[Pauline]

Originally Posted by horselover

That's one reason why I don't vote.

What are the other reasons?

[horselover]

There's only one other reason: I hate politicians and politics. >

[Pauline]

Originally Posted by horselover

There's only one other reason: I hate politicians and politics. >

I can relate!

Unfortunately, politicians and politics are a fact of life.
What is the alternative, anarchy? Not so good either.
Do we say, we refuse to get sick (or get vaccinated!) because we hate germs? It would be kind of futile and counterproductive.

[horselover]

I know the consequences when I don't vote and honestly I don't care. The government is a joke and one person is not going to fix it.

[Nate Martin]

Horselover: Unfortunately, not careing is what we are doing now. If everyone was careing, then we might have this little utopia and everyone would be happy. I agree on many levels with your feelings about politicians. However, AB 32 seems to be a good deal right? This is by far the most aggresive political climate change bill ever. California is setting the bar. See below for details.

The Governor (California) has signed AB 32 today, as expected. The Governor said on signing the bill:

"Some have challenged whether AB 32 is good for businesses. I say unquestionably it is good for businesses. Not only large, well-established businesses, but small businesses that will harness their entrepreneurial spirit to help us achieve our climate goals.


"Using market-based incentives, we will reduce carbon emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. That's a 25 percent reduction. And by 2050, we will reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. We simply must do everything in our power to slow down global warming before it's too late."

Specifically, AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requires CARB to:

Establish a statewide greenhouse gas emissions cap for 2020, based on 1990 emissions by January 1, 2008.
Adopt mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of greenhouse gases by January 1, 2009.
Adopt a plan by January 1, 2009 indicating how emission reductions will be achieved from significant greenhouse gas sources via regulations, market mechanisms and other actions.
Adopt regulations by January 1, 2011 to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas, including provisions for using both market mechanisms and alternative compliance mechanisms.
Convene an Environmental Justice Advisory Committee and an Economic and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee to advise CARB.
Ensure public notice and opportunity for comment for all CARB actions.
Prior to imposing any mandates or authorizing market mechanisms, CARB must evaluate several factors, including but not limited to impacts on California's economy, the environment and public health; equity between regulated entities; electricity reliability, conformance with other environmental laws and ensure that the rules do not disproportionately impact low-income communities.

[Pauline]

This discussion reminds me of the old scorpion/frog parable:

A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream. The scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion says, "Because if I do, I will die too."

The frog figures this makes sense, and they set out, but in midstream, the scorpion stings the frog. The frog, knowing they both will drown, has but time to gasp "Why?"

Replies the scorpion: "It is my nature..."

I think that when we rely on corporations and governments to do the right thing just because it is the right thing, we are expecting too much.
Corporations exist in order to make money. They are responsible to their shareholders, first and foremost.
We may not agree with this, we may not like it, but this is how it is and this is what we must work with.

Politicians in a democracy are accountable to voters but they too will not do the right thing unless they think it will help in their reelection, either directly, by pleasing voters, or indirectly, by pleasing those who can donate large sums to their campaigns and by running a stable country with a good economy so that there is no reason to vote otherwise.

Changing the priorities of governments and corporations is possible when we recognize what motivates them and how to appeal to those goals.

People need to be made more aware of the issues and the future consequences. There has been some progress made lately but there needs to be more. The issue really needs to be marketed in the same way that a new product is marketed, to create demand. When a good percentage of the populace clearly demands government action, green products and easily available alternatives to fossil fuels, they will get it.
Corporations will find a way to make a profit out of it and politicians will be only too happy to comply.

I think that is where sites like this one come in. This one, and others like it, can be part of a "grass roots effort" to promote change. It can happen - not by trying to get those in control to work against their interests but by aligning their interests with ours.

[horselover]

Originally Posted by Nate Martin

Horselover: Unfortunately, not careing is what we are doing now. If everyone was careing, then we might have this little utopia and everyone would be happy. I agree on many levels with your feelings about politicians.

If more people cared then maybe I would too. If for once I ever heard a politician actually say something useful, I would vote. And then only if I knew that the person would follow through on their promises.

[Matc]

In England the parties are all pretty much same. That is part of the reason there is so much voter apathy here.

[L hoff]

ignorance and indifference.

[horselover]

Originally Posted by L hoff

ignorance and indifference.

On whose part, the politicians or the public?