What new law would you make?

[iNow]

7 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Improvement of the environment must be in the head of people, not ordered by law...

Why not both?

You act as if they’re mutually exclusive. 

They're not. 

[Alex_Krycek]

6 hours ago, Sensei said:

Improvement of the environment must be in the head of people, not ordered by law...

Then it will only work...

In a representative democracy, the will of the people is the law.  For some reason you choose to relegate the will of the people only to the private sector - hoping against hope that corporations will eventually offer the kind of environmentally friendly solutions that the world so desperately needs.  This is a pathetically inefficient approach to the magnitude of the problems facing the world. 

Corporations will always choose the slowest path towards change as long as it is legally possible - profit drives corporations, not ethics.  Only when their hand is forced by the government (with respect to carbon emissions, renewable energy, or environmentally friendly products) will they abide by new standards.  Otherwise, the change will be glacial - too little too late, which is where the world is now.  Depressingly, the notion that we will somehow stay below 2C is now a bit of a pipe dream.  Countries that have adopted strong regulatory stances towards improving the environment, on the other hand, are seeing noticeable results.  Germany, for example, has a heavily regulated energy industry and is on track to implement 80% renewable energy by 2050. 

Uruguay has already transitioned to 95% electricity using renewable energy and has done so incredibly quickly, primarily because of government action "https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/03/uruguay-makes-dramatic-shift-to-nearly-95-clean-energy

From the article: 

• "In fact, he says that now that renewables provide 94.5% of the country’s electricity, prices are lower than in the past relative to inflation. There are also fewer power cuts because a diverse energy mix means greater resilience to droughts."
• "There are no technological miracles involved, nuclear power is entirely absent from the mix, and no new hydroelectric power has been added for more than two decades. Instead, he says, the key to success is rather dull but encouragingly replicable: clear decision-making, a supportive regulatory environment and a strong partnership between the public and private sector."

The bottom line is this:  allow corporations to run the show and expect little to no change.  Pressure the government to set meaningful standards and corporations will have no choice but to follow suit.

[Sensei]

11 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Corporations will always choose the slowest path towards change as long as it is legally possible - profit drives corporations, not ethics. Only when their hand is forced by the government (with respect to carbon emissions, renewable energy, or environmentally friendly products) will they abide by new standards. 

Hilariously... US government is currently made of climate change deniers who reject human-made global warming.. and do everything to destroy previous efforts of people who tried to reverse destruction of this planet.. Current US government will accelerate destruction of the planet, rather than trying to fight with global climate change, they don't believe in..

Regardless of their attitude toward global warming they will hold new cash from such taxes and do whatever with them what they want i.e. misuse and embezzle them, if they don't believe in global warming...

 

Edited July 19, 2019 by Sensei

[dimreepr]

52 minutes ago, Sensei said:

It's kinda the way D.T. thinks! He thinks "let's increase duty for Chinese products". Who is paying these duties? Not Chinese, certainly. But Americans having to pay more for the same product in the shop.

Taxation is not equivalent to import duties, besides a tax based on revenue will help to eliminate tax dodges and limit companies ability to run at a loss in order to gain market share, at the cost of society and the infrastructure it provides.

[Alex_Krycek]

5 hours ago, Sensei said:

Hilariously... US government is currently made of climate change deniers who reject human-made global warming.. and do everything to destroy previous efforts of people who tried to reverse destruction of this planet.. Current US government will accelerate destruction of the planet, rather than trying to fight with global climate change..

Regardless of their attitude toward global warming they will hold new cash from such taxes and do whatever with them what they want i.e. misuse and embezzle them, if they don't believe in global warming... 

Agreed - so the logical solution is to get the current administration the f*** out. 

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Hilariously... US government is currently made of climate change deniers who reject human-made global warming.. and do everything to destroy previous efforts of people who tried to reverse destruction of this planet.. Current US government will accelerate destruction of the planet, rather than trying to fight with global climate change, they don't believe in..

Regardless of their attitude toward global warming they will hold new cash from such taxes and do whatever with them what they want i.e. misuse and embezzle them, if they don't believe in global warming...

 

Please note the title and OP of this thread.

[dimreepr]

6 hours ago, Sensei said:

Regardless of their attitude toward global warming they will hold new cash from such taxes and do whatever with them what they want i.e. misuse and embezzle them, if they don't believe in global warming...

And my lobby law comes into effect.

[Curious layman]

4 hours ago, MandanMaru39 said:

No nudity on websites , Youtube and  google search results

Agreed (unless you have I.D), and let's get rid of all the murder videos as well, there Disgusting.

