Our Quality of Life Peaked in 1974. It's All Downhill Now

Search

"The Real Original Rx. Borat"
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,882
Tokens
Our Quality of Life Peaked in 1974. It's All Downhill Now
We will pay the price for believing the world has infinite resources

by George Monbiot

With the turning of every year, we expect our lives to improve. As long as the economy continues to grow, we imagine, the world will become a more congenial place in which to live. There is no basis for this belief. If we take into account such factors as pollution and the depletion of natural capital, we see that the quality of life peaked in the UK in 1974 and in the US in 1968, and has been falling ever since. We are going backwards.

The reason should not be hard to grasp. Our economic system depends upon never-ending growth, yet we live in a world with finite resources. Our expectation of progress is, as a result, a delusion.

This is the great heresy of our times, the fundamental truth which cannot be spoken. It is dismissed as furiously by those who possess power today - governments, business, the media - as the discovery that the earth orbits the sun was denounced by the late medieval church. Speak this truth in public and you are dismissed as a crank, a prig, a lunatic.

Capitalism is a millenarian cult, raised to the status of a world religion. Like communism, it is built upon the myth of endless exploitation. Just as Christians imagine that their God will deliver them from death, capitalists believe that theirs will deliver them from finity. The world's resources, they assert, have been granted eternal life.

The briefest reflection will show that this cannot be true. The laws of thermodynamics impose inherent limits upon biological production. Even the repayment of debt, the pre-requisite of capitalism, is mathematically possible only in the short-term. As Heinrich Haussmann has shown, a single pfennig invested at 5% compounded interest in the year AD 0 would, by 1990, have reaped a volume of gold 134bn times the weight of the planet. Capitalism seeks a value of production commensurate with the repayment of debt.

Now, despite the endless denials, it is clear that the wall towards which we are accelerating is not very far away. Within five or 10 years, the global consumption of oil is likely to outstrip supply. Every year, up to 75bn tonnes of topsoil are washed into the sea as a result of unsustainable farming, which equates to the loss of around 9m hectares of productive land.

As a result, we can maintain current levels of food production only with the application of phosphate, but phosphate reserves are likely to be exhausted within 80 years. Forty per cent of the world's food is produced with the help of irrigation; some of the key aquifers are already running dry as a result of overuse.

One reason why we fail to understand a concept as simple as finity is that our religion was founded upon the use of other people's resources: the gold, rubber and timber of Latin America; the spices, cotton and dyes of the East Indies; the labor and land of Africa. The frontier of exploitation seemed, to the early colonists, infinitely expandable. Now that geographical expansion has reached its limits, capitalism has moved its frontier from space to time: seizing resources from an infinite future.

An entire industry has been built upon the denial of ecological constraints. Every national newspaper in Britain lamented the "disappointing" volume of sales before Christmas. Sky News devoted much of its Christmas Eve coverage to live reports from Brent Cross, relaying the terrifying intelligence that we were facing "the worst Christmas for shopping since 2000". The survival of humanity has been displaced in the newspapers by the quarterly results of companies selling tableware and knickers.

Partly because they have been brainwashed by the corporate media, partly because of the scale of the moral challenge with which finity confronts them, many people respond to the heresy with unmediated savagery.

Last week this column discussed the competition for global grain supplies between humans and livestock. One correspondent, a man named David Roucek, wrote to inform me that the problem is the result of people "breeding indiscriminately ... When a woman has displayed evidence that she totally disregards the welfare of her offspring by continuing to breed children she cannot support, she has committed a crime and must be punished. The punishment? She must be sterilized to prevent her from perpetrating her crimes upon more innocent children."

There is no doubt that a rising population is one of the factors which threatens the world's capacity to support its people, but human population growth is being massively outstripped by the growth in the number of farm animals. While the rich world's consumption is supposed to be boundless, the human population is likely to peak within the next few decades. But population growth is the one factor for which the poor can be blamed and from which the rich can be excused, so it is the one factor which is repeatedly emphasized.

It is possible to change the way we live. The economist Bernard Lietaer has shown how a system based upon negative rates of interest would ensure that we accord greater economic value to future resources than to present ones. By shifting taxation from employment to environmental destruction, governments could tax over-consumption out of existence. But everyone who holds power today knows that her political survival depends upon stealing from the future to give to the present.

Overturning this calculation is the greatest challenge humanity has ever faced. We need to reverse not only the fundamental presumptions of political and economic life, but also the polarity of our moral compass. Everything we thought was good - giving more exciting presents to our children, flying to a friend's wedding, even buying newspapers - turns out also to be bad. It is, perhaps, hardly surprising that so many deny the problem with such religious zeal. But to live in these times without striving to change them is like watching, with serenity, the oncoming truck in your path.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,228
Tokens
Thats got a nice ring.

