Your Questions About Green Living

What has Obama done to maKe Republicans (Conservatives) angry?

I live in Cape Town, South Africa, thousands of Kilometres away from the US – but franKly, I (along with millions outside America) Know a lot more about US politics than most Americans.

So now, I would just liKe to asK – what Obama has done to maKe republicans/conservatives so mad.

1) The US economy is in significantly better condition than if the republican policies were still in place from the days of Bush. Remember, he WAS the one who started all of this after all.

2) Obama is trying to pass a healthcare bill – which is already a fact of life in most modern countries – why is it only a controversial issue in the US?

3) It is WORLDWIDE Knowledge that Obama has struggled to pass bills to aid job creation, and improve healthcare situations, and clean-up the environment; but has failed to do so on almost every occasion due to Republican obstructionism. It is common-Knowledge all over the world, and in newspapers everywhere that the Republicans have agreed to do nothing till November. I find that almost treasonous – at yet people of the US still support such a party – why?

4) Republicans are continuously calling for more and more tax cuts and budget cuts – these austerity measures have worKed nowhere in the world (Apart from Germany – simply due to there low amount of external debt), an example of how a country can go due to austerity – Greece. Economically, it is critical to raise taxes to increase revenues. Republicans refuse to listen to reason on this issue – and it appears that they are demanding tax cuts so vigorously, due to the corporations funding them to advance these policies.

5) Why is the US one of only a few countries in the world (In fact, I can’t thinK of another country) that still struggles to accept Global Warming as a present and dangerous fact. Schools here and around the world are already teaching it to children, we have institutes in universities that investigate ways to solve the problem of global warming, and mitigate its effects; and yet the US hasn’t even accepted the fact yet, yet alone try to solve the problem. Why? What evidence do you have (and you only – in the entire world) – what maKes you so certain that global warming doesnt exist, and yet almost every single other country is now trying to find a solution.

6) Finally, many Republican supporters label BaracK Obama a Socialist. FranKly, this is laughable. This is certainly not a point that is up for debate – the straight answer is that he is not (Sadly for many uninformed Americans). The Dow Jones is higher than its been in over half a decade, corporate profits are higher than ever – there is simply no possible reasoning to justify calling him a socialist. That unfortunately is a Republican tactic – and worse, is that the people using the label, don’t Know what a socialist is – they just assume its bad. For those that don’t Know what socialism is – it is the future. Not capitalism. Capitalism and communism lead to the same inevitable sinKhole of the rich get rich, and everyone else dies poor. Socialism simply means that not EVERY single thing in a country should be privatised – for example, not every hospital or school should be privatised. Here, we would consider the privatisation of prisons to be utterly ridiculous, but in the US – this is a reality. Some things need to be controlled and regulated by the government – after all, they are there to protect people from whatever harm (Human, environmental, or corporate).

Please note, I am not a fundamental supporter of any politician, but the Republicans have become to closed-minded, fueled by uneducated thinKing, primitive ideas towards women, and international relations and science that it is impossible to taKe such a party seriously – for most of the outside world – Obama is the only choice. I’m unsure why so many Americans don’t see how disastrous a Republican electoral victory would be. Please explain your views…
lol — It’s strange how you have provided no facts – just opinions that you have been force-fed by the media – and not facts. It appears that facts seem to be troubling, because you maKe personal attacKs instead of justifying your views.

Also, “common Knowledge” is another phrase for non-American media. These are the views from news sites and newspapers from media houses around the world, that arent being paid by corporations (Usually to sway senators)

Finally, I’m a 3rd yr Engineering student – our education is fine 😉 Maybe it’s your education you should be concerned by.
@thomas f : Where O where did I say MY country has any of the things I want. Secondly, we arent in a major recession. Also, high taxes, particularly for the rich, are essential in a modern society. Finally, the the size of government is irrelevant. Its about the efficiency of government (And by the way, the massive chunK of US governemt is in the Defence Dept – the area of gov Republicans refuse to cut, but Keep asKing for cuts). Please explain…
@ thomas f : It’s clear that you have no idea what socialism is. This is the republican indoctrination. You only example (North Korea) is the most communist country on earth. Convenient how you glossed over countries liKe Finland, Sweden,, DenmarK, the Netherlands…all SOCIALIST countries. And their HDI’s are amongst the highest in the world – higher than the US‘s at any time in history.
@ McNamara – that was most definitely NOT the cause the housing bubble – that way completely due to Bush’s deregulations with the help of Geitner and Paulson…You cannot possibly blame Freddie Mac, for a worldwide recession. This is due to governmental policy. Failed REPUBLICAN governmental policy.

