[Wilhelm]

Economic growth is compatible with concern for the environment.

What do you think about that statement? For or against? I believe it is not compatible. What are your ideas about this?

Please include proof (links, etc) to sustain your opinions.

I will tell you my opinion when this gets going.

[CasX]

Well I think it COULD be. As long as there are Government restrictions / laws to make it possible. A strong 'Green' party would make this inevitable if the Government need their support. But I don't think companies can be left to voluntarily respect the environment.

[ZenWilsonian]

For future development of the economy, careful management of the environment is REQUIRED. Oil must be conserved - we have 30 years of it left tops. Businesses who are too greedy will eventually bankrupt themselves - hell knows what e$$o will do when oil has ran out - they haven't spent a penny on alternative energy research! If the Earth's resources are drained, the future economy will be non-existent! the fact that being good to the environment can save money in the long run is something that hasn't been noticed by many businesses.

[SirBateman]

The two parties currently in power in the US have no desire to see the massive restrictions and policy changes necessary to preserve the environment of the US and the world into the next century and beyond. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are heavily lobbied and financed by corporations which would be harmed financially if significant policy changes were to be made. Until the parties are given significant motivation to change, or corporations are encouraged (bribed) to do the same, the solution to environmental gains while maintaining economic viability is not to be had.
The only viable answer to this question lies in the people forcing government to listen to it's concerns, and the way to do that, is through the election of a thrd party, non-insider candidate. The Green party, with all it's flaws, seems to be that party. But I would like to do more research on this subject. Implausible as my suggestion may seem/be.

[Comrade_Boris]

Of course economic growth is possible with environmental protection under a green/techno-socialist planned econonomy, that runs on the basis of an artificial currency that doesnt depend on market trends.

People will be trained and organised into labour batalions, and set to work for a decent wage rate on building thousands of Wind power stations on the asian steppe, maintained by a good network of roads and maintenance depot houses.

In the hotter desert climates similar projects would be built using solar power. Huge fields - like in the film GATTACA. Providing free almost unlimited energy for the people to enjoy their technological devices.

Also, with birth control - the setting of a 2 child maximum on couples, we will bring the population level down to the optimum of 1.5 billion, allowing for plentiful resources for all. Also, with less people, the people are more valued. Life is cheap and society uncaring in countries like India where the population booms are rife.

[Proctor]

Gattaca. Good movie that. Did you realise that it's name is made from the four chemicals that comprise DNA?

[Demosthenes]

Well Wilhelm, you're assuming that current econmic policy is truly destroying the envirenment. I guess this sounds almost blasphemous on this forum but the problem is that most theories on eco-damage are based on flawed science perpetuated by far left extremistists with an agenda that, in truth has little to do with "Saving the planet". This idealogy has more basis in seeking power than the magnanomy this stand suggests. For an example I will use the now infamous case of global warming:

You asked for a link, so voila: Here's a link http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

BTW- this is from the Oregan institute of science and medicine

[Siberian Fox]

That's data mining if ever I saw it.

Choose a different (longer) sample period and from the trend line one would conclude the exact opposite

The fact is that the majority of reputable scientists now accept that global warming is real. Take it to its logical conclusion Demosthenes, what would happen if we chopped down every tree on the planet and burned them all?

[Demosthenes]

The fact is that the majority of reputable scientists now accept that global warming is real. Take it to its logical conclusion Demosthenes, what would happen if we chopped down every tree on the planet and burned them all?

Ok Foxy, I'd love to get into whether global warming is real or not but I hate to take too much more away from Wilhelm's original topic. I do that enough already, and since Wilhelm's a fairly reasonable guy I hate to change it on him too much.

But quickly, I think seizing on that chart, a little out of context and calling the study flawed is a little short sighted, it is fair to "pro-global warming" if you will.

I'm also not too sure the majority of scientists agree on it. In fact it's quite hotly debated. So to base an assumption that a given economic system doesn't work because of it, is in my opinion also short sighted.

Its like dipping a pail in a lake and coming up with no fish, and then deciding there are no fish anywhere in the lake. or something like that...

(sorry Wilhelm I think I just did what I wasn't trying to do)

P.s.- I'll add a new post in the "Global warming- What's the fuss?" thread

[John Doe]

Actually, I think most scientists would agree the Earth is getting warmer... we're coming out of an Ice Age after all. What they disagree on is the amount of effect humans are having on the warming trend.

[John Doe]

Kolzene,

I'm an old guy and I remember when oil was going to run out in the 1980's and we were entering a new Ice Age. I take the global warming folks with a huge grain of salt as a result.

I have a rule of thumb... whenever a special interest group has a disaster looming a couple of decades off, and they really can't prove it but by golly we better do something just in case, and BTW that doing something involves shoveling huge wads of cash towards that same special interest group -- I don't take them very seriously.

Wise cracks about who funds research studies* aside, I have read a lot of scientific literature and there is genuine sceptisism over global warming and man's impact on it. The global warming mathematical model (since changed) predicting disasters that didn't occur when the oil wells were fired at the end of Gulf War One certainly didn't help the sky-is-falling crowd.

There is time for deliberate research IMHO.

*BTW, when you read newspapers about who funds research note this curious trend: when the report supports the chic view they list the Doctors who ran it, when it doesn't support the chic view they list the funding sources.

[John Doe]

Kolzene,

Seesh, a little on the touchy side are we? BTW, why does not putting much stock in the claims of the global warming/immenent environmental disater zealots always translate into being in favor of raping and pillaging Mother earth in some folks minds?

For the record I'm a conservationist, but not an environmentalist. A distinction that admittedly probably only exists in my mind (and which i don't have time to explain right now).

[Putinist]

Global warming is a tricky subject, and even though I feel that it is happening, it's very questionable right now so I don't debate it much.

I was originally going to save this until all the furore on the "Final Phase" revelation died down, and I still am, but I am going to state that I can prove, conclusively and beyond and shadow of a doubt, that, not only is global warming a media-invented capitalist-commissioned myth, but also that we could be just 10-20 years away from being plunged head-first into the next ice age.

I will be making a new revelatory thread similar to Important news on the future on global socialism, on which I will reveal how the Western, and international for that matter, media are deliberately covering up this alarming scenario, by hiding important facts like:
-The fact that the Planet Earth is the coldest it has ever been for thousands of years.
-The fact that 100%(!!) of the world's glaciers are growing.
-and the fact that the planet is already experience the worst snowstorms and floods (precursors to ice ages) for thousands of years.

I will not be discussing this any further on this thread - you will have to wait for my major thread on this which will be unleashing in June.