----------------------
Political survival depends upon stealing from the future to give to the present.
----------------------

I'm just glad I was born during a time of relative plenty. Lucky me.
I think that everyone knows deep down, it won't last.

I read somewhere that we would need three planet earths' to give everyone the lifestyle that the West enjoys nowadays.

so enjoy it while it lasts, because on the balance of probabilities, it WILL change.
We're playing a game of roulette, where the house/house-edge belongs to planet earth.

tick tock tick tock...
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
The sky is falling!!The sky is falling!!

I remember the enviromentilist saying the world will run out of oil by the year 2000, back in 1974.

The thing about you "progressives" is the last thing you do is progress.
The auto and oil companies will soon have developed efficient fuel cell energy.This idea will be driven by their wallets not by Al Gore or any other communist...like their motives or not its just a plain fact of life.
Need is the mother of invention.
Your article is the inbred offspring of regression,communism,Hillary Clinton and Koffi Anan.and the the rest of the global phoney baloneys.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
608
Tokens
Patriot...

You are so right, fuel cells will definitely end overpopulation and the need for any and all finite resources
 

"The Real Original Rx. Borat"
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,882
Tokens
The reason we have Depressions and Wars is because humanity as a
whole is not smart enough nor disciplined enough to put population into
checks and balances. When people are prospering, their greed wants them
to have more children. Even during Depressions such as the Great
Depression, pictures of people in stress showed them breeding like
rabbits when the wise thing was to have no children. Not enough history
books or economic analysis shows that those people who saw the
depression coming on and stopped having kids that they made it through
the depression rather well, well indeed. But the people who saw hard
times coming on, they fornicated during the Depression, because
fornication to them was the only fun thing in life but it was miserable
for their new born kids.
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
520
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Borat Sagdiyev:
The reason we have Depressions and Wars is because humanity as a
whole is not smart enough nor disciplined enough to put population into
checks and balances. When people are prospering, their greed wants them
to have more children. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


That's not the way I see it at all! The U.S. is the richest country in the world but we have an average of barely over 2 children per household. Education is the key!! Come to Latin America and the rest of the third world where poverty and ignorance run rampant.....you'll see an average of 4-5 children per household......education is the key to overpopulation my friend! But unfortunately that is contrary to the interests of the pillaging politicians that run these countries!!
 

"The Real Original Rx. Borat"
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,882
Tokens
I used to think "wow what a good idea Hydrogen powered cars" now I realize that we can not all be rich. If we had acces to this unliimited power supply then it would not be neccessary for us to work and thier would be more of an idle rich populations doing nothing other than enjoying their lives. I think that they could have created this many years ago but if you do then you lose all that revenue from oil sales and it makes no sense for the powers that be to change the status quo. I read that Shell oil is concerned about the environment and yadayadayada. The only reason they are looking into Hydrogen is because in the beggining of the rollout of hydrogen their profits will be actually higher.

Ralph, even if their politicians weren't corrupt these countries would never be allowed to compete with us. Read the following. I was having this discussion with someone yesterday.

In 1990 the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel claimed that the NSA intercepted messages about a pending $200-million telecommunications deal between Indonesia and the Japanese satellite manufacturer NEC Corp. George Bush, then the U.S. president, is said to have intervened on the basis of the intelligence intercept and to have convinced the Indonesians to split the contract between NEC and US - owned AT&T.
In May 2000 , Robert Windrem, investigative producer for NBC News in New York reported on newly unearthed documents that appear to confirm reports that Echelon was used for commercial espionage [ 42 ]. The United States admits that it regularly tracks bribery attempts by foreign companies in competition with US firms for overseas contracts - and uses that information to help US companies win those contracts.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
5,412
Tokens
Nice article which speaks the truth!

Traditional economics has a fatal flaw and that is that it does not set up an account for the current level of nature's resources. This will not change any time soon because the power centers have short term planning horizons and could give a rats ass about the distant future. Luckily, though, there are growing numbers of people who are catching on and starting to do something about it. At the moment Al Qaida is leading the way in the pro-earth movement but when the inevitable great great depression comes there will be nuclear superpowers involved as well and then things will really get interesting.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I read that Shell oil is concerned about the environment and yadayadayada. The only reason they are looking into Hydrogen is because in the beggining of the rollout of hydrogen their profits will be actually higher.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
DUHHHHH!!!!
Like I said Need is the mother of invention.
Capitilist society = Invention of the light bulb$$$,automobile$$$$,airplane$$$$,Bill Gates$$$ etc.etc$$$$
Oil companies and the like, continually reinvent themselves for profit is a good thing,its called progress.
Its called building a better mousetrap.
By the way I have never been hired by a poor person. (Shakin down yes,hired no.)
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
608
Tokens
There was a need to put seat belts in automobiles and save 1000's of peoples lives. The Automotive industry knew of the need, yet wasn't going to integrate seatbelts because it wasn't the "cost conscious" thing for the industry, though the need existed. The only thing that pushed the industry to meet the need was the threat of the Federal Government by making and enforcing Automotive standards. Hence, need is not the mother of invention, dire consequences are.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
MM...you don't need seat belts unless you have the the car!!!!!
The invention came first...the regulations or the afterthough comes 2nd.

