hsedin33 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Left-wing Hollywood Hippy Mumbo-Jumbo? Or just more hypocricy? What ticks me off about big actors and producers telling us all how to live our lives is that if Hollywood was erased and all their wealth was spread to the areas of the earth that needed patching up, virtually all of our environmental problems would be solved. James Cameron alone could stop world hunger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsedin33 Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 Left-wing Hollywood Hippy Mumbo-Jumbo? Or just more hypocricy? What ticks me off about big actors and producers telling us all how to live our lives is that if Hollywood was erased and all their wealth was spread to the areas of the earth that needed patching up, virtually all of our environmental problems would be solved. James Cameron alone could stop world hunger. Having money for food isn't the problem TOMaplelaughs. The problem is the main geographical locations for food harvest in the US are seeing a large, sustained increase in temperature and droughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 The money would go towards the science that would eliminate that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsedin33 Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 The money would go towards the science that would eliminate that. Okay, so is it just actors that must donate all their money and wealth to science? Or just actors and people who care about climate change? Who must donate all their money and who is exempt? Who's responsibility is it to make sure food can still grow? If the actors donated all their money, does that mean actors get first crack at all the food? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Aerosex Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 James Cameron alone could stop world hunger. James Cameron already raised the bar, what more do you want from him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Eliminating hollywood and spreading it's wealth would be just a small step of a much larger move towards a proper, healthy world society. Hey, if we're going left, then let's go all the way, not just have some rich-ass hollywood types tell us relatively poor, unfortunate and powerless types what's what about the world's problems. On a positive note, I saw a TedTalks on how desertification can be reversed by just properly managing livestock. ie. Large herds. What naturally happens without human interference. The earth's going to be fine. It's us who are not going to be able continue as-is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsedin33 Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 Eliminating hollywood and spreading it's wealth would be just a small step of a much larger move towards a proper, healthy world society. Hey, if we're going left, then let's go all the way, not just have some rich-ass hollywood types tell us relatively poor, unfortunate and powerless types what's what about the world's problems. On a positive note, I saw a TedTalks on how desertification can be reversed by just properly managing livestock. ie. Large herds. What naturally happens without human interference. The earth's going to be fine. It's us who are not going to be able continue as-is. Sorry, but Hollywood doesn't contribute to climate change, carbon emissions do. Take away all the rich actors in the world, and you are still left with an entire world dependant on fossil fuels. The world is indoctrinated to use fossil fuels because the worlds infrastructure is built to rely on them. Spreading wealth doesn't help climate change, if you spread the wealth evenly, all the poor people would then own cars, consume food and burn fossil fuels as much as we do. Plus there will always be corruption and greed and someone who wants more. As long as the world uses oil and coal, and continues to burn down forests and peat, it doesn't matter who is rich or not, who is against it or not, if wealth is spread or not, carbon emissions will still trap in gasses and that will be that. When we talk about the saving the earth, we are talking about saving us, that is a given. Humans will survive climate change, we have the technology, but we don't have the ability to save everyone. Drought, starvation and extreme weather patterns will take its toll over time, and our home won't feel very much like home anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Sorry, but Hollywood doesn't contribute to climate change, carbon emissions do. Take away all the rich actors in the world, and you are still left with an entire world dependant on fossil fuels. The world is indoctrinated to use fossil fuels because the worlds infrastructure is built to rely on them. Spreading wealth doesn't help climate change, if you spread the wealth evenly, all the poor people would then own cars, consume food and burn fossil fuels as much as we do. Plus there will always be corruption and greed and someone who wants more. As long as the world uses oil and coal, and continues to burn down forests and peat, it doesn't matter who is rich or not, who is against it or not, if wealth is spread or not, carbon emissions will still trap in gasses and that will be that. When we talk about the saving the earth, we are talking about saving us, that is a given. Humans will survive climate change, we have the technology, but we don't have the ability to save everyone. Drought, starvation and extreme weather patterns will take its toll over time, and our home won't feel very much like home anymore.Again, spreading the wealth of Hollywood is just a small part. If you spread the wealth in general and simply make laws to eliminate carbon emissions, then you'll find that science is easily going to come up with a solution for that and it will be affordable by everyone. This approach will work to solve any world problem, really. If not, it's certainly a better approach than merely telling the worlds' ants that they can make a difference, when in reality nothing will change until the worlds' powers do it or they're replaced and the new worlds' powers do it. Anyway, short of world revolution, I'm certain that Arnie and Jessica Alba have the resources available to fix the problems they're talking about more than little ol' me. Oh, and didn't Arnie drive a Hummer for years? Interesting that he's preaching to us about climate change now. And I wonder what the carbon footprint of James Cameron's malibu mansion is here: Typical Hollywood hypocrisy. "Learn to swim." