Should Economic Growth Supercede Environmental Concerns?

Should Economic Growth Supercede Environmental Concerns?

  • Yes

    Votes: 4 30.8%
  • No

    Votes: 9 69.2%

  • Total voters
    13

Smurf

Private Member
Joined
May 15, 2003
Seems one of the things (amongst many others) holding up growth is how difficult it is to get approval to build things in the UK. And even if you do get approval it can take years to get to whatever project completed.

We've been here before and as previously it'll be contentious as fuck but the UK Government appear to be announcing a new runway at Heathrow. Seems like their best case scenario would see it delivered in 10 years. There will be huge opposition particularly from the environmental lobby.

China would have no obstacles and would complete the project in next to no time. Personally I'm totally now in doing pretty much whatever it takes to get economic growth as without it we are fucked. No economic growth means no improvement in public services and worse still guarantees further decline. No economic growth means our politics will become very dangerous with populism on the rise.
 
A reluctant aye from me. It’s a matter of survival, though the Greta’s of the world will cast it as money over lives similar to the cant with Covid.

This is even more the case as what net zero actually mostly means is offshoring emissions along with production to places that give less of a fuck or no fucks at all. And then accruing more to ship stuff here.

We should absolutely be pursuing green measures alongside, of course. But in the knowledge we’ll be cutting over as and when it is viable.
 
A reluctant aye from me. It’s a matter of survival, though the Greta’s of the world will cast it as money over lives similar to the cant with Covid.

This is even more the case as what net zero actually mostly means is offshoring emissions along with production to places that give less of a fuck or no fucks at all. And then accruing more to ship stuff here.

We should absolutely be pursuing green measures alongside, of course. But in the knowledge we’ll be cutting over as and when it is viable.
Who are the 'greta's of the world'?
 
if we dont have an environment we can live in and grow food, there will not be much need for economics. (in the worse case scenario obviously)


There is no reason why it should be one over the other. I think they can be a symbiosis, off course we need to temper greed.
Your first paragraph is of course correct in the end but there is indeed a reason why things need to assume relative priorities.

Our current course just hands manufacturing to the likes of China while we pretend we are reducing emissions. Instead of making a widget and accruing the emissions that go with that, we get China to do it then buy the widget off them, and accrue more emissions shipping it here. Simplified obvs, but to illustrate a point.

And we can’t make anything ourselves while energy is expensive and unreliable as green energy is at this stage, and certainly not if we want wages not to be pitiful.

It’s a real dilemma and it can’t be wished away. Again if we take worst case scenarios, the likes of the UK end up in developing world status and eventually collapses in to civil strife. Meanwhile China becomes the dominant power in the world, and it won’t sacrifice that position to environmental concerns so there isn’t a gain anyway - we have destroyed ourselves and emissions haven’t changed at a global level.
 
if we dont have an environment we can live in and grow food, there will not be much need for economics. (in the worse case scenario obviously)


There is no reason why it should be one over the other. I think they can be a symbiosis, off course we need to temper greed.
Are we not just pissing in the wind though? The entire UK could switch the lights off for the next 12 months and hibernate and any net benefit to the environment would be negated by the increased consumption by China alone.... The majority of the world appear (I've no actual data) to be almost not giving a fuck so what's the point in us making ourselves poorer.

As an aside we can all see and experience the effects of real change in climate and the extreme weather so nobody can deny that. However, even if the entire world changed (and we know that isn't going to happen) then is the scientific data confirming things would at all improve? Was it all happening anyway and that it actually has nothing to do with us on earth?

On tempering greed my concerns are more about us becoming poorer. And that means less pay and resources in public services. We can't borrow or tax ourselves out of this mess the UK/Scotland is in. Only economic growth generates the revenues and as we've been pretty much bumping along with no real growth the last 20 years we can all see the mess it has generated....
 
What we really need to do I suspect is change the collective behaviour of global consumers, but good luck with that.

