Dr Jane Goodall; HUMAN (watch)

Some great points made about the planet too

Very true. If only, huh? The biggest greed is for money. It infects all of us.

So very true. As humans, we don't need much, but we always seem to want more.
I think that feeling fades as you get older.

What a lovely inspirational lady. Everything she said made sense....she actually reminded me of my own mum in her later years.

Along with the likes of fellow conservationists/environmentalists  -- the likes of  Rachel Carson ('Silent Spring'), Bill Mollinson (Permaculture), Dianne Fossey ('Gorillas in the Mist'), Richard St. Barber Baker ('My life, my trees'), and the economist E.F. Schumacher ('Small is Beautiful'),   Jane Goodall has been one of the leading and inspirational influences on the development of my own feelings and positions re: wildlife, the environment and the effects of human developments and encroachments on this planet...


Ms Goodall covered some of the same points that I have covered in a couple of threads over the last two days, and many more over the years,  including such things as :

Overpopulation.
Corporate greed and corrupted governments.
Poor farming practices.
'Mans' inhumanity towards man..'

Overpopulation is a very real concern. Can you really stop it though?

eddie wrote:Overpopulation is a very real concern. Can you really stop it though?

World wide probably not....in developed countries like the UK, stop child benefits at two children, that might concentrate the mind (and other parts)

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:Overpopulation is a very real concern. Can you really stop it though?

World wide probably not....in developed countries like the UK, stop child benefits at two children, that might concentrate the mind (and other parts)

I don't think so. You only currently get something like £8 per week for a third child (could be wrong on that) so I don't think that would work at all.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

World wide probably not....in developed countries like the UK, stop child benefits at two children, that might concentrate the mind (and other parts)

I don't think so. You only currently get something like £8 per week for a third child (could be wrong on that) so I don't think that would work at all.

Children bring in other benefits though don't they? Child tax credits...free this and that...(I remember having a similar discussion once and someone listed all the benefits parents with kids are entitled to nowadays....the more kids they have the more money they are entitled to) I am just saying stop child benefits at two children.... want any more... fund them yourself.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

World wide probably not....in developed countries like the UK, stop child benefits at two children, that might concentrate the mind (and other parts)

I don't think so. You only currently get something like £8 per week for a third child (could be wrong on that) so I don't think that would work at all.

Children bring in other benefits though don't they? Child tax credits...free this and that...(I remember having a similar discussion once and someone listed all the benefits parents with kids are entitled to nowadays....the more kids they have the more money they are entitled to) I am just saying stop child benefits at two children.... want any more... fund them yourself.

Okay but you're assuming it's only people on benefits who have more than two children. What about people not receiving benefits, working people? What's their incentive?

Their incentive Eddie? Buying what they want instead of only what they need. My wife is like that, the garden is, to my mind, overpopulated with plants and it's difficult to weed. Every shelf indoors is full of ornaments and other knick-knacks. The freezer is so full the door doesn't close fully and she has to selotape it. The cupboatds are jammed full of food jars, tins, and bottles etc.
Ugh!!! I give up.

This might upset some of you, I'm sorry if it does but I'm a bit old fashioned in my way of thinking, but benefits should be stopped to unmarried girls who get pregnant, and giving them flats and housing whilst decent folk have to struggle. It aint right!!!

Another point, MPs should have their own cars and stop being chauffered around, nor receive benefits for a second house or flat because it's nearer to parliament.

I could go on but let that suffice for now. I'll sit back and wait for the cannons to fire at me.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

Children bring in other benefits though don't they? Child tax credits...free this and that...(I remember having a similar discussion once and someone listed all the benefits parents with kids are entitled to nowadays....the more kids they have the more money they are entitled to) I am just saying stop child benefits at two children.... want any more... fund them yourself.

Okay but you're assuming it's only people on benefits who have more than two children. What about people not receiving benefits, working people? What's their incentive?

People who work can also receive benefits Eddie.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

Children bring in other benefits though don't they? Child tax credits...free this and that...(I remember having a similar discussion once and someone listed all the benefits parents with kids are entitled to nowadays....the more kids they have the more money they are entitled to) I am just saying stop child benefits at two children.... want any more... fund them yourself.

Okay but you're assuming it's only people on benefits who have more than two children. What about people not receiving benefits, working people? What's their incentive?

People who work can also receive benefits Eddie.

