Splite dbl

[TheJanitor]

"you people", good to know I am simply a "you people".

He used a less personal term, trying to be less offensive and not have to name everyone who might be offended by the term "you people".

o when you stop driving cars that use oil you can talk to me about knowing about wasteful consumtion habits.

Perhaps he drives a electric car, or a car that uses petrol and electricity sometimes using as little as 90 mpg. That is called 'effecient' SUVs on the other hand are a much less miles to the gallon in another words - much more wasteful . The fact that you assume he is as wastful as the rest by using a car only proves his point futher. Public transport cuts down congestion, and the government would like you to use it more for some reason so why would he be a hipocrite for using something more effeciant that most people?

To wander off your post a little bit (ill get back to it later.). My parents have had 4 kids, but perhaps we all are bloody effeciant buggars only actually amount to the consumption of one or two people but lets say someone else has 2 kids but they are extremely wasteful and are unwilling to make sacrafices. Which family is a more effeciant? Which family is more likely to contribute the society and the economy?

This is what we need more, to be a lot less wastful. I would like you to research the demographic problem facing China in about 15 years or ask B~E to explain it to you. Family 1 would be much perferred there even if they used exactly as much resources as family 2.

However you also cannot say that there is no one trying to do anything.

If that is what he desires, progress I doubt he hasn't heard of it, and I doubt he would deny the existence of such progress as that is what he wants more of.

The kyoto protocal is trying to limit bad gas emissions, (something which Canada is involved in and the United States is not) and if we have the ability to organize that with 100 countries, then we "people" know where to start.

So because you just happen to live in a country that the administration knows the threat that they are trying to prevent, you are trying to pass yourself off as more enlightened than others from a country where the administration of it is not so enlightened. Believe it or not, but a hell of a lot of people in America are very eco aware and perhaps a lot less wastful than you. Next time specifically target the adminstration instead of making out that you are more eco friendly because you live on another side of a imaginary line. Afterall, you are not the one being asked to make the sacrafices in that particular agreement.

Statement above. Lazy bastards? Who are you to call anyone lazy. Do you live in a house? a heated home?

Again, this shows a lack of understanding of different effeciencies, his light bulbs may be energy effiecient, and so may all of his electrical appliances. B~E may of also of insulated his home well, using a lot less energy for heating that the average home. Effeciency doesn't mean you have to sacrafice almost every luxury, the quicker you come to terms with that, the better. There are schemes that are encouraging people to be more effecient, why don't we instead of spending money on this, start more wars to lower the population? This is because 'we' believe that a lot more progress can be made trying to get people more effeciant than to get them to stop ****ing. Yes the more people the more consumption.... that is obvious and the obvious way about it is to limit people BUT whether you like it or not, the population is going to increase, it's inevitable and that's why people want to be more effeciant, to make more room for them. The Earth has lot more room for us to expand in, if we cast away a lot of our wasteful habits.

You don't gain anything from lowering your consumption only to have double the number come in and fill up the empty spots.

Ok because we don't gain anything from being effeciant lets be as wasteful as we can and try to stop everyone from gaving sex. That is NOT going to work, if we are double as effecient then we have double cabability to expand, that what we gain. I'm not saying we want to expand, but we can't stop it. We can't overide our natural instincts so easily as you suggest we should, and even if we did we would be facing a huge global demographic problem. Now if you say we should forcefully stop people from having sex you must also realise the multitude of problems that would bring.

it is likely never to get done as opposed to not having as many children which is alot easier to do.

As you said there is already progress being made, now you say that it will never happen?

Sometimes the obvious solution is not always the right one

No it is both. but what is quicker? Throwing the entire economy and everyone's way of life out of balance, or stop having as many children. hmm...

The entire economy? Wow thats not a exaggeration . Im sorry that you believe that buying more effiecient light bulbs and cars are going to throw the whole enconomy, but I assure you it won't. It even could create more competition, imagine companies competing with rivals to make the most effiecient car, then being able to sell them for 10 grand less than the cost to make them because they are being compensated by eco friendly governments trying to give people more of a incentive to buy these. This has already happened with one of Hondas dual eletric and petrol cars (without need of recharging) - 90 mpg - costs about 10 grand less than it cost them to make it. Maybe stop people buying, 12 mpg SUVS that cost more and cost more to run aswell. Only 5 percent of SUVs are actually taken off road but account for 1 in 4 sales, pretty sad isn't it . This is one example of needless wastefulness.