[dimreepr]

4 hours ago, MandanMaru39 said:

No nudity on websites , Youtube and  google search results

What's so wrong with being naked and proud?

[Curious layman]

25 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

What's so wrong with being naked and proud?

Ok not nudity, just blatant porn. Was looking for article about Japanese nurses a while ago....Jesus Christ..

[Sensei]

7 hours ago, MandanMaru39 said:

No nudity on websites , Youtube and  google search results

..so this is the law of Internet censorship? Hidden under "saving people's morality" or "saving kids/teenager's morality".. ?

I don't think so it is doable in democratic country. Anybody can make his or her own Internet crawler and scan entire Internet. Then offer results for anybody on the other side of the world. US law cannot control what 3rd party programmer from 3rd country is offering to (usually anonymous) people around the world. Unless you will filter, block and censorship the entire US Internet traffic like in Russia, China or in other totalitarian countries..

I don't think so it's worth bothering problem i.e. teenagers by themselves are searching and creating such nude photos and videos and spreading them to their lovers or lovers-to-be in private correspondence. That's quite natural. Sexuality is natural. If parents don't want their teenagers to make such nude photos or videos, should explain that such acts could be used for blackmailing in the far future, when they will be adult and filing for respectable job requiring having unblemished reputation. That's parents job, not government job.

Edited July 19, 2019 by Sensei

[Alex_Krycek]

9 hours ago, Curious layman said:

Ok not nudity, just blatant porn. Was looking for article about Japanese nurses a while ago....Jesus Christ..

I would recommend using the search engine Duck Duck Go.  They don't track / monitor you like google does, and there's a "safe search" feature which guarantees that the only Japanese nurses you see are middle aged and fully clothed.

Edited July 19, 2019 by Alex_Krycek

[StringJunky]

51 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

I would recommend using the search engine Duck Duck Go.  They don't track / monitor you like google does, and there's a "safe search" feature which guarantees that the only Japanese nurses you see are middle aged and fully clothed.

It seems odd that the biggest search engine throws everything at you by default and compromises your privacy and StartPage and DDG protect your privacy and make exposure to nudity porn an opt-in feature.

[Alex_Krycek]

12 hours ago, StringJunky said:

It seems odd that the biggest search engine throws everything at you by default and compromises your privacy and StartPage and DDG protect your privacy and make exposure to nudity porn an opt-in feature.

The landscape on the internet is changing.  People want some semblance of privacy these days after all the scandals and intrusion.  Google and FB have clearly overstepped their bounds.

[Sensei]

9 hours ago, MandanMaru39 said:

There is too much porn related ads in the mobile devices too these days . 

Don't install free suspicious apps with ads, and you won't get sexual related ads on your mobile device. Trojan apps try to influence your mobile device e.g. replace browser's home page, over and over again. Browser is from Google ("Chrome"), but it's being attacked by Trojan app. It has nothing to do with Google or YouTube.

9 hours ago, MandanMaru39 said:

Its annoying sometimes when porn is all over the place when you don't want it . 

..I am not getting ANY porn ads to be honest. But I also don't have any free-app-with-ads on my devices.

9 hours ago, MandanMaru39 said:

Only YouTube kids is sort of free from it .

Where did you see porn on regular YouTube?!

 

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, Sensei said:

Don't install free suspicious apps with ads, and you won't get sexual related ads on your mobile device. Trojan apps try to influence your mobile device e.g. replace browser's home page, over and over again. Browser is from Google ("Chrome"), but it's being attacked by Trojan app. It has nothing to do with Google or YouTube.

..I am not getting ANY porn ads to be honest. But I also don't have any free-app-with-ads on my devices.

Where did you see porn on regular YouTube?!

 

I don't get unwanted porn either because I don't download stuff associated with it. Getting pirated stuff is a gateway to getting infected. There's always a price for seeking free (stolen) versions the latest games or films.

[dimreepr]

On 7/17/2019 at 10:56 PM, Ken Fabian said:

not sure what the matched funds for opposition lobbying thing is about.

Very basically, it's about addressing the value of money verses people.

If every penny spent by a "legal" drug/gun dealer promoting their wears, is also spent mitigating the harm they cause; then we're, at least, on the same playing field.  

 

Anyone who claims a special privilege because they paid for it, should be spanked... 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Anyone who claims a special privilege because they paid for it, should be spanked... 

In which case one could film it and post it as porn. The circle is now complete

[dimreepr]

Just now, iNow said:

In which case one could film it and post it as porn. The circle is now complete

Indeed, but which circle?

[MigL]

Sorry, I have not visited this topic for a while.
Been busy Googling "Japanese Nurses'.