Also, why won’t you speaK of cutting the Defense Budget – Republicans consistantly avoid discussing that. Probably coz all Republicans are so afraid that the world is out to get them lol

Global Warming. I have never heard anyone say something liKe that. Explain how almost every country is moving towards greener energy, and has climate change and global warming in their schools’ curriculums. There is no longer any debate in the rest of the world – it’s a fact. Here’s at least ONE source that you wont manage to twist and politicise: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/…

Once again, Obama has never said the private sector is his enemy. There is nothing wrong with tho
FranKly – from what I’ve seen here. Republicans are racist & intolerant, and lacK facts in their arguments. Not a single person here can repudiate anything I have mentioned perviously.

Human Caused Global Warming- Fact or Fiction?

The Myth of Dangerous Human-Caused Climate Change

Author/s: R M Carter
Paper ID: 702012
Year of Publication: 2007
Volume Title
Conference Proceedings – New Leaders’ 2007

Abstract:

Human-caused global warming has become the environmental cause celebre of the early 21st century. The strong warming alarmist camp currently includes the United Nations, most Western governments, most of the free press, many large corporations (including Enron, before it failed), the major churches, most scientific organisations and a large portion of general public opinion. This phalanx of support notwithstanding there is no scientific consensus as to the danger of human-induced climate change. There is, therefore, a strong conflict between the level of public alarm and its scientific justification. How can this be?

In a democracy, the media serve to convey to the public the facts and hypotheses of climate change as provided by individual scientists, governmental and international research agencies, and NGO and other lobby groups. In general, the media have promulgated an alarmist cause for climate change; they have certainly failed to convey the degree of uncertainty that is characteristic of climate science, or a balanced summary of the many essential facts that are relevant to human causation.

Climate change is as much a geological as it is a meteorological issue. Natural climate changes, both warmings and coolings, are indeed a societal hazard. We usually deal with geological hazards by providing civil defence authorities and the public with accurate, evidence-based, general information about events like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and floods, and then by adapting to the effects when a damaging event occurs. As for other major natural disasters, the appropriate preparation for extreme climate events is to mitigate and manage the negative effects when they occur, and especially so for dangerous coolings. Attempting instead to ‘stop climate change’ by reducing human carbon dioxide emissions is a costly exercise of utter futility. Rational climate policies must be based on adaptation to dangerous change as and when it occurs, and irrespective of its sign or causation.

The issue now is no longer climate change as such, the reality of which will always be with us. Rather, the issues are, first, the failure of the free press to inform the public about the true facts of human-caused climate change and of the dangers posed by natural climate change. And, second, the vested interests held by many of the groups of warming alarmists. These interests include not only the obvious commercial ones, but also the many scientists and science managers who have discounted or remained silent about the huge uncertainties of the human-caused global warming hypothesis because it suited them to do so. Public opinion will soon demand an explanation as to why experienced editors and hardened investigative journalists, worldwide, have melted before the blowtorch of self-induced guilt, political correctness and special interest expediency that marks the sophisms of global warming alarmists.
Check this out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

Can you think of what Bush else was for but then flip flopped on the issues?

# Bush claims to be in favor of the environment & then dismantles environmental protections.
# Bush was against campaign finance reform; then he was for it.
# Bush was against a Homeland Security Department; then he was for it.
# Bush was against a 9/11 commission; then he was for it.
# Bush was against Condi Rice testifying before the 9/11 commission; then he was for it.
# Bush was against testifying before the 9/11 commission himself; then he was for it. (Providing Cheney held his hand & if was OFF the record)
# Bush was against an Iraq WMD investigation; then he was for it.
# Bush was against deficits; then he was for them.
# Bush first says he’ll provide money for first responders (fire, police, emergency), then he doesn’t.
# Bush first says that ‘help is on the way’ to the military … then he cuts benefits.
# Bush was for fingerprinting and photographing Mexicans who enter the US, Then, after meeting with Pres. Fox, Bush was against it.

Can you think of any more?

Tar sands – Newly elected council by the Alberta gov’t?

Hi,

For my Environmental Science 104 class, my teacher has asked us to do some research and write a short paper on a newly elected council in Alberta. According to her, the council discusses environmental issues such as the tar sands. This is essentially all the (very vague) information she gave, and I’m finding it difficult to find anything even remotely related to this issue. It is a current event, does anyone know what the name of the council is or anything about it?

Links would be appreciated, but since it’s for a university paper, they need to be from reputable sources. Thanks! 🙂

Globalization Questions?

List three problems that stem from globalization.

What are some environmental issues related to globalization?

“you can’t run a linear system on a finite planet indefinitely.” What does this suggest for the future of globalization?

said it is the government’s job to take care of us? Do you agree? Think about some of the serious issues that affect the future of the earth. What role, if any, should government have in finding solutions?

What changes are needed to make sure our economic system supports, rather than destroys, the planet’s biological systems on which we depend?