Category: Denial

Canadians Are In Denial

Canadians think we elected the liberals because we are decent and tolerant when in fact we voted for the party that promised the most stuff with the least inconvenience to our privileged lifestyles.

If this were not true, why did we reject the same party when they made climate change their top priority 7 years ago?

Thermodynamics trumps Keynesian economics. There is no free lunch.

The increased debt we just voted for will not fix anything and will only delay the day of reckoning and made that day much more painful when it comes.

Given that a dollar of debt now produces less than a dollar of income, it’s time to have an adult conversation and shift our strategy to conservation and population reduction.

Many people are saying they are happy the Liberals won because they will do more to address climate change than the Conservatives. I’m sure the Liberals have better intentions however the fact that they plan to increase debt and public expenditures means they will emit more CO2 than the Conservatives.

But let’s not let facts spoil our good feelings.

Canadian Election Choices

The Canadian election choices seem to be…

1) growth at the expense of the rich (Liberals)
2) growth at the expense of social harmony (Conservatives)
3) growth pretending to be socially responsible (NDP)
4) growth pretending to be sustainable (Greens)

All of these platforms will harm the future of our children and accelerate the collapse of our planet’s ecosystem.

Not one party is promising less now so that we step back from the cliff.

Not one party is promising population reduction policies which are needed to maintain a decent lifestyle for future generations and survival for many other species.

All of the parties see the painful symptoms of limits to growth and think that the policies of the other parties are to blame.

How can you construct a useful platform when you do not have a clue what is going on?

Climate Scientists Damage Their Own Credibility

Climate scientists damage their own credibility by being in denial about the reality of our situation.

1) The planet cannot feed more than a billion people without fossil energy.

2) Those of us fortunate to have comfortable lives owe it to fossil energy.

3) Over 90% of all wealth derives from fossil energy.

4) Renewable energy does not have the qualities, scale, or return to replace fossil energy.

5) There is no easy fix to climate change.

6) There may be no fix to climate change because it is possible that self-reinforcing positive feedback loops have taken over.

7) Assuming we can still influence the outcome, austerity, conservation, and population reduction policies are the only things that might help.

8) Most climate scientists don’t set a good example in their personal lives.

Perhaps if climate scientists started setting a good example and speaking the truth they might have more credibility and impact.

Or maybe it wouldn’t make any difference.

It would be nice to have an honest fight.

A Smile On My Death Bed

It is remarkable that there is not more discussion and concern about the fact that THE KEY resource that created and maintains our civilization will be mostly gone in 20 years.

You’d think there would be one enlightened country or political party somewhere in the world that has this at the top of their priority list, but there is not.

I find this mindbogglingly amazing.

This is why I am a fan of Varki’s denial theory.

On my death bed I will have a smile thinking about Varki and how I was one of only a handful of 7 billion that appreciated his theory.

Time to Question the Pie

I have for a long time felt that the future pain we will experience from our zero interest rate policy will far exceed any benefit we obtain today.

Here is an excellent article by the ecological economist Herman Daly making this case and why we should move to a full reserve monetary system.

What is Wrong with a Zero Interest Rate?

Have you heard any of the candidates in the Canadian federal election discussing this vital issue? Or climate change, or peak oil, or species extinction, or fisheries collapse, or dying trees, or the disease epidemic caused by refined carbohydrates?

It seems our leaders are happy to discuss any issue except the issues that actually matter. Idiots. All of them.

It’s time to stop voting based on left versus right which is essentially a question of how to divide up the pie that is destroying our planet. It’s time to vote for people with the IQ and wisdom to question the pie.

 

What did we learn from 2008?

What did we learn from 2008?  Nothing.

What did we do in response to the 2008 crisis?  Even more of the same thing that caused the problem.

What happens next?  2008 on steroids.

“Debt ratios have reached extreme levels across all major regions of the global economy, leaving the financial system acutely vulnerable to monetary tightening by the US Federal Reserve, the world’s top financial watchdog has warned.

The Swiss-based BIS said total debt ratios are now significantly higher than they were at the peak of the last credit cycle in 2007, just before the onset of global financial crisis.”

US interest rate rise could trigger global debt crisis

My Election Platform

Here is my election platform:

“We are in severe overshoot. Vote for me and I promise to make the world a less bad place for your children. We will implement policies to ensure needs are met but wants are not. There will be forced conservation and a ban on the export of non-renewable resources, higher interest rates to curtail debt and growth, a one child policy, cessation of immigration, and a capital tax on the rich to narrow the wealth gap.”

How many Canadians would vote for me? Probably one, me.

If people understood what is going on and overrode their inherited denial filter, how many would vote for me?  Probably most.

By Mac10: Locus of Denial: Why I Don’t Watch CNN

The mysterious Mac10 at Ponzi World often has insightful and important things to say.

He also tends to be refreshingly brief.

I thought this post was particularly good and it has a denial theme for bonus points.

Locus of Denial: Why I Don’t Watch CNN

Denial Is An Amazing Thing

Take Paul Beckwith for example. He has done a superb job of bringing to our attention that the reality of climate change is much much worse than that reported by the IPCC and others.

At the same time he thinks we can stop further climate change if we only decided to spend enough money including, among other things, replacing fossil with renewable energy, and imposing a carbon tax. All of which won’t help and will in fact make things worse.

How can we explain this dichotomy?

My theory is that without denial he would be too depressed to continue to research and report on the reality of the crisis.

Much like Tim Garrett now seems to think that fracking will save us for a long time.