For instance, buying fewer more expensive things and then repairing them. Clothes are an example, with ‘fast fashion’ being a cancer. This would also help western labour who can compete better in higher cost quality goods. I once ran a poll on here asking who would be prepared to make such purchases to support western jobs and the results were not encouraging. I doubt it would be different if an environmental tag was slapped on.

Same goes across the board. Get unnecessary things like streaming tv in the bin, holiday in the UK etc. FFS end habits like upgrading phones every other year. Then there is our model of getting the developing world to breed our labour for us, before expending carbon to ship them here and converting them from low carbon users to high carbon users.

It’s no coincidence that green concerns have always been popular on the far left and the (real) far right. Actually doing all the things we would really need to do to move the needle creates the kind of authoritarian dystopias they seek.

Meanwhile most folk cling to reality avoidance, taking the view it’s not for individuals to make such sacrifices it’s all about the greed of the people who make and sell to us what we demand. Then there are the dopes who actually claim to be making sacrifices, such as not having kids. Let’s just say I’m sceptical that a bunch of university alumni are making a sacrifice by choosing a life devoted to them self, and and am further sceptical that a lifetime of resultant vastly higher disposable income, will be spent in ways that produce an environmental benefit. And that’s on top of the aforementioned need to ship in replacements.
 
Last edited:
We could also cut out ideological wars against domestic food producers. There’s some low hanging fruit for a government with a green agenda.
 
Are we not just pissing in the wind though? The entire UK could switch the lights off for the next 12 months and hibernate and any net benefit to the environment would be negated by the increased consumption by China alone.... The majority of the world appear (I've no actual data) to be almost not giving a fuck so what's the point in us making ourselves poorer.

As an aside we can all see and experience the effects of real change in climate and the extreme weather so nobody can deny that. However, even if the entire world changed (and we know that isn't going to happen) then is the scientific data confirming things would at all improve? Was it all happening anyway and that it actually has nothing to do with us on earth?

On tempering greed my concerns are more about us becoming poorer. And that means less pay and resources in public services. We can't borrow or tax ourselves out of this mess the UK/Scotland is in. Only economic growth generates the revenues and as we've been pretty much bumping along with no real growth the last 20 years we can all see the mess it has generated....
A prime example is the closing of the Welsh steelworks to make them more environmentaly friendly, unfortunately that cannot make the steel we need so production has been moved to India and steel is shipped here, hardly saving the planet. All its done is make welsh steelworkers redundant.
 
A prime example is the closing of the Welsh steelworks to make them more environmentaly friendly, unfortunately that cannot make the steel we need so production has been moved to India and steel is shipped here, hardly saving the planet. All its done is make welsh steelworkers redundant.
Exactly. And we can pretend we are somehow doing our bit for the environment.... It's madness that's killing us economically.
 
Priority originally never had a plural, you couldn’t have priorities, you could only have a priority; the single most important thing.
That’s ridiculous in a complex world, I’d surmise the change very much reflected growing complexity. Mind you we go can go back to a pre industrial world if we choose, indeed it’s central to this topic. No one else will choose it mind.

Try applying it to government. Let’s focus on defence (or whatever) and then after that it’s a lottery.

Or Hibs signing policy. Let’s focus everything on a right back (or whatever) and forget the rest.
What is the single most important thing; easy that’s the survival of the species.

If that’s the priority, I’d say we’re largely ignoring it.
What do you think is the most immediate threat to survival here?
 
Last edited:
Is a problem here that many people wish to be subjects rather than citizens, in other words have a paternalistic ruler fix everything without us having to worry about our role, difficult choices, contradictory demands etc?
 
Are we not just pissing in the wind though? The entire UK could switch the lights off for the next 12 months and hibernate and any net benefit to the environment would be negated by the increased consumption by China alone.... The majority of the world appear (I've no actual data) to be almost not giving a fuck so what's the point in us making ourselves poorer.

As an aside we can all see and experience the effects of real change in climate and the extreme weather so nobody can deny that. However, even if the entire world changed (and we know that isn't going to happen) then is the scientific data confirming things would at all improve? Was it all happening anyway and that it actually has nothing to do with us on earth?

