Battlezone Forums

No matter how good it seems economy never works out in the end

Nielk1 wrote: Our government refuses to use our own resources and goes so far to demonize the use of them claiming global warming or some other bunk while then turning around and buying it all at greater and greater prices from other countries.

Which country would you rather be in in 75 years? The one that has used all it's resources, and has no choice but to buy from others at whatever price they set, or the one that has prudently preserved their now much more valuable resources, and can set the price that others buy them at?

Yes, I know we'll be dead, but it's just remotely possible that everything isn't all about us.

Our government refuses to use our own resources and goes so far to demonize the use of them claiming global warming or some other bunk while then turning around and buying it all at greater and greater prices from other countries.

Hmm, no. You know how your country works, Governments do not control resourcing company's, company's do what they do for profit.
The reason my ex-employers have destroyed American, south American, African, Asian, Chinese, Russian even! (etc etc etc) forests is a historic one, it is because The US was a colony, They acquired a whole continent unspoilt by industry, and proceeded to create great wealth by harvesting its resources, there was no need to grow plantations such was the natural abundance. A whole nation was built with that wealth, industry advanced and with it the "efficiency" with which harvesting could be performed.
They grew into a powerful corporation, capable of great influence over the politics of your Nation. But of course forests are not like other crops, it would take 1000 years for them to recover naturally (if at all) So when in the 1970's your government actually realised the true scale of the problem (huge), they tried to control them. The corporation then faced an impossible task, they simply could not afford to buy enough land to create a real lumber industry that actually produced its own resources. Legislation was passed to protect the remaining American forests from them. So they exported themselves to South America along with their environment removing "efficiency" That caused the "Amazon" problem of more recent years, when people started making a fuss about that they moved on, they are still moving on.
It is not that your government won't let them do it, its that they are just not interested in doing it the only way it can really work, in a sustainable manner.
You probably think I am talking rubbish, but I can assure you that the great majority of paper that our western cultures feed on is still acquired in this way. There is also a remarkable correlation between conflict and industrial scale logging and of course environmental disasters.
That great influence still exists, I see it in your words, Its a shame you cannot see it for what it really is. Its a shame for all of us.

AHadley wrote:

Nielk1 wrote:Of course, the US is still in better shape in many respects than Europe. I wonder which falls first.

Economically speaking, Europe is not a single entity.

EU is the reason the Euro is and historically has been more powerful than the $

AcneVulgaris wrote:

Nielk1 wrote: Our government refuses to use our own resources and goes so far to demonize the use of them claiming global warming or some other bunk while then turning around and buying it all at greater and greater prices from other countries.

Which country would you rather be in in 75 years? The one that has used all it's resources, and has no choice but to buy from others at whatever price they set, or the one that has prudently preserved their now much more valuable resources, and can set the price that others buy them at?

Yes, I know we'll be dead, but it's just remotely possible that everything isn't all about us.

It is both physically and mathematically impossible for us to use up our resources at even 1/100th that rate.

It is both physically and mathematically impossible for us to use up our resources at even 1/100th that rate.

Depends what resources your talking about, and how wasteful that use. That company I worked for disliked the whole Idea of recycled paper, because it is much more profitable to get a bunch of guys to waste an entire ecosystem through "efficient" resourcing than it is to go round collecting up all the stuff you already sold to people and reprocessing it, particularly if you got cheap access to it by bribing the right people. Killing a few thousand million or so of Gods creations in the process does not cost a dime. It only took 20 or so years to destroy most of the Amazon and fill up landfill sites all over the world.

Nielk1 wrote:

AcneVulgaris wrote:

Nielk1 wrote: Our government refuses to use our own resources and goes so far to demonize the use of them claiming global warming or some other bunk while then turning around and buying it all at greater and greater prices from other countries.

Which country would you rather be in in 75 years? The one that has used all it's resources, and has no choice but to buy from others at whatever price they set, or the one that has prudently preserved their now much more valuable resources, and can set the price that others buy them at?

Yes, I know we'll be dead, but it's just remotely possible that everything isn't all about us.

It is both physically and mathematically impossible for us to use up our resources at even 1/100th that rate.

Got an equation and some numbers to plug into that? I didn't think so.

AcneVulgaris wrote:Got an equation and some numbers to plug into that? I didn't think so.

I did actually, back in 2008, gotta find the bloody thing.

MrTwosheds wrote:

It is both physically and mathematically impossible for us to use up our resources at even 1/100th that rate.

Depends what resources your talking about, and how wasteful that use. That company I worked for disliked the whole Idea of recycled paper, because it is much more profitable to get a bunch of guys to waste an entire ecosystem through "efficient" resourcing than it is to go round collecting up all the stuff you already sold to people and reprocessing it, particularly if you got cheap access to it by bribing the right people. Killing a few thousand million or so of Gods creations in the process does not cost a dime. It only took 20 or so years to destroy most of the Amazon and fill up landfill sites all over the world.

If a paper company destroyed every tree, they would run themselves out of business as they would run out of forest. Even the super evil paper industry has a basic understanding of hitting the optimal point where replenishment and reduction are at the same rate. Its plain old good business.

If a paper company destroyed every tree, they would run themselves out of business as they would run out of forest. Even the super evil paper industry has a basic understanding of hitting the optimal point where replenishment and reduction are at the same rate. Its plain old good business.

You and I can both see the sense in that statement. But for a profit hungry industry that has never been involved in the business of replenishment, It is not their problem and not their responsibility, all they have to do is wave a large bundle of cash at the next lumber rich Leader looking for some financial backing.
It is not the loggers who will go out of business first, it is creation itself that bears that risk.
Now I must admit, due to that industries successful evasion of almost all media attention in recent years, that I am a little out of date. The last public info I heard was of GW Bush himself (while president) acting as their buyer for the sub Arctic Russian forests... Maybe something has changed since then, Maybe Obama decided to give them a few US National reserves to play with...No of course he didn't. They are still out there somewhere, completely unaccountable to any authority, taking what they can when they can, and in the mean time their loyal clients in the media/political industry's, are covering up their crimes by producing "Global warming is bunk" stories and never linking the disasters and wars they cause to their actions.
The whole anti climate change-anti science madness that has infected the US conciousness is happening because they and the fossil fuel industries cannot change their ways and stay in business. They are clearly prepared to sacrifice the future of humanity for profits now, and our leaders are clearly not prepared to confront them.

maybe we can grow trees on Mars...

Nielk1 wrote:

AcneVulgaris wrote:Got an equation and some numbers to plug into that? I didn't think so.

I did actually, back in 2008, gotta find the bloody thing.

You're saying that the US could use only native resources for the next 7500 years and not run out. You slipped a decimal place or dropped a sign somewhere, because there is no way that's correct.

AcneVulgaris wrote:

Nielk1 wrote:

AcneVulgaris wrote:Got an equation and some numbers to plug into that? I didn't think so.

I did actually, back in 2008, gotta find the bloody thing.

You're saying that the US could use only native resources for the next 7500 years and not run out. You slipped a decimal place or dropped a sign somewhere, because there is no way that's correct.

No, I didn't say that. You are changing what I said. I never once said to only rely on native resources. You are changing what I said so you can attack it rather than actually thinking about what I did say, which was to use our resources rather than not. That does not preclude the use of external resources, but it does allow for lower prices via competition.

Don't try to straw-man me.

Pandemic is the solution.

Red Devil wrote:Pandemic is the solution.

Three years too late for that.

they had the right idea (Destroy All Humans), but didn't follow up with marketing.