The Great Reset

[timber 3]

 What are your thoughts on the "Great Reset"  And "Agenda 2030"?  Do you think tis will affect your personal freedom and affect your lifestyle?  Is the aim really usher in a global communist utopia without borders as some conspiracy theorist claim?   Will paying carbon taxes to the technocrats who profess in order to save the planet we need restrictions to population production of food fuel and industry be effective?  As a scuba diver I acknowledge that bleaching of coral reefs is happening.  As a skydiver how much will it affect the ability of the average drop zone owner to stay in business?  Hopefully the technology of electric or hybrid powered aircraft will continue to evolve.  However strip mining for lithium and producing batteries has environmental issues also.

[mistercwood 287]

From what little I've seen on it so far, it appears to be a list of ideals that a select group think capitalism should pivot to, without abandoning capitalism itself. These ideals/suggestions have then been interpreted by the usual suspects as somehow a gateway to some sort of totalitarian socialist utopia - a rehash of a rehash of a rehash of decades old NWO/OWG conspiracies. Scary words sound scary, kind of thing.

To paraphrase a discussion I had yesterday - In terms of influence on global directions, I am much, much more concerned about Nestle than the WEF...

[billvon 2,396]

2 hours ago, timber said:

 What are your thoughts on the "Great Reset"  And "Agenda 2030"?  Do you think tis will affect your personal freedom and affect your lifestyle?  

Nope.  It will result in fewer people I know dying, which is personally a good thing IMO.  The government will get a little saner.  We will have allies again.  But none of those affect "my lifestyle."

Quote

Is the aim really usher in a global communist utopia without borders as some conspiracy theorist claim? 

No, but you probably knew that.

Quote

Will paying carbon taxes to the technocrats who profess in order to save the planet we need restrictions to population production of food fuel and industry be effective?

There's a whole lot in that there sentence.

Will paying carbon taxes to technocrats do X?  No, mainly because no proposal I have seen says anything like that.

Will paying carbon taxes to the government help anything?  Yes, by giving people financial incentives to put less carbon in the air.

Will that restrict population?  No.

Is restricting population a good thing?  Probably not.

Is REDUCING population a good thing?  Definitely; fewer people = each person has more resources and even if each person generates the same amount of pollution, pollution goes down.  Best ways to accomplish that is through organizations like Tostan and Camfed IMO.

Quote

However strip mining for lithium and producing batteries has environmental issues also.

Definitely.  Even hydro dams have some negative impacts.  There's no free lunch.

[Phil1111 910]

The Paris accords cost me seven per cent on energy now rising to 13% in 2022. I'm happy to do my part but bought a more economical vehicle in part as a result.

The World Bank, the UN, etc. haven't resulted in a rebirth of communism.

[riggerrob 558]

Yesterday, a conservative colleague reminded me to look up Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's "Reset."

GRRRRR!

He ruined my day by reminding me of how mush I hate Trudeau's version of double-speak. That smarmy spokes-man could convince a farmer that shit is good for polishing boots!

 

ION Earlier this week, another co-worker told me of how proud he will be when his next automobile will be electric. When I reminded him that his car requires building more electric generating capacity: dams, fossil-fuel burning, wind turbines, etc. He suggested that nuclear power is the answer. Too bad too many tree-huggers, salmon-huggers, etc. enact NIMBY to prevent building less-polluting electric generators.

 

As for over-population, birth-rates - in wealthy First-World countries - dropped below replacement rates during the 1960s or 1970s. Now first-world nations need to import large numbers of immigrants - from the Third-World to do manual labour. The best hope for reducing global population growth is educating women in Third-World countries. Educated women tend to pursue careers and have fewer children.

[tonyhays 86]

7 minutes ago, riggerrob said:

The best hope for reducing global population growth is educating women in Third-World countries. Educated women tend to pursue careers and have fewer children.

Correct.

 

https://youtu.be/r7coAXAkbLk

[Phil1111 910]

4 minutes ago, riggerrob said:

Yesterday, a conservative colleague reminded me to look up Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's "Reset."

As for over-population, birth-rates - in wealthy First-World countries - dropped below replacement rates during the 1960s or 1970s. Now first-world nations need to import large numbers of immigrants - from the Third-World to do manual labour. The best hope for reducing global population growth is educating women in Third-World countries. Educated women tend to pursue careers and have fewer children.

The liberals have signed Canada onto the Paris accords. Trudeau has said that Canada is on track to meet those accords, a lie. I'm in favor of immigration and Canada's points system brings in educated, wealthier immigrants. But each immigrant adds to the impossibility of meeting those same climate goals.