[Danijel Gorupec]

Lol... and I am still searching for the "unwanted porn"... It seems that google only provides misses.

[Ken Fabian]

On 7/12/2019 at 8:38 PM, dimreepr said:

Any money spent lobbying the government, for whatever reason, must be matched and given to their opponents.

Ah, sorry, I misread and misunderstood. I'm presuming you mean matched funding for the opposing of a cause - rather than major lobbyists' donations going to opposition Parties as well as governing ones; they already do that. I suppose it would be a bit hypocritical to criticise this for being impractical; my suggested carbon pricing hardly rates as realistic. I do think lobbying is just one of a whole toolkit for influencing government decisions as well as public opinion - PR, Advertising, Lobbying, Strategic Donating, Tactical Lawfare, Post Politics Payoffs and Tankthink all come to mind.

On 7/19/2019 at 5:29 PM, Sensei said:

Regardless of their attitude toward global warming they will hold new cash from such taxes and do whatever with them what they want i.e. misuse and embezzle them, if they don't believe in global warming...

Well, we see that in Australia already - emissions reductions funding being funneled to corporate agriculture and mining enterprises, run by climate science deniers and supporters of coal and gas, to (more often than not) do things they were going to do anyway. Whilst genuine and effective emissions reductions activities somehow miss out.

Should we have a new law to stop 'soft' corruption? (Buying the lawmakers and the rules rather than 'hard' corruption where the laws are there but they are circumvented). Not sure how we ultimately enshrine ethical behaviors in our decision making - and more significantly - rule making and selection processes for our highest offices of last resort, like courts of law. Certainly democracy and respect for the rule of law put some limits, but these are, themselves, vulnerable to soft corruption. Throwing things to the public to decide democratically - when the expert advice is quite clear but unwelcome and misinformation is widely promulgated - is still capable of delivering outcomes that turn out being against the public's best interests; I suspect modeling the forcings and feedbacks that go into making 'the will of the public' would make global climate modeling look simple. And I do think people in positions of responsibility, trust, power and influence should have greater - not less - requirement to take expert advice on complex matters seriously.

Edited July 21, 2019 by Ken Fabian

[dimreepr]

12 hours ago, Ken Fabian said:

rather than major lobbyists' donations going to opposition Parties as well as governing ones; they already do that.

Not in order to remedy the situation, lobbying, both positive and negative has an audit trail, so we collect on the audit trail rather than the moral one; mitigation in this respect can only help the affected.

12 hours ago, Ken Fabian said:

Should we have a new law to stop 'soft' corruption? (Buying the lawmakers and the rules rather than 'hard' corruption where the laws are there but they are circumvented). Not sure how we ultimately enshrine ethical behaviors in our decision making - and more significantly - rule making and selection processes for our highest offices of last resort, like courts of law. Certainly democracy and respect for the rule of law put some limits, but these are, themselves, vulnerable to soft corruption. Throwing things to the public to decide democratically - when the expert advice is quite clear but unwelcome and misinformation is widely promulgated - is still capable of delivering outcomes that turn out being against the public's best interests; I suspect modeling the forcings and feedbacks that go into making 'the will of the public' would make global climate modeling look simple. And I do think people in positions of responsibility, trust, power and influence should have greater - not less - requirement to take expert advice on complex matters seriously.

Let's not forget the first country the Nazi's invaded was Germany. 

And let's not forget most people don't understand complex matters...

But a well directed, and well advertised, publicity campaign, could if it were funded properly. 

[Airbrush]

What new law would I push if I were king?

Tax junk foods.  Much, if not most, need for medical attention stems from people eating too much of the wrong foods (salt, sugar, fat, artificial additives, and preservatives).  We are just as healthy as we eat correctly.  We could save trillions of dollars in health care expense.  When you tax junk foods you can use the tax to subsidize healthy food.  A candy bar should be expensive, and a piece of fruit should be cheep.  Also fruits and veges should have better quality control.  A piece of fruit should always be very sweet and tasty.  That is not always true today.

Also, processed or enhanced foods are too delicious.  Eating should NOT be that much fun.  That is the reason for much obesity in the world.  Plain, simple foods are tasty enough.  I'm 65 and I am careful to eat plain, simple, healthy foods.  With simple foods, moderation is easier.  With fancy foods, moderation is more difficult for me.  With healthy foods, I am satisfied with less.  I'm still able to jog 4 km almost every morning in about 25 minutes. 

Edited August 24, 2019 by Airbrush

[MigL]

So, you can't control your impulses and you want the government to do it for you ?