On tempering greed my concerns are more about us becoming poorer. And that means less pay and resources in public services. We can't borrow or tax ourselves out of this mess the UK/Scotland is in. Only economic growth generates the revenues and as we've been pretty much bumping along with no real growth the last 20 years we can all see the mess it has generated....
Scotlands doesnt need to be in a mess smurf, but thats another thread.

Everyone is pissing in the wind if its about China, the US, India or Russia. But we have things like e.g. The Paris agreement, where effectively the whole of the world is signed up to sans the fat rapists' USA. So there is tacit agreement globally that we cant continue as we are doing.

Im not sure why we would be poorer tbh, and i think theres a lot of disparate point being made. We havent had a manufacturing base for quite some time, though we are top at manufacturing for the arms industries of the world. We are poor when we want to be and not at other times. Nice new armoured personnel carriers coming into service at a cool £5b, new frigates, subs tanks and aircraft etc.

Labour left the country in 2010 with a defecit of circa £1t, and the tories left the country in 2024 with a defecit of circa £2.8t.

The point im making about these things is there is lots of reasons why a country could become poorer. Politicians misuse of funds, but i genuinely think that corporate greed needs reigned in in all sectors. Our version of capitalism doesnt need to be the one we are in now. The manufacturing base being nothing to what it was, is really just one facet of the issues faced.

On manufacturing; what the hell can we manufacture anyway? The colume of goods being produced by China and India for example simply smashes wee tiny countries like Britain. All fabrics, steel, most food groups, and thats just economies of scale, and low wages being just one driver. So we are a wee service industry island, and a place for dafties to rinse their money in and very good at weapons manufacturing.

The biggest problem we have and the biggest reason we will become poorer, collectively in the west is a massively ageing population and incorrect immigration. We need people in our countries, we need young people. We dont procreate enough. Thats why we need to smash rascists and the right wingnuts everywhere we find them. The demographics are frightening for the ageing west and we need to address this.... again im jumping into disparate side issues

We have to use the resources we all have correctly, I still dont think it needs to be one of the other.
 
We dont procreate enough. Thats why we need to smash rascists and the right wingnuts everywhere we find them.
Just so I'm clear: we don't procreate enough (agreed); but the way to solve this is not to encourage and enable us to have more children ourselves, but to import more ready-made young folk from elsewhere.

And moreover, the reason we're not even doing that in large enough volumes is because of racists and right wingnuts; the liberal smashing of whom will ensure that this is addressed adequately.

Gotcha.
 
Just so I'm clear: we don't procreate enough (agreed); but the way to solve this is not to encourage and enable us to have more children ourselves, but to import more ready-made young folk from elsewhere.
Why are inferencing that? You have literally inferred that I am against encouraging us to procreate more? eh?
And moreover, the reason we're not even doing that in large enough volumes is because of racists and right wingnuts; the liberal smashing of whom will ensure that this is addressed adequately.
What are you talking about?
Are you picking a fight for any reason?