I know but the cost of a child isn't covered by a benefit - that's my point; people are no better off by having one!
An incentive would be to pay people NOT to have (more) children....but that's a little immoral.

stardesk wrote:Their incentive Eddie? Buying what they want instead of only what they need. My wife is like that, the garden is, to my mind, overpopulated with plants and it's difficult to weed. Every shelf indoors is full of ornaments and other knick-knacks. The freezer is so full the door doesn't close fully and she has to selotape it. The cupboatds are jammed full of food jars, tins, and bottles etc.
Ugh!!! I give up.

This might upset some of you, I'm sorry if it does but I'm a bit old fashioned in my way of thinking, but benefits should be stopped to unmarried girls who get pregnant, and giving them flats and housing whilst decent folk have to struggle. It aint right!!!

Another point, MPs should have their own cars and stop being chauffered around, nor receive benefits for a second house or flat because it's nearer to parliament.

I could go on but let that suffice for now. I'll sit back and wait for the cannons to fire at me.

All I know is, your darling wife sounds like a hoarder.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

People who work can also receive benefits Eddie.

I know but the cost of a child isn't covered by a benefit - that's my point; people are no better off by having one!
An incentive would be to pay people NOT to have (more) children....but that's a little immoral.

No...I don't like the sound of that at all.
I remember when I had my son in 1975 child allowance for one child was not given...only for the second and subsequent children. I think he was 2 or 3 before they changed the rules.

What we need to do is carefully examine the various aspects of our culture, looking for where corporations and capitalists have made them dysfunctional, and I think at that point we'll see that removing corporate/capitalist influence will make life better for everyone.

For example: Why do so many people flock to buy the replacement for an $800 smartphone when the $800 smartphone in their pocket is only a year old?

Is it because they're stupid? Or have corporate/capitalist interests successfully re-engineered society to make it one in which not having the latest and greatest everything is socially unattractive?

Another example: When children aren't achieving in school, why isn't the first thing we look at the myriad of video games, TV shows and other things that corporate/capitalist interests have marketed which distract them from becoming educated? Along the same lines, when we talk about childhood obesity, etc., why don't we start by holding corporate/capitalist interests responsible for aggressively marketing junk food to kids?

Only when society as a whole begins to really question why private prison operators lobby for tougher anti-crime measures; why automakers secretly oppose public transportation initiatives; why oil and gas companies fund global warming denialists; etc. will we really make a difference in the world. Unbridled, unprincipled greed is the number-one thing destroying the world and ruining lives.

Ben Reilly wrote:What we need to do is carefully examine the various aspects of our culture, looking for where corporations and capitalists have made them dysfunctional, and I think at that point we'll see that removing corporate/capitalist influence will make life better for everyone.

For example: Why do so many people flock to buy the replacement for an $800 smartphone when the $800 smartphone in their pocket is only a year old?

Is it because they're stupid? Or have corporate/capitalist interests successfully re-engineered society to make it one in which not having the latest and greatest everything is socially unattractive?

Another example: When children aren't achieving in school, why isn't the first thing we look at the myriad of video games, TV shows and other things that corporate/capitalist interests have marketed which distract them from becoming educated? Along the same lines, when we talk about childhood obesity, etc., why don't we start by holding corporate/capitalist interests responsible for aggressively marketing junk food to kids?

Only when society as a whole begins to really question why private prison operators lobby for tougher anti-crime measures; why automakers secretly oppose public transportation initiatives; why oil and gas companies fund global warming denialists; etc. will we really make a difference in the world. Unbridled, unprincipled greed is the number-one thing destroying the world and ruining lives.

That's what I would have said if I had had the words. /\

Syl you are gloriously delightful sometimes, you know that?

Reilly well said lad. You can have but my "thanks" but not a green as that's just greedy and in light of all toy e said, I don't want to make you greedy.

I was doing my Spanish lessons one day and came across this sentence to translate:

Estamos una sociedad, no sola una economia.

"We're a society, not just an economy."

I feel we've handed control over our societies to people who just see them as markets, and I wonder how we ever let that happen. (Of course, I do have my suspicions )

eddie wrote:Syl you are gloriously delightful sometimes, you know that?

Reilly well said lad. You can have but my "thanks" but not a green as that's just greedy and in light of all toy e said, I don't want to make you greedy.

Aww stop. No don't

I gave my to Ben, I really liked what he said.

Ben Reilly wrote:I was doing my Spanish lessons one day and came across this sentence to translate:

Estamos una sociedad, no sola una economia.

"We're a society, not just an economy."

I feel we've handed control over our societies to people who just see them as markets, and I wonder how we ever let that happen. (Of course, I do have my suspicions )

You're pretty smart sometimes.

