Greta Thunberg - Time for Discipline ?

Here's the thing: A lot of people are concerned that they're gonna end up poor and destitute, if the goals that Greta wants to achieve are indeed achieved. In order to clean up the atmosphere of all the shit that current factories and motor vehicles are pumping into the air, these factories would have to be shut down completely globally, driving millions of people into unemployment and poverty and desperation, because no suitable replacement jobs could possibly be found for them all. In essence, they'd then be nothing more than bums in the social ladder, and in extreme neoliberal ultra-capitalist countries like the United States, would also get treated as such. As bottom of the barrel, despicable poor people. No mercy. Into the skid row with you, you bum. You don't bring any extra value to your society anymore, so we don't want you anymore. Scram, you fucking poor person, you. We don't care, if you are homeless, starving, and in distress.

And the polluting gas guzzlers? Consider, that your typical Tesla car costs anywhere upwards of 30,000 bucks even on a base level, +20,000 to get the worn out battery packs replaced when the time comes. Your typical minimum wage worker is not gonna be able to put that much cash down on one. They may have to rely on that 1980's clunker for a good while longer just to be able to get to work in places where public transport may not exist. But at the same time, if you put more and more punitive green taxes on oil based fuels that power these old clunkers, that's money away from food and other utilities, making just your basic survival for many that much harder. All the while the society around you refuses to understand your situation and is just all to happy to shame you for your failure to keep up with the Joneses.

What the greens too often forget is that somebody always has to bankroll a massive change like this, and the average Joe just might not be able to afford it. In Greta's case, because of her age, she's seen as somebody, who is still being supported by her father, and may therefore be blind to the financial struggles and hardships that an adult person would have to endure, without any support or sympathy from anybody. And the green transfer, it's not gonna come cheap. If it displaces too many people from society and normal, comfortable living, we could be looking at a political cost that might trigger the next world fire that sets this planet ablaze long before global warming has a chance to. Donald Trump was already a taste of things to come.

So Greta is reviled in many circles, because she wants to end the party for them, and indeed, some are worried that the whole rug of just your normal, everyday living might get pulled away from under their feet. Many people have too much to lose, and they're not ready to accept their fates.

 

The problems of going “green” are not unsolvable. In the long run green living would create huge savings as well as alternative employment. Two days ago a fire in the Boulder, Colorado are caused 500 million dollars in damage plus huge pollution issues. Of course changes in the economic system will be a prerequisite…..
Reducing the gross unequal distribution of wealth

Making the polluters pay the very real costs they impose on all of us

Required impact analysis for new private sector investments

Including inter generational equity as a consideration

Maybe a Tesla is not the answer but discouraging urban dwellers from driving 15 miles to the gallon full size pickups around town would be big help. A greener day is coming or our survival on this planet is certainly at risk. Greta has more intelligence than all the Republicans on my block combined.

 

I am not moved by greta's emotional pleas. Nor do I revile her. I actually like her spunk and energy. And clearly smart. But she's a kid. Not only lacking life experience and maturity, but education as well. She has a long way to go before I can even lend her an ear. She needs to study science/engineering and economics and put a few years of struggle in before I'd consider giving her any credibility. And I do believe she is capable of much, if she invests her time wisely. Time will tell.

Meanwhile, it doesn't take any ability to think, filter, analyze, design, or troubleshoot in order to simply repeat what someone else says. A lot of people latch onto feelings, and haven't accepted that feeling something doesn't make it true.

 

I'm for making polluters pay to clean up, and that's actually been happening. Sometimes they pay before being made to, knowing that'll happen if they don't. But yeah like I said before, we gotta clean up.

What I'm not for, is the government taking over economics. They've already made a big mess of things making life a lot more difficult for the people who do things. Instead we should be encouraging people to do things by not sticking our noses where they don't belong. And the government shouldn't be borrowing money. We're starting to pay the price now but I can only imagine the price our kids and grandkids will pay. These crazy tactics crush people's ability of upward mobility. Few people think of that when they applaud government regulation and spending benefiting their perceived priorities. It's like kick starting a large displacement single cylinder four cycle motorcycle engine (thumper). Sooner or later, and you never know when, that joker is going to kick back! Or if they do think about it then they just don't care how future generations will do.

 

BUT (and it is a BIG but) not everyone is as honest and some people will pollute and then try to dodge the cost of what they have done, which is why we need a government to (a) enforce the legislation in the first place, (b) punish those who do not or will not abide by the rules in the second place. Hence Governments SHOULD interfere as you say !!!

 

Our Media are just in love with Greta Thunberg, she hits all the talking points exactly.

If Greta were truly to say something challenging to the liberal order she would be gaslighted immediately.

Just another tool to feed you the proper talking points, to steer your curiosity away from the truly privileged.

 

Exactly.

Here is a piece from Alexandria's "shirt shop"...



There's a talking point.

----

Greta has great things to say, actually.

 

As long as there's any left among you Americans, who still scream "COMMUNISM!" when there's even the slightest hint of somebody even suggesting that you should adopt a more progressive tax system. First step is to somehow undo decades of Red Scare brain washing, and then have a look at the European models with a more open mind. The Soviet Union fell over 30 years ago, Fidel Castro is dead and most recently even North Korea isn't doing that great anymore. There's no such thing as the threat of communism anymore, and the European models aren't communism.

Of course, how you achieve this is your own, internal matter.

 

The few rich are currently paying more than half of the total federal income, how should we define what paying their 'fair share' is?

 

Prove it!

 

There are articles from such as The Heritage foundation and other right wing organizations that claim the rich pay more than 80 % of the taxes collected . There are other articles that explain why they DON'T. There's a good one in the google line up that explains it. Also, I think most everyone saw the list of corporations that pay NO taxes and in fact get money from the government. Loopholes are created by the bought and paid for legislators in order to protect the wealth of the rich. I could not bring forth the articles that I wanted because if they don't have a SHARE 'button "on the article, I don't know how to do it.

 

In 2018, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.1 percent of all individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.9 percent.

The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (40.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (28.6 percent).

Tax Foundation

 

I thought we were talking about individuals. "Rich people"

Now you're talking about corporations. If you were running a corporation, wouldn't you reinvest profits into improving and growing the corporation???

Growing corporations hire more people which not only provides more people with income but also more people paying into the public treasuries. So the corporations generate revenue that ends up in the treasuries when they reinvest their profits rather than directly pay taxes on it.

 

Course these “statistics” miss the horrible concentration of wealth at the top even before all the cozy exclusions to income. We need corporations to pay back to the community for the profits they have made by addicting people, polluting the environment, selling weapons of mass destruction….guns, monopoly and predatory capitalism….and the list goes on ad infinitude

 

How about BOTH at the same time ???