What the fuck in my post is offensive.? fuxsake
 
Scotlands doesnt need to be in a mess smurf, but thats another thread.
We have a better chance than the UK combined, but we would need vastly different policies, I suspect completely at odds with what many Indy supporters have in mind.
Everyone is pissing in the wind if its about China, the US, India or Russia. But we have things like e.g. The Paris agreement, where effectively the whole of the world is signed up to sans the fat rapists' USA. So there is tacit agreement globally that we cant continue as we are doing.
Not sure if serious. China and the rest don’t give two fucks, at least not until after more pressing and energy consuming priorities are addressed.
Im not sure why we would be poorer tbh, and i think theres a lot of disparate point being made. We havent had a manufacturing base for quite some time, though we are top at manufacturing for the arms industries of the world. We are poor when we want to be and not at other times. Nice new armoured personnel carriers coming into service at a cool £5b, new frigates, subs tanks and aircraft etc.
We are poor all the time and getting poorer with every debt-based spend which you seem to be conflating with periods of not being poor. We have indeed not had a manufacturing base for a while but given the service industry goose is already mostly cooked, and the heat is still being turned up; given that those we depend on to make stuff are increasingly not our pals; and given that we can’t afford to maintain a population of workless people - and not just on financial terms - we need to do something. We are absolutely capable of manufacturing in certain sectors if the conditions are right: low energy costs, low tax burden, properly targeted education, picking and choosing what we aim at.
Labour left the country in 2010 with a defecit of circa £1t, and the tories left the country in 2024 with a defecit of circa £2.8t.
Of which a commensurate share belongs to Scotland. That aside, this is the spiral - contra your rich when we want to be point. We’ve had one PM ousted directly as a consequence of our indebtedness and this PM and / or chancellor have only narrowly avoided it in their first year. We need to escape what is currently a one way ratchet.
The point im making about these things is there is lots of reasons why a country could become poorer. Politicians misuse of funds, but i genuinely think that corporate greed needs reigned in in all sectors. Our version of capitalism doesnt need to be the one we are in now. The manufacturing base being nothing to what it was, is really just one facet of the issues faced.
What do you suggest? The same pattern is repeating across the entire western world, and isnt because of snouts in troughs.
On manufacturing; what the hell can we manufacture anyway? The colume of goods being produced by China and India for example simply smashes wee tiny countries like Britain. All fabrics, steel, most food groups, and thats just economies of scale, and low wages being just one driver. So we are a wee service industry island, and a place for dafties to rinse their money in and very good at weapons manufacturing.
We absolutely could make steel if the incentives were right. Not as cheaply as China of course, but that only matters in a completely open market, and I don’t see that lasting as the world becomes more polarised. More to the point we should be focussed on higher quality goods whether digital or analogue; easier to absorb first world labour costs making Scottish cashmere sweaters than fast fashion for example.
The biggest problem we have and the biggest reason we will become poorer, collectively in the west is a massively ageing population and incorrect immigration. We need people in our countries, we need young people. We dont procreate enough. Thats why we need to smash rascists and the right wingnuts everywhere we find them. The demographics are frightening for the ageing west and we need to address this.... again im jumping into disparate side issues
What right wing racists? 90% of the racial tensions summoned up in the UK when they were all but dead, comes from the opposite flank. England is one of the most racially tolerant countries in the world. We will see if Scotland can match that as our immigration ramps up. With a fair wind perhaps we can buck our history.

Your plan to use the developing world as a baby farm, which depends on them remaining poor, is a cynical one. Let them bear the cost, and we’ll reap the benefits as well as stripping them of the talent they need to get out of the bit - which of course we require, because if they do get out of the bit the model breaks down. It’s gobsmackingly immoral imho, but setting that aside it’s also impractical. In the real world the country will become poorer and balkanised, the trust and communality on which services and business depend will collapse, and then you’ll see racists of every flavour really let rip.
We have to use the resources we all have correctly, I still dont think it needs to be one of the other.
No it doesn’t, but priorities certainly need to be in line. High energy costs and high labour costs put together are teas oot time for the service sector never mind manufacturing. And that’s before we get to geopolitical exposures.
 
We have a better chance than the UK combined, but we would need vastly different policies, I suspect completely at odds with what many Indy supporters have in mind.

Not sure if serious. China and the rest don’t give two fucks, at least not until after more pressing and energy consuming priorities are addressed.

We are poor all the time and getting poorer with every debt-based spend which you seem to be conflating with periods of not being poor. We have indeed not had a manufacturing base for a while but given the service industry goose is already mostly cooked, and the heat is still being turned up; given that those we depend on to make stuff are increasingly not our pals; and given that we can’t afford to maintain a population of workless people - and not just on financial terms - we need to do something. We are absolutely capable of manufacturing in certain sectors if the conditions are right: low energy costs, low tax burden, properly targeted education, picking and choosing what we aim at.

