarian Inconsistencies.

One observation I have, and my experience is limited, is that "Libertarians" tend to cherry-pick between policies of the Left-Libertarians, and the Right-Libertarians, and in their own mind work out any contradiction that may seem to arise within their basket of policies.

Am I correct on this, Tom and Dilip? Or are most either totally left or totally right?

The exploration of Libertarianism as a "Related Issue" in this thread has been most beneficial to CT'ers coming here, IMHO.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Armstrong]

ChessTalk

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC) Thread

(Started: 21/12/9)





Week # 1 (23/1/2 – 23/1/8: 7 days)

Weekly Stats:

Views
.....................................................2023 Average.... 2022 Average
Last Week's......Prior Week's........Views/Day..........Views/Day
Views/Day........Views/Day.............(1 wk .)........ ......(1 wk.).

...26.........................13..........................26.........................44

Responses (Posts)

......................................................2023 Average.........2022 Average

....Last Week's.....Prior Week's......Responses/Day......Responses/Day

Responses/Day....Resp./Day......... (1 wk.)....................... (1 wk.)

.............7....................2.........................7............................3.

Analysis of First Weeks Stats for 2023

The stats are mixed in comparison with 2022. We'll see how the participation goes in 2023.

Climate Change Thread “Responses”

There are lots of climate change articles out there, both on negative anthropogenic climate change, and negative natural climate change.

This thread encourages CT'ers on all sides to re-post here, as responses, the climate change posts of interest they see elsewhere. Overall, ChessTalker's have been quite active here in posting “responses” and it seems that chessplayers across Canada re wanting information on climate change, a challenge unlike any our species has ever faced before.

Note: I personally, as the thread originator, am trying to post a new response at least every 2^nd day, but admit my busy schedule means I am sometimes falling short on this. So it is great that a number of other CT'ers are posting responses here somewhat regularly.

The Pressing Climate Change Issue

The core issue:

Building a sense of URGENCY on this issue in society. We must realize that we cannot kick it down the road any longer!

The public is aware of the climate change issue.......

BUT.....

climate activists must find strategies to “AWAKEN” the public to the “urgency”.

It is expected, though somewhat disheartening, to see other negative issues of the day climb immediately to the top of the public's agenda, with climate change being sometimes substantially downgraded in importance. We will all pay for this.........

The Time Line

Nature's Tipping point is estimated to be, on current trajectory, only 9 years away (Around Jan. 1, 2031). Capping the temperature rise at only 1.5 degrees Celsius (the original international target) is now impossible (UN Climate Change Panel's most recent report). Their position is that the problem at this time is mostly due to human activity, and that radical change in our method of living is the only way to avoid this rising, very problematic, temperature. UNCCP noted that current government deadlines were totally insufficient to solve the problem. CO 2 must be capped by 2025! Also, it has now become necessary to add in the process of CO 2 “removal”, along with “eliminating” the spewing of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere by human activity. And it has now become clear that the more deadly greenhouse gas is Methane, and countries' last year agreement on its reduction are on the table this year again!

Our window of opportunity is fast closing.

The Large Picture Solutions

Can we come up with at least one viable suggestion of some impressive, radical thing that might wake up the public, that we could then put out there to other concerned climate activists?

Negative “Natural” Climate Change

This thread has had a number of CT'ers arguing for Natural Climate Change, and arguing that the human economic activity contribution to negative climate change is negligible. We are just in one of Nature's long warming cycles.

We would encourage everyone to consider the materials being presented, and then see whether they in any way change your perspective, if you are an adherent of negative Anthropogenic climate change. Whether you change anything, or not, your assessment of the evidence would be most welcome in this thread.

CT'ers' Local Actions on Climate Change

You can do something! When you like one of this thread's links on an aspect of climate change, spread the news by posting it to your social media accounts and other Websites/Discussion Boards you participate in!

~ Bob (T-S/P)

[Dilip Panjwani]

Left-Libertarianism

Thanks for enlightening the ignorant........I had never heard of this distinction.

It is a critical one for non-Libertarians to know. It explains to me what I have previously considered to be Libertarian Inconsistencies.

One observation I have, and my experience is limited, is that "Libertarians" tend to cherry-pick between policies of the Left-Libertarians, and the Right-Libertarians, and in their own mind work out any contradiction that may seem to arise within their basket of policies.

Am I correct on this, Tom and Dilip? Or are most either totally left or totally right?

The exploration of Libertarianism as a "Related Issue" in this thread has been most beneficial to CT'ers coming here, IMHO.

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

The difference between right and left libertarianism is minimal as compared to the difference between Capitalism and Marxism:
Capitalism: Exploitation of workers by the owners of business is allowed, leading to worker unrest and eventual downfall of the business
Marxism: Abuse of those who design the businesses is allowed, leading to overall loss of entrepreneurship and downfall of the economy
Libertarianism: No one can abuse anybody... all are happy!

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

Weather Extremes

Warming

Subscribers Only

"Climate change causing more frequent warm winter temperatures, extreme weather expert says"

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cana...mhAW4S4QM2hoOG

~ Bob A (T-S/P)