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:Syl you are gloriously delightful sometimes, you know that?

Reilly well said lad. You can have but my "thanks" but not a green as that's just greedy and in light of all toy e said, I don't want to make you greedy.

Aww stop.  No don't

I gave my    to Ben, I really liked what he said.

And my "thanks" put him over 700 rep points.
Pfffffff.

eddie wrote:

Syl wrote:

eddie wrote:Syl you are gloriously delightful sometimes, you know that?

Reilly well said lad. You can have but my "thanks" but not a green as that's just greedy and in light of all toy e said, I don't want to make you greedy.

Aww stop.  No don't

I gave my    to Ben, I really liked what he said.

And my "thanks" put him over 700 rep points.
Pfffffff.

And it's gone

STRAIGHT

TO

MY

HEAD!!!!!!!!!!!

You've made two really good posts today, you'll be tired in a minute

Ben is quite right about companies being greedy. One prime example of that is the regular update of mobile phones and other gadgets which people buy, just to be up to date. My mobile phone is about six years old, it does what I want it to do, phone home or the wife's mobile if she's out. If need be I can phone shops and other services. As long as it does that why buy a new one?

As for kids and their gadgets, parents have a lot to answer for, perhaps shoving them in their bedrooms or up a corner with their head stuck in them and not being a part of family communication and life. Just about everyone walking up the street have their mobiles stuck to their head ot looking down at it instead of looking where they're going.

What a sad, sick, and yes greedy and selfish world we live in.

We have cars nowadays as luxury private transport, we have our own houses nowadays as luxury dwellings.
Being reasonably well off in bygone years we would have had horses, horse drawn carts,carriages as luxury transport.
A wooden cabin as a luxury dwelling place, these things equal themselves out as time and things have evolved, not necessarily GREED but PROGRESS.

Envy/jealousy/survival drives people to better themselves in all things, why not?????

I am glad we have moved on.

Are you not pleased you can give your children, loved ones things your parents may not have been able to afford?

As a lad I remember those who had bugga all.

EVEN on benefits some manage to survive quite well which is another step forward away from poverty.

Don't knock it.

Major wrote:We have cars nowadays as luxury private transport, we have our own houses nowadays as luxury dwellings.
Being reasonably well off in bygone years we would have had horses, horse drawn carts,carriages as luxury transport.
A wooden cabin as a luxury dwelling place, these things equal themselves out as time and things have evolved, not necessarily GREED but PROGRESS.

Envy/jealousy/survival drives people to better themselves in all things, why not?????

I am glad we have moved on.

Are you not pleased you can give your children, loved ones things your parents may not have been able to afford?

As a lad I remember those who had bugga all.

EVEN on benefits some manage to survive quite well which is another step forward away from poverty.

Don't knock it.

BIG difference in leading a modern first-world life of dignity and the corporate-driven consumer madness we see these days.

ALL corporate lobbyists should be rounded up, taken down to the bottom paddock,  put out of their collective misery, and turned into fertiliser...

It would be the first useful and productive job they have had in any of their miserable, oxygen thieving lives..      

Stardesks post has hit the nail well and truly on the head, a really accurate observation. A well deserved "green".

Ben Reilly wrote:

Major wrote:We have cars nowadays as luxury private transport, we have our own houses nowadays as luxury dwellings.
Being reasonably well off in bygone years we would have had horses, horse drawn carts,carriages as luxury transport.
A wooden cabin as a luxury dwelling place, these things equal themselves out as time and things have evolved, not necessarily GREED but PROGRESS.

Envy/jealousy/survival drives people to better themselves in all things, why not?????

I am glad we have moved on.

Are you not pleased you can give your children, loved ones things your parents may not have been able to afford?

As a lad I remember those who had bugga all.

EVEN on benefits some manage to survive quite well which is another step forward away from poverty.

Don't knock it.

BIG difference in leading a modern first-world life of dignity and the corporate-driven consumer madness we see these days.

It really shouldn't surprise us, Ben, to see one of the leading lights of Newsfix's Fascist Brigade extending his largesse into embracing the ideals and excesses of Corporate Fascism --  including those anti-environmental and anti-humanity agendas that endears them to everyone on here...

Not content with disparaging "mixed race" children (yet another direct and insulting slur against me (and others on here..) and my extended family..)),  and his ongoing slurs against "forunuz", refugees, asylum seekers, any other foreigners in general, Muslims in particular, wildlife, women and gays --  now we see him openly supporting all of the damage and evils that unbridled and greed-fuelled Corporatism has inflicted on this world.