Of which a commensurate share belongs to Scotland. That aside, this is the spiral - contra your rich when we want to be point. We’ve had one PM ousted directly as a consequence of our indebtedness and this PM and / or chancellor have only narrowly avoided it in their first year. We need to escape what is currently a one way ratchet.

What do you suggest? The same pattern is repeating across the entire western world, and isnt because of snouts in troughs.

We absolutely could make steel if the incentives were right. Not as cheaply as China of course, but that only matters in a completely open market, and I don’t see that lasting as the world becomes more polarised. More to the point we should be focussed on higher quality goods whether digital or analogue; easier to absorb first world labour costs making Scottish cashmere sweaters than fast fashion for example.

What right wing racists? 90% of the racial tensions summoned up in the UK when they were all but dead, comes from the opposite flank. England is one of the most racially tolerant countries in the world. We will see if Scotland can match that as our immigration ramps up. With a fair wind perhaps we can buck our history.

Your plan to use the developing world as a baby farm, which depends on them remaining poor, is a cynical one. Let them bear the cost, and we’ll reap the benefits as well as stripping them of the talent they need to get out of the bit - which of course we require, because if they do get out of the bit the model breaks down. It’s gobsmackingly immoral imho, but setting that aside it’s also impractical. In the real world the country will become poorer and balkanised, the trust and communality on which services and business depend will collapse, and then you’ll see racists of every flavour really let rip.

No it doesn’t, but priorities certainly need to be in line. High energy costs and high labour costs put together are teas oot time for the service sector never mind manufacturing. And that’s before we get to geopolitical exposures.
thanks.
 
Why are inferencing that? You have literally inferred that I am against encouraging us to procreate more? eh?
I haven't. You've specifically said we do need to.
What the fuck in my post is offensive.? fuxsake
Nothing? No idea why you're thinking I'm offended?

Let me put it another way, see if we can understand each other:

"We dont procreate enough. Thats why we need to smash rascists and the right wingnuts everywhere we find them."

So, make this statement make sense for me? As in, describe to me why "smashing racists" has any causal relationship with us not procreating enough?

Yes, I was being a bit snarky, but what you're saying -- by which I mean, when you logically decipher your statement -- is that rather than us actually doing the procreating, we should be slapping down anyone who opposes the importation of warm bodies to work, pay tax, etc., because we need them to fill the void (because we don't procreate enough). As you've said, that's why we need to slap them and fight them.

If you meant something else, then please do elucidate. But jesus wept, it gets really tiresome on here when folk get ratty at other folk who've literally read what they've written.

And just to be clear -- if what you're saying is that we need to procreate more and import more warm bodies, as a two-pronged strategy, then say that. But that's not what your right-on "that's why we need to smash racists" posturing is actually saying.
 
I haven't. You've specifically said we do need to.
Ive specifically said that Im against us procreating more? I did? Do tell.
Nothing? No idea why you're thinking I'm offended?
The tone of your post.
Let me put it another way, see if we can understand each other:

"We dont procreate enough. Thats why we need to smash rascists and the right wingnuts everywhere we find them."

So, make this statement make sense for me? As in, describe to me why "smashing racists" has any causal relationship with us not procreating enough?
Oh aggie. Right wingers are vociferous in their disdain of immigration. They will say "illegal" mostly. But we get the craic. So what I was meaning was that whether we like it or not, we need immigration. So we need to smash the arseholes who cant see that. We and other economies are ageing at an alarming rate, and its not sustainable. I mentioned in my first about "incorrect immigration" . So no there is no causal relationship between then 2, I would have thought you would have seen that the point I was making was the ageing population time bomb we have. We need to grow our country, we cant do that without inward immigration. We already try and get our population to procreate more, we give tax incentives, we give more time off for the mothers and now more time off for the fathers. No sure what more we can do to increase our popultion bar increasing the poor.
Yes, I was being a bit snarky, but what you're saying -- by which I mean, when you logically decipher your statement -- is that rather than us actually doing the procreating, we should be slapping down anyone who opposes the importation of warm bodies to work, pay tax, etc., because we need them to fill the void (because we don't procreate enough). As you've said, that's why we need to slap them and fight them.
Well, your completely wrong, but yeah, snarky.

