We’ll be damned if we do resolve it, we will be damned if we dont resolve it.
What I mean is, the immediate action required to resolve climate change has such a profound effect on the stability of the global population, it poses a risk to the lives of the global population, and that risk is a real adverse effect which must be avoided.
Similarly, if the immediate action required to resolve climate change is not taken, then the effect of the continued pollution on the planet shall be as forecast; devastating to the balance of our ecosystem.
The application of Human Rights laws internationally, theoretically can provide guidance, as to actions required in relevant situations (for example the prevention of industrial pollution which is causing respiratory illness in contravention to Article 3 (Inhumane Treatment), Article 5 (the Right to Life) and Article 8 (The right to a family life) however the enforcement of the same presents a real issue as the UN lacks the teeth required to enforce it in countries which have such a flagrant disregard for said rights. Also this action if taken by another nation would be viewed as politically condemned as its looked down upon to interfere with another state’s domestic policy and enforcement of the same. The principles and theories give at best the illusion that the powers that be run a tight ship; A fair and just society which guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms, yet this is just an illusion, and cases arise from a minority of situations.
Perhaps it would be wise to focus on the Protection of Human Rights within the UK, rather than Housing Starts (New Builds) data sets which are being used to influence the economic outlook of the country, as they are a key economic indicator used in the finance industry.
Talking domestically, I can see that the revolution comes from a manifesto of a political party who is going to enact legislation which requires manufacturers and importers to perform product analysis on all goods, determining their Environmental Impact score. The Legislation could be part of a series of taxation reforms which increase the import duty on goods deemed to have high Environmental Impact scores, and due to this high import duty, all the non-friendly products are filtered out from the economy, and we are left with goods which are “NECESSARY” to live. Reducing waste, reducing manufacturing and industrial pollution on needless products, and really changing the economic values of the world.
However this does have a downside to the legislative, and that is funding for the public services provided for by the state; If any change is made to the consumer habits of the population, then all states will feel the reduction in consumer spending through their tax income stream as gained from the taxation of goods, or lack of taxation of goods subject to sanction due to being environmentally unfriendly.
Hence forth, we shall be damned if we do, and damned if we dont!
Comment by Anonymous on 17/07/2020 at 11:44 am
Its all well and good saying London is going to reduce auto emissions by bringing in Electronic cars, yet this is the second highest contributor to GHG emissions in the capital, the first being energy consumption in buildings. They should concentrate on the First major contributor. Anyway, bringing in electronic cars is not a solution, it is simply transferring the emissions from the back end of a car to a power station which is generation electricity (used to charge the car) and resulting in just as much emissions. Government slight of hand at its finest if you ask me. Needs to be coupled with solar farms and green energy, however the development of such a supply for every car in England is some mean feat! I would like to see that.
Comment by Anonymous on 17/07/2020 at 11:56 am
As stated in earlier comment:
“We’ll be damned if we do resolve it, we will be damned if we dont resolve it.
What I mean is, the immediate action required to resolve climate change has such a profound effect on the stability of the global population, it poses a risk to the lives of the global population, and that risk is a real adverse effect which must be avoided.
Similarly, if the immediate action required to resolve climate change is not taken, then the effect of the continued pollution on the planet shall be as forecast; devastating to the balance of our ecosystem.”
These are the two issues on the scales which must be decided upon; worldwide instability caused by the revolutionary change demanded by climate change.
Or Climate change itself, the effects of which cannot be undone.
Seems to me the lesser of the two evils is the immediate instability of the world economy when the drastic change required occurs (if it occurs), and the greater of the two evils is the risk of irreversible climate change occurring.
There are the two options; its upto the media to publicise them and gather a consensus as to what action they want to take.
Comment by Anonymous on 17/07/2020 at 12:25 pm
Thanks for your message Vivienne. It is inspiring as always! Fabulous outfit too!