Never mind what kind of world they are leaving to future generations..    Just as long as Stormee and his ilk can have flashier cars and bigger homes, nevermind the collateral costs to the planet's ecology, the rest of the world can "go to hell in a handbasket"...          

The Major isn't talking about flashier cars and houses, he's talking about cars and houses generally. What was once considered a luxury is not a luxury any more. Unless you're homeless Wolfman, he's talking about you. Do you have a car? If you do, he's talking about you. You're not the "rest of the world".

Re the issue of phones, I have resisted the temptation to have anything but a very basic mobile phone. There are times though when I wish I had a posher one.

Major wrote:We have cars nowadays as luxury private transport, we have our own houses nowadays as luxury dwellings.
Being reasonably well off in bygone years we would have had horses, horse drawn carts,carriages as luxury transport.
A wooden cabin as a luxury dwelling place, these things equal themselves out as time and things have evolved, not necessarily GREED but PROGRESS.

Envy/jealousy/survival drives people to better themselves in all things, why not?????

I am glad we have moved on.

Are you not pleased you can give your children, loved ones things your parents may not have been able to afford?

As a lad I remember those who had bugga all.

EVEN on benefits some manage to survive quite well which is another step forward away from poverty.

Don't knock it.

I agree with everything you have said bar the highlighted line Major.
I think envy and jealousy are destructive emotions ....hard work, love for our families (which I know you have) and a bit of good luck should suffice.
All the luxury goods in the world cant be enjoyed if a person is filled with negative emotions.

I also agree that the people on benefits nowadays are a lot better off than the people of my generation who were considered poor.....thankfully, even though I know a lot of families are still struggling, they don't live in the same conditions of past generations.

Oooohhh......

One of the majorettes hen house gang has redded me  !!!
I'll bet they only wished the red slashes included a counter..

Oh No..  the shame and ignominy of it all.
I don't how how I can live with myself now..

stardesk wrote:Ben is quite right about companies being greedy. One prime example of that is the regular update of mobile phones and other gadgets which people buy, just to be up to date. My mobile phone is about six years old, it does what I want it to do, phone home or the wife's mobile if she's out. If need be I can phone shops and other services. As long as it does that why buy a new one?

As for kids and their gadgets, parents have a lot to answer for, perhaps shoving them in their bedrooms or up a corner with their head stuck in them and not being a part of family communication and life. Just about everyone walking up the street have their mobiles stuck to their head ot looking down at it instead of looking where they're going.

What a sad, sick, and yes greedy and selfish world we live in.

More want more when it comes to corporate greed. Some of the most sickening is when we hear of companies that supply medical equipment and medicines.....the vast profits they make, whilst people who cant afford them die.
Bankers who screw the customers, have to be bailed out at the expense of the customers, then pay themselves multi million pound bonuses.
People like Philip Green and his incredibly ugly wife....who swan around on their new yachts living a life of spoiled luxury on the backs of hundreds of hard working 'ordinary' people...who are now out of jobs with no pensions.

I agree with your observations about kids and gadgets too....it's a strange world we live in where real social life is second to technology.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Oooohhh......

One of the majorettes hen house gang has redded me  !!!
I'll bet they only wished the red slashes included a counter..

Oh No..  the shame and ignominy of it all.
I don't how how I can live with myself now..

Have another...on me.

Syl wrote:

stardesk wrote:Ben is quite right about companies being greedy. One prime example of that is the regular update of mobile phones and other gadgets which people buy, just to be up to date. My mobile phone is about six years old, it does what I want it to do, phone home or the wife's mobile if she's out. If need be I can phone shops and other services. As long as it does that why buy a new one?

As for kids and their gadgets, parents have a lot to answer for, perhaps shoving them in their bedrooms or up a corner with their head stuck in them and not being a part of family communication and life. Just about everyone walking up the street have their mobiles stuck to their head ot looking down at it instead of looking where they're going.

What a sad, sick, and yes greedy and selfish world we live in.

More want more when it comes to corporate greed. Some of the most sickening is when we hear of companies that supply medical equipment and medicines.....the vast profits they make, whilst people who cant afford them die.
Bankers who screw the customers, have to be bailed out at the expense of the customers, then pay themselves multi million pound bonuses.
People like Philip Green and his incredibly ugly wife....who swan around on their new yachts living a life of spoiled  luxury on the backs of hundreds of hard working 'ordinary' people...who are now out of jobs with no pensions.

I agree with your observations about kids and gadgets too....it's a strange world we live in where real social life is second to technology.

