The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

If money wasn't speech, then it wouldn't be useful as money. Whenever we spend money on anything, we're saying something, even if what we're saying is "build more of these things".

There needs to be more personal responsibility with regards to corporate culpability. I'm not sure if that means dissolving corporations as legal entities, but the prospect of profit needs to be tempered by the prospect of utter ruin when calculating risk. Risks taken when ruin is not possible is not a risk then, but an incentive to be reckless.

If the spreadsheets were fleshed out with all the transparency of externalities presently unrecognized and unreported,the bean-counters would have an entirely different calculus with which to work with,and shareholders would finally have a true look at their corporation,and could decide whether or not,they would want to remain as an investor,or not.
This would be a perfect market mechanism.
Just as a democracy cannot function properly without an informed populace,neither can a corporation.

[sendler]

Originally Posted by aerohead

The secret, intellectual dishonesty of that graphic is hiding in plain view.
The quanta reflect 'primary' energy,which includes 2nd-law of thermodynamics,which aren't associated with renewable energy,as their input energy is 'free.'
If you look at the net,useable energy available,after the conversion of fossil-fuel chemical energy,to actual 'work',you'll find that renewables are up to 300% higher than reported in this graphic.

Very hopeful but untrue. Many thermal industrial processes for carbon fuel such as cement manufacturing, are very efficient and electrification will make for little reduction in the energy required. Some transportation uses of electrification are almost three times more efficient (except for the embodied energy and raw materials of the storage medium) so a good ball park figure to wish for might be more like a 2:1 reduction in energy with the full electrification of everything. So the less than 2% of total energy from solar and wind right now would be more like 4% in that case and become actually visible on the chart. But still a very small fraction of ever replacing carbon fuels without a drastic reduction in consumption and opulent lifestyle.
.
Over-optimistic complacency in the hope of a Star Trek high tech replacement to allow a minimal response is a big problem right now.
.
.

.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by freebeard

What would we do if corporations weren't people and money wasn't speech? What then?

Money is Property - and therefore cannot be speech.

And a corporation is a creation of the State - and therefore it cannot be a person.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Almost forgot: Boing Boing ran a story on shopping bags. Organic cotton shopping bags have to be used 20,000 times before they're better for the Earth than plastic disposables

That makes no sense, and it can't be correct. A cotton bag will decompose and return to the soil - so, it is infinitely better for the environment; no matter how many times you use it.

[redpoint5]

Money is not property, it is:

• store of value
• unit of account
• medium of exchange

It absolutely is speech, and is inseparable from it. In fact, sometimes it directly is used to either prevent speech, or to promote it... and unless someone is talking directly to others, unassisted by anything, it takes money to speak.

[sendler]

Corporations are considered "persons" under US law.
.
Since all goods start with a little bit of raw materials harvested with a great amount of energy. And then refined, manufactured, transported with a great deal more energy. Money is also mainly a claim on future energy. Our debt based economy is now writing checks that eventually will not be paid.

[NeilBlanchard]

So - if money isn't Property, you can give me all your money?

Property and Speech and Persons are legal/Constitutional entities.

I think we can agree that Money is not Speech.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by sendler

Corporations are considered "persons" under US law.

Can we put a corporation in prison? Can we execute a corporation? Does a corporation get the right to vote? When does the corporation get jury duty?

Corporations are a creation of the State, and they originally were intended to do one thing, and then dissolved.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

That makes no sense, and it can't be correct.

Reading the fine article:

"In February 2018, Denmark's Ministry of Environment and Food published its Life Cycle Assessment of grocery carrier bags, which looked at the overall embodied energy, materials and labor in different grocery bags, and also evaluated the environmental impacts of different kinds of plastic bags.

Their conclusion was that single-use, flimsy disposable plastic bags are the best option in terms of environmental and climate costs (however, the Ministry's analysis did not factor in marine life impacts of these bags, which are severe).

By far the worst performer was organic cotton, which has about 3x the environmental impact of conventional cotton (organic growing requires more land, water, and pesticides than are used when growing GMOs with synthetic pesticides). "

I recycle plastic bags that don't get reused.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Money is not property, it is:

• store of value
• unit of account
• medium of exchange

It absolutely is speech, and is inseparable from it.

So is Bitcoin speech? Asking for a friend.

[aerohead]

Al changed computers this week and I have access to audio now.
I went ahead and completed the video at permalink# 5589.
That's probably the last I'll invest my time with.
My opinion is that the entire presentation is without merit.A fine piece of propaganda.
I'll stick with SCIENCE, NATURE,and Scientific American.
An unregulated internet is a double-edged sword.