I agree. And its going to take a long time for oil to run out, and even longer (at least hundreds of years) for coal and uranium to run out.No, both of you, that's not what I mean at all
*rolls eyes*
I'm not that naive.
I would just prefer work on these alternatives starts well in advance of a dramatically higher cost for these resources, as I don't trust entirely viable ones can be developed so quickly.
It's going to take a lot of TIME to develop is all.
ur just being silly. especially since you said economic and environmental issues frequently overlap.which is why i initially said 'type properly'. i also never referred to you as dumb. personally, i place environmental and social issues before economic ones, i'm not ill informed or ignorant. it's my choice.
Oh yeah that's fair enough.Yes, but unfortunately I am still worried about the major environmental impacts the continuing usage of these resources might have.
But that's another argument.
Read Capitalism and freedom by Milton Friedman.personally, i place environmental and social issues before economic ones, i'm not ill informed or ignorant. it's my choice.
I would just prefer work on these alternatives starts well in advance of a dramatically higher cost for these resources, as I don't trust entirely viable ones can be developed so quickly.
Good work Sylvester, have you gone ancap yet, or still a criminal minarchist?Read Capitalism and freedom by Milton Friedman.
he demonstrates how economic freedom leads to social freedom.
The idea that people view economic and social issues differently is sad. The real dichotomy is state or anti-state. As long as there is a state there won't be freedom, social or otherwise.
Well, you can't just conveniently place pricing issues to the side, can you?You don't think they already are, my price arguments aside?
I mean on top gear the other day I saw a fully functioning hydrogen car that filled up at an LA servo.
As for large scale power, we just need to get people to stop being so ignorant about nuclear power and boom, thorium reactors, problem solved.
m8 im about as anti-statist as you can getGood work Sylvester, have you gone ancap yet, or still a criminal minarchist?
yeah, i'm aware of anarcho-capitalism and i'm all for freedom but from what i can gather free markets also lead to pretty severe inequality.Read Capitalism and freedom by Milton Friedman.
he demonstrates how economic freedom leads to social freedom.
The idea that people view economic and social issues differently is sad. The real dichotomy is state or anti-state. As long as there is a state there won't be freedom, social or otherwise.
welcome to the clubm8 im about as anti-statist as you can get
admittedly I got stuck at the minarchist part for a disgustingly long time, but this was a bad time in my life...dabbling in objectivism, ignorant about concepts like polycentric law etc...
but yes, im good now
No what leads to inequality is a system of corporatism (i.e. Australia, USA) where average workers pay about half their income in tax while the richest and most powerful people pay little to no tax, and receive massive subsidies and corporate welfare.yeah, i'm aware of anarcho-capitalism and i'm all for freedom but from what i can gather free markets also lead to pretty severe inequality.
You're such a bitter little man. Why do you seek to misrepresent your political opponents instead of facing them respectfully on their political differences?omfg wtf is with this wave of hippies who have no idea with how a country works. you fucking hippies are all the same. want to save every species, want to not cut down any tress, mine any resource and yet somehow someway want to maintain the standard of living you now have and improve on it. if the greens got in and did exactly everything they said they will do. your standard of living would be as bad as those in China if not worse because at least china is smart enough to know they have to keep poullting the place if they want there shit of an economy to fucking function.
you strike me as someone who views the economy as a pie that everyone gets a certain share of i.e. you view wealth as a static quanitityyeah, i'm aware of anarcho-capitalism and i'm all for freedom but from what i can gather free markets also lead to pretty severe inequality.
why does stupidity deserve respect.You're such a bitter little man. Why do you seek to misrepresent your political opponents instead of facing them respectfully on their political differences?
shut-up, your knowledge of my political beliefs is based entirely on a couple of posts in this thread. i don't agree with you and more importantly: i don't give a fuck.you strike me as someone who views teh economy as a pie that evryone getes a certain share of i.e. you view wealth as a static quanitity
on a free market
-The size of the pie would not be limited, but keep continuing to grow, so to speak
- The rich would not be able to use government regulations to subvert competition, hence it would be harder for them to be so rich