Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "Climate Scientist vs Engineer with @ClimateAdam" video.

It'll never happen because the rich are selfish, and corporations are structurally designed not to care.
4
@bartroberts1514 Bravo.
2
@EngineeringwithRosie Did you know that solar power was one of the fastest growing industries in America Rosie? Then the fossil fuel industry lobbied their senators and a TARIF was placed upon solar power, whilst aid was given to the oil companies. This goes way beyond a selfish reticence to change Rosie - these people are evil. Corporations, by their nature are evil. They are ruthlessly immoral. All they want to do is maximise profit, and they don't care what the cost to lives or the planet. And they are aided by greedy politicians. I love that you are out there designing solutions that are cheaper than the alternatives, but at the core, corporations are ACTIVELY opposing you. Just this week, we learned that a green exhibition at the Science Museum was sponsored by Shell, who then demanded that a whole bunch of stuff was removed from the exhibition. You know the old wive's tale about the car companies buying up hydrogen fuel technology. Do you doubt for a second that they WOULDN'T do that if such a technology appeared?
1
@brianm8846 Population DECLINE is the likely problem for the future, not growth. China has gone from a one child policy to urging couples to have more, and across the western world, the rate of growth is deccelerating, and will soon be declining.
1
@brianm8846 "The population will stabilize because... " The population will NOT stabilise - it will decrease. One huge factor is female education and autonomy, although education in general decreases populations. A decrease in religiosity, and more recently, a decrease in living wage and places to live all contributer to population deecrease. In the 3rd world, children were seen as a way to increase family labour, but as people become upwardly mobile, that "necessity" disappears.
1
@anderslvolljohansen1556 I agree that we should not stop trying, but corporations have a greater hold over governments now than they have EVER had. And HAVE we saved the ozone? I hardly think so or climate change would not still be the issue of our time.
1
@chainesciences7125 "A population decline is very painful" This is a failure of the welfare state. Old people should not be dependent upon the young to support them. Nor should they go to their graves with vast personal holdings in money and property. Companies are permitted to pay less in real terms, and everybody expects to own their own homes. Then when they retire, they expect a comfortable life. Meanwhile, the underlying financial structures are manipulated by the wealthy.
1
@Tamizushi Such as whom? And how?
1
@anderslvolljohansen1556 I'll have to defer to your knowledge on that Anders.
1
@chainesciences7125 Old people have FAR more disposable income than the young, and that money can create wealth by investment. I HATE the attitude that sees old people as a burden, and the young are maintainers. The old have spent 50 years investing in the system that they go on to withdraw from. By the same token, the young are NOT slave labour to support to old!
1
@Tamizushi In Britain, we have literally zero control over who becomes a lawmaker. In America, they have the illusion of choice.
1
@chainesciences7125 Perhaps the government needs to give young people more incentive to stay...
1
@chainesciences7125 Of course free money exists. No currency on the planet attaches to actual wealth - it's all just fiat currency. Sure, if the government just printed a trillion dollars worth of lira, the economy would go into free fall, but the point is, there ARE solutions. Right now, every single government has spent trillions it supposedly doesn't have. So now what? We all work for nothing until it's paid back?
1
@chainesciences7125 Sorry but I don't unerstand what you mean
1