If you meant something else, then please do elucidate. But jesus wept, it gets really tiresome on here when folk get ratty at other folk who've literally read what they've written.
Well your only that seems to be getting in a state about it. Youve read it wrong. Relax.
Im not ratty at you, you seem to be at me though.
And just to be clear -- if what you're saying is that we need to procreate more and import more warm bodies, as a two-pronged strategy, then say that. But that's not what your right-on "that's why we need to smash racists" posturing is actually saying.
Were no studying for a phd aggie. No every post is going to be a dissertation on a particular subject. I post in between working mate.

PM if you want to discuss my posting style further, lets no bore the rest of the board eh.
 
Migration doesn't fix the birth rate issue anyway. Its just a quick fix that makes the problem worse.

Either migrants assimilate in which case they come in line with indigenous norms and the problem increases, or they don't assimilate and you have a different problem. In short our culture doesn't work and expressly depends on other cultures to survive. But that means it's only a matter of time before the population balance shifts and they get to call the shots - and quite rightly so.

This is not just my opinion and not just stating the obvious, it's what studies show. A global overview also indicates its very hard to do anything about the problem - making it more affordable to sprog has little affect.

This is a good intro for those interested

 
The coincidence in it all....the same people that made ALOT of money from COVID...Are making huge amounts from Climate bullshit.

I do recycle,and play my part.

Unfortunately a One World Government...are making the shots.

Does the United Kingdom exist...or are we just like a holding company?
 
The coincidence in it all....the same people that made ALOT of money from COVID...Are making huge amounts from Climate bullshit.

I do recycle,and play my part.

Unfortunately a One World Government...are making the shots.

Does the United Kingdom exist...or are we just like a holding company?
Who are these people ? And if an answer like Blackrock comes out, I’ll say in advance I’m going to ask what Blackrock does.

As you may know by the way, the likes of them and others than had green centred funds set up rapidly losing enthusiasm - which, before your opponents get too smug, is also a nailed on indicator that green energy solutions ain’t there yet.
 
The coincidence in it all....the same people that made ALOT of money from COVID...Are making huge amounts from Climate bullshit.

I do recycle,and play my part.

Unfortunately a One World Government...are making the shots.

Does the United Kingdom exist...or are we just like a holding company?
Who is pulling the strings?
 
Who are these people ? And if an answer like Blackrock comes out, I’ll say in advance I’m going to ask what Blackrock does.

As you may know by the way, the likes of them and others than had green centred funds set up rapidly losing enthusiasm - which, before your opponents get too smug, is also a nailed on indicator that green energy solutions ain’t there yet.
You act like a paid shill.

How does such an unelected company...have such a huge influence???

They also own 50% of Ukraine.
Nice..when you don't have a clean sheet to start from.

There's alot of demons around that don't give a shit about the state of humanity.


The problem is.....Most people can't see it!
 
You act like a paid shill.
Ryan, the day I discredit opposition to global capitalism, woke mania, corrupt government and the likes, as you seem to have as your vocation, then such accusations will move up to the rung above laughable
How does such an unelected company...have such a huge influence???
Do you know what Blackrock does? I dislike them btw, but based on what they actually are?
They also own 50% of Ukraine.
Not they don’t
Nice..when you don't have a clean sheet to start from.

There's alot of demons around that don't give a shit about the state of humanity.


The problem is.....Most people can't see it!
Ok I’ll answer my own question.

Blackrock manage pension fund investments and the like. They track the stock market and invest in its major companies. Unsurprisingly if pharma does well they will benefit, and if xyz does well they will benefit, because like Scottish widows, Aviva, Axa, and many others - just at larger scale - they have balanced portfolios that span all the big companies in the world.

They are absolute tossers and a major instigator of ‘corporate woke’ - that’s one reason I don’t like them, and one reason your sources don’t like them. I am content to dislike them for what they are rather than make up fantastical rubbish to dupe people into joining me.