Comment by Jeffrey Jordan on 18/07/2020 at 1:47 am
We’ll be damned if we do resolve it, we will be damned if we dont resolve it.
What I mean is, the immediate action required to resolve climate change has such a profound effect on the stability of the global population, it poses a risk to the lives of the global population, and that risk is a real adverse effect which must be avoided.
Similarly, if the immediate action required to resolve climate change is not taken, then the effect of the continued pollution on the planet shall be as forecast; devastating to the balance of our ecosystem.
The application of Human Rights laws internationally, theoretically can provide guidance, as to actions required in relevant situations (for example the prevention of industrial pollution which is causing respiratory illness in contravention to Article 3 (Inhumane Treatment), Article 5 (the Right to Life) and Article 8 (The right to a family life) however the enforcement of the same presents a real issue as the UN lacks the teeth required to enforce it in countries which have such a flagrant disregard for said rights. Also this action if taken by another nation would be viewed as politically condemned as its looked down upon to interfere with another state’s domestic policy and enforcement of the same. The principles and theories give at best the illusion that the powers that be run a tight ship; A fair and just society which guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms, yet this is just an illusion, and cases arise from a minority of situations.
Perhaps it would be wise to focus on the Protection of Human Rights within the UK, rather than Housing Starts (New Builds) data sets which are being used to influence the economic outlook of the country, as they are a key economic indicator used in the finance industry.
Talking domestically, I can see that the revolution comes from a manifesto of a political party who is going to enact legislation which requires manufacturers and importers to perform product analysis on all goods, determining their Environmental Impact score. The Legislation could be part of a series of taxation reforms which increase the import duty on goods deemed to have high Environmental Impact scores, and due to this high import duty, all the non-friendly products are filtered out from the economy, and we are left with goods which are “NECESSARY” to live. Reducing waste, reducing manufacturing and industrial pollution on needless products, and really changing the economic values of the world.
However this does have a downside to the legislative, and that is funding for the public services provided for by the state; If any change is made to the consumer habits of the population, then all states will feel the reduction in consumer spending through their tax income stream as gained from the taxation of goods, or lack of taxation of goods subject to sanction due to being environmentally unfriendly.
Hence forth, we shall be damned if we do, and damned if we dont!
Comment by Anonymous on 17/07/2020 at 11:44 am
Its all well and good saying London is going to reduce auto emissions by bringing in Electronic cars, yet this is the second highest contributor to GHG emissions in the capital, the first being energy consumption in buildings. They should concentrate on the First major contributor. Anyway, bringing in electronic cars is not a solution, it is simply transferring the emissions from the back end of a car to a power station which is generation electricity (used to charge the car) and resulting in just as much emissions. Government slight of hand at its finest if you ask me. Needs to be coupled with solar farms and green energy, however the development of such a supply for every car in England is some mean feat! I would like to see that.
Comment by Anonymous on 17/07/2020 at 11:56 am
As stated in earlier comment:
“We’ll be damned if we do resolve it, we will be damned if we dont resolve it.
What I mean is, the immediate action required to resolve climate change has such a profound effect on the stability of the global population, it poses a risk to the lives of the global population, and that risk is a real adverse effect which must be avoided.
Similarly, if the immediate action required to resolve climate change is not taken, then the effect of the continued pollution on the planet shall be as forecast; devastating to the balance of our ecosystem.”
These are the two issues on the scales which must be decided upon; worldwide instability caused by the revolutionary change demanded by climate change.
Or Climate change itself, the effects of which cannot be undone.
Seems to me the lesser of the two evils is the immediate instability of the world economy when the drastic change required occurs (if it occurs), and the greater of the two evils is the risk of irreversible climate change occurring.
There are the two options; its upto the media to publicise them and gather a consensus as to what action they want to take.
Comment by Anonymous on 17/07/2020 at 12:25 pm
Thanks for your message Vivienne. It is inspiring as always! Fabulous outfit too!
Comment by Jeffrey Jordan on 18/07/2020 at 1:47 am