How fxckin stupid an aargument is that...jesus!
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
608
Tokens
Pat...
Are you a man or woman? What I am saying is, without a kick in the ass, industry won't evolve. Without a bump from the Gov; GM, Ford and DC will not put the resources forth that are needed to make Alternative Propulsion a viable alternative.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,228
Tokens
Private companies are one of the biggest sacks of coal that society has to drag along, or a wild horse to hold back, depending on the industry.

"They try to keep us back, so that their outdated systems can continue to generate 'profits' for shareholders."

The automobile industry is sooo guilty of this, and has been holding us back and pissing about for forty years.

At the other end of the scale, the food industry has been reaching out and grasping every opportunity.
So much so that people in Europe will not touch GM with a pole if they have a choice.
Theres all kinds of crap in food, and food processing, its hard cash all the way.

The first people to have more individual raw wealth than the Monarchy in recent British history were the guys that invented the 'tetra-pack' waxed paper food/liquid storage and distribution system.

If you are a brilliant inventor dude, stay away from cars, invent a food related system. They don't mess about, unlike the car industry. Those wankers are still messing about with the 4,6 and 8 pot 4 stroke system.
(Remember the guy that invented coke can openers that you don't throw away to replace ring-pulls, two years criticism, and the entire industry found a solution. It looked pretty dumb at the time, now no-one even notices.)

Footnote:
Anyone remember the two buttons system on coke cans at that time?
One small one to relieve the pressure with your thumbnail, then the bigger drinking one that cut your finger as you pushed it in...omg

[This message was edited by eek on January 06, 2004 at 08:57 PM.]
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
1,730
Tokens
Michael Chichton (Jurasic Park author) gave a speech about 6 months ago...the full talk is at

http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html

Eek...make sure you read the whole thing. Your cliches are just that; cliches. Here are parts of the speech:

There is no Eden. There never was. What was that Eden of the wonderful mythic past? Is it the time when infant mortality was 80%, when four children in five died of disease before the age of five? When one woman in six died in childbirth? When the average lifespan was 40, as it was in America a century ago. When plagues swept across the planet, killing millions in a stroke. Was it when millions starved to death? Is that when it was Eden?"

"Well, it's interesting. You may have noticed that something has been left off the doomsday list, lately. Although the preachers of environmentalism have been yelling about population for fifty years, over the last decade world population seems to be taking an unexpected turn. Fertility rates are falling almost everywhere. As a result, over the course of my lifetime the thoughtful predictions for total world population have gone from a high of 20 billion, to 15 billion, to 11 billion (which was the UN estimate around 1990) to now 9 billion, and soon, perhaps less. There are some who think that world population will peak in 2050 and then start to decline. There are some who predict we will have fewer people in 2100 than we do today. Is this a reason to rejoice, to say halleluiah? Certainly not. Without a pause, we now hear about the coming crisis of world economy from a shrinking population. We hear about the impending crisis of an aging population. Nobody anywhere will say that the core fears expressed for most of my life have turned out not to be true. As we have moved into the future, these doomsday visions vanished, like a mirage in the desert. They were never there---though they still appear, in the future. As mirages do."

"Okay, so, the preachers made a mistake. They got one prediction wrong; they're human. So what. Unfortunately, it's not just one prediction. It's a whole slew of them. We are running out of oil. We are running out of all natural resources. Paul Ehrlich: 60 million Americans will die of starvation in the 1980s. Forty thousand species become extinct every year. Half of all species on the planet will be extinct by 2000. And on and on and on.

With so many past failures, you might think that environmental predictions would become more cautious. But not if it's a religion. Remember, the nut on the sidewalk carrying the placard that predicts the end of the world doesn't quit when the world doesn't end on the day he expects. He just changes his placard, sets a new doomsday date, and goes back to walking the streets. One of the defining features of religion is that your beliefs are not troubled by facts, because they have nothing to do with facts."
 

"The Real Original Rx. Borat"
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,882
Tokens
You don't start worrying about a tire running flat when you see the sparks from the rim you worry about it when you see the tire pressure falling. Why do you think civilization has not reached the level it has at one point during it's hundreds of thousands of years in existence. It's because natural catastrophies have wiped out civilizatioins due to not taking preemptive measures. The effect we are having on the atmosphere is profound and is accelerating proccesses that take a long time to materialize if left to nature.