I don't think there was any need to call anyone "ugly" tbh.

Of course corporate greed is a bad thing, but I always say something in defence of pharma companies. Without them, there are a lot of drugs that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for them. They have to spend huge amounts of money and time to develop and test drugs, some of which fail the tests so it's money down the drain.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Tag team", anyone...

Cowardly hens..

Wrong thread!

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Tag team", anyone...

Cowardly hens..

Grow up. There's no tag-teaming going on. You're the one being childish and attacking posters yet again.

Everythng about her, from her plastic exterior to her rotten greedy interior is ugly imo.
She is as bad as he is.

So?

Raggamuffin wrote:So?

I posted the pic before I added the text....
She is ugly inside and out.

Compare her hard plastic face, a woman living off the backs of others to the woman in the OP, who's face and expressions are wise and gentle....one = ugliness, one = beauty, to me anyway.

Wolfie.

You are repeatedly referring to gangs (majorettes etc) in that thread. This is against the rules Ben has layed out. So I'm giving you a warning.

Please don't continue with it. I like you as a poster, and you are better than that.

Syl wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:So?

I posted the pic before I added the text....
She is ugly inside and out.

Compare her hard plastic face, a woman living off the backs of others to the woman in the OP, who's face and expressions  are wise and gentle....one = ugliness, one = beauty, to me anyway.

I think that's so unfair. You can't judge what someone's really like because of their facial features. If you can come up with examples of how she's not a nice person - unrelated to how much money she has - that might be different.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

BIG difference in leading a modern first-world life of dignity and the corporate-driven consumer madness we see these days.

It really shouldn't surprise us, Ben, to see one of the leading lights of Newsfix's Fascist Brigade extending his largesse into embracing the ideals and excesses of Corporate Fascism --  including those anti-environmental and anti-humanity agendas that endears them to everyone on here...

Not content with disparaging "mixed race" children (yet another direct and insulting slur against me (and others on here..) and my extended family..)),  and his ongoing slurs against "forunuz", refugees, asylum seekers, any other foreigners in general, Muslims in particular, wildlife, women and gays --  now we see him openly supporting all of the damage and evils that unbridled and greed-fuelled Corporatism has inflicted on this world.

Never mind what kind of world they are leaving to future generations..    Just as long as Stormee and his ilk can have flashier cars and bigger homes, nevermind the collateral costs to the planet's ecology, the rest of the world can "go to hell in a handbasket"...          

I wondered how long it would take for WhoseYourWolfie to start name calling and false accusations and mods ignoring it.

Back to your old ways I see.

Don't call me fascist or Stormee

Major wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

BIG difference in leading a modern first-world life of dignity and the corporate-driven consumer madness we see these days.

It really shouldn't surprise us, Ben, to see one of the leading lights of Newsfix's Fascist Brigade extending his largesse into embracing the ideals and excesses of Corporate Fascism --  including those anti-environmental and anti-humanity agendas that endears them to everyone on here...

Not content with disparaging "mixed race" children (yet another direct and insulting slur against me (and others on here..) and my extended family..)),  and his ongoing slurs against "forunuz", refugees, asylum seekers, any other foreigners in general, Muslims in particular, wildlife, women and gays --  now we see him openly supporting all of the damage and evils that unbridled and greed-fuelled Corporatism has inflicted on this world.

Never mind what kind of world they are leaving to future generations..    Just as long as Stormee and his ilk can have flashier cars and bigger homes, nevermind the collateral costs to the planet's ecology, the rest of the world can "go to hell in a handbasket"...          

I wondered how long it would take for WhoseYourWolfie to start name calling and false accusations and mods ignoring it.

Back to your old ways I see.

Don't call me fascist or Stormee

Or, instead of whining about it, you could just debate him?

Ben Reilly wrote:

Major wrote:

I wondered how long it would take for WhoseYourWolfie to start name calling and false accusations and mods ignoring it.

Back to your old ways I see.

Don't call me fascist or Stormee

Or, instead of whining about it, you could just debate him?

Wolfman wasn't debating, but I noticed you didn't bother to advise him to debate the issue.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:

Major wrote:

I wondered how long it would take for WhoseYourWolfie to start name calling and false accusations and mods ignoring it.

Back to your old ways I see.

Don't call me fascist or Stormee

Or, instead of whining about it, you could just debate him?

Wolfman wasn't debating, but I noticed you didn't bother to advise him to debate the issue.

Sure he was -- multiple challenges to his worldview.

Christ, this site is littered with fucking sissies!