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsedin33 Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 Again, spreading the wealth of Hollywood is just a small part. If you spread the wealth in general and simply make laws to eliminate carbon emissions, then you'll find that science is easily going to come up with a solution for that and it will be affordable by everyone. This approach will work to solve any world problem, really. If not, it's certainly a better approach than merely telling the worlds' ants that they can make a difference, when in reality nothing will change until the worlds' powers do it or they're replaced and the new worlds' powers do it. Anyway, short of world revolution, I'm certain that Arnie and Jessica Alba have the resources available to fix the problems they're talking about more than little ol' me. Oh, and didn't Arnie drive a Hummer for years? Interesting that he's preaching to us about climate change now. And I wonder what the carbon footprint of James Cameron's malibu mansion is here: Typical Hollywood hypocrisy. "Learn to swim." Okay, firstly, lets get one thing clear, the wealth will NEVER be spread evenly. You will never, not once, even get remotely close to doing that. Its not a real option. Even if actors gave all their money to R&D for greener technology and tried to pass bills to make it law, big oil and coal will always be able to lobby against it. Harrison ford has a net worth of around $210 million, sound big? Exxon's net worth is around $486 billion, Chevron's about $253 billion. Greener technology has been around for probably over 100 years (electric cars and solar panels etc), its not like we don't know how to do it, we can't do it because there is no real infrastructure for it and because big oil stymies it from getting mass produced though buyouts and lobbying. The show brought in actors to draw in an audience. Actors are just normal people like you or me, they aren't superheroes. If they had some joe blow scientist as the host, nobody would ever tune in to watch. We are all hypocrites, but it's better to try and make a change now then never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Okay, firstly, lets get one thing clear, the wealth will NEVER be spread evenly. You will never, not once, even get remotely close to doing that. Its not a real option. Even if actors gave all their money to R&D for greener technology and tried to pass bills to make it law, big oil and coal will always be able to lobby against it. Harrison ford has a net worth of around $210 million, sound big? Exxon's net worth is around $486 billion, Chevron's about $253 billion. Greener technology has been around for probably over 100 years (electric cars and solar panels etc), its not like we don't know how to do it, we can't do it because there is no real infrastructure for it and because big oil stymies it from getting mass produced though buyouts and lobbying. The show brought in actors to draw in an audience. Actors are just normal people like you or me, they aren't superheroes. If they had some joe blow scientist as the host, nobody would ever tune in to watch. We are all hypocrites, but it's better to try and make a change now then never.It certainly is a real option and has been attempted before. It's just never been done correctly because of aforementioned inherit greed and corruption. I think doing it properly in the future will require a cataclysmic event to make people of all types want to do it correctly. But in our current system, no it's likely not a real option. I also agree that large corporations (all of them, not just big oil) and banks, not to mention the governments they control, will need to be leading the way in the global cleanup effort, but since they're behind the pollution, greed and corruption globally, i'm not sure when that's going to happen. In the meantime i guess it helps to be made aware of the problems, regardless of how hypocritical these hollywood types are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsedin33 Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 It certainly is a real option and has been attempted before. It's just never been done correctly because of aforementioned inherit greed and corruption. I think doing it properly in the future will require a cataclysmic event to make people of all types want to do it correctly. But in our current system, no it's likely not a real option. I also agree that large corporations (all of them, not just big oil) and banks, not to mention the governments they control, will need to be leading the way in the global cleanup effort, but since they're behind the pollution, greed and corruption globally, i'm not sure when that's going to happen. In the meantime i guess it helps to be made aware of the problems, regardless of how hypocritical these hollywood types are. A cataclysmic event may rally the world to change, it all depends how ready we are to face reality. In this video, there is a whole town in the US that blames god for a major prolonged drought. I mean come on, its obviously witches that are causing it. In other situations for instance, the show points out that deforestation contributes to 20% of climate change. There are already laws that forbid the mass burning and clear-cutting of massive parks and forests in major areas of the world, but because of corruption, they simply aren't enforced. At a recent UN meeting, climate change was announced as already here and it's going to spiral out of control if nothing is done. They classified the danger level at "Horrible". Its not at the prevention phase anymore, its at the mitigation phase. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/30/un-climate-change-report_n_5060317.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offensive Threat Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 NP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.