It seems as if someone has taken the steps to curb population growth using the least obtrusive method that comes to mind. IE lowering sperm counts.

Open your mind people.



The leader of the Scottish Greens is worried about toxic pollution and low sperm count
The executive is being urged to address concerns that falling sperm counts are being caused by toxic chemicals.
Green MSP Robin Harper is to raise the issue during First Minister's Questions on Thursday, after a study suggested male fertility had fallen by a third.

The study on 7,500 men in Aberdeen between 1989 and 2002 showed a 29% fall in the average sperm count.

Alcohol, smoking and obesity reduce sperm counts, with fears pesticides and chemicals may damage sperm quality.


Mr Harper will ask whether the executive is aware of any link between toxic chemicals in the environment and the falling sperm count.

The executive will also be urged to support EU proposals which are expected to clamp down on the use of toxic chemicals.

Mr Harper said: "This is yet another signal that serious action is needed to tackle the scourge of toxic contamination in Scotland's people and environment.


Robin Harper is urging the executive to act
"Everyday products, even some of the carpets we walk on, give off hormone disrupting compounds and much of the food we eat is laced with a cocktail of chemicals."

Mr Harper said that dangerous chemicals can be found in the bodies of virtually everyone, some of which have been linked to cancers and birth defects.

He urged the executive to contribute robustly to EU proposals, expected within 18 months, to control and even phase out toxic chemicals.

Mr Harper added: "Some urgency is needed and I expect to hear a committed response by the first minister.

"For the sake of our children, and our ability to reproduce them, this issue needs to be taken extremely seriously indeed."
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
1,730
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Borat Sagdiyev:
Why do you think civilization has not reached the level it has at one point during it's hundreds of thousands of years in existence. It's because natural catastrophies have wiped out civilizatioins due to not taking preemptive measures. The effect we are having on the atmosphere is profound and is accelerating proccesses that take a long time to materialize if left to nature.

It seems as if someone has taken the steps to curb population growth using the least obtrusive method that comes to mind. IE lowering sperm counts.

Open your mind people.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Borat, civilization has not been around for hundreds of thousands of years. The rest of your statement is equally absurd...quoting a kook enviromentalist with a clear agenda isn't exactly proof.
 

"The Real Original Rx. Borat"
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,882
Tokens
Shotgun! Hey I called it. Hahahaha. Hey, would you consider the BBC a good source?

Global warming 'biggest threat'

_39718323_bbcwarm203.jpg

Greenhouse gases stop energy escaping from the Earth's surface
Climate change is a far greater threat to the world than international terrorism, the government's chief scientific adviser has said.
Sir David King said the US had failed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

And without immediate action flooding, drought, hunger and debilitating diseases such as malaria would hit millions of people around the world.

US President George Bush says more research is needed before he introduces punitive carbon taxes on industry.

But Sir David criticised the Bush administration for relying too exclusively on market-based incentives and voluntary actions.

Climate change is the most severe problem we are facing today

Sir David King

He told Science, the house magazine of the US scientific establishment: "As the world's only remaining superpower, the United States is accustomed to leading internationally co-ordinated action.

"But at present the US Government is failing to take up the challenge of global warming."

Flood risk

In Britain the number of people at high risk of flooding was expected to more than double to nearly 3.5 million by 2080, Sir David said.

And damage to properties could run to tens of billions of pounds every year.

Britain was trying to show leadership by cutting energy consumption and increasing the use of renewable sources, Sir David added.

But the UK was responsible for only about 2% of the world's emissions while the US, with just 4% of the world's population, produced more than 20%.

The UK was asking the world's developed economies to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60% of 1990 levels by about 2050, under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), Sir David said.

Severe problem

But despite declaring support for the UNFCC's objectives, the US had failed to ratify the Kyoto accord for emission reductions and "refused to countenance any remedial action now or in the future".

The United States is already in the forefront of the science and technology of global change, and the next step is surely to tackle emissions control too

Sir David King

Sir David added: "We can only overcome this challenge by facing it together, shoulder to shoulder.

"We in the rest of the world are now looking to the USA to play its leading part."

Sir David said climate change was the most severe problem faced by the world.

"The United States is already in the forefront of the science and technology of global change, and the next step is surely to tackle emissions control too," he said.


"If we do not begin now, more substantial, more disruptive, and more expensive change will be needed later on."

Population growth

Levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have risen steeply since the industrial revolution.

Concentrations have increased mainly because of the use of fossil fuels, deforestation and other human activities, spurred on by economic and population growth.

Greenhouse gases stop energy escaping from the Earth's surface and atmosphere.

If levels rise too high, excessive warming can distort natural patterns of climate.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,971
Messages
13,575,663
Members
100,889
Latest member
junkerb
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com