71–80 of 129 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do the simple calculations yourself and see what they need to explain.
You’ll go a lot further in convincing me of your argument by not assigning me math homework. That, and experience says that almost any time someone says something like “do the research/math yourself” and I do , turns out they’re full of shit, thereby explaining why they didn’t just answer a straight question. So no, I won’t be doing any simple calculations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are nice people everywhere but if you travel a lot you'll soon learn that some places are a lot less welcoming than others.
Can you be more specific? What places are a lot less welcoming in your many travels?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ultimately the resources a nation has are the skills of its people and political will. No nations resources are limitless, and the Netherlands has far fewer real resources but much better skills and organizational capabilities. The fact that the Netherlands was a former colonial power doesn't give them any "colony juice" that they can squeeze onto the ground and dams rise up like apple trees. They still have to desig…
The Dutch are quite famous for their fight against the water and have build enormous resources (companies, knowledge, public administration) for building dams and the like. Doing 'their thing' all over the world, for example, in Indonesia...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polder_model
And that enabled big projects like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maeslantkering
You can draw your own conclusions about what the Dutch think of people who don't believe in global warming, then lie about the Netherlands, then call reports with video evidence of their lies fake news, then deny they used the term fake news less than 60 seconds later. It's not consensus decision making if you can't even agree with your own words.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/22/us-ambassador-...
Historical background
Somewhat ironically, there is no consensus about the exact historical background of the polder model. In general there are three views on this subject.
One explanation points to the rebuilding of the Netherlands after World War II. Corporatism was an important feature of Christian Democratic, and particularly Catholic, political thought. During the postwar period, the Catholic, Protestant, Christian, social-democratic, and liberal parties decided to work together to reconstruct the Netherlands, as did unions and employers' organizations. Important institutions of the polder model, like the SER, were founded in this period. No single political party has ever had anything approaching an overall majority in parliament, so coalition government is inevitable. This makes parties extremely cautious, since today's enemy may be tomorrow's ally, all the more so in present times when the "death of ideology" has made it possible for almost all the parties to work together.
Another explanation points to the dependency of the Netherlands on the international economy. The Dutch cannot afford protectionism against the unpredictable tides of the international economy, because the Netherlands is not an autarkic economy. Therefore, to cushion against the international economy, they set up a tri-partite council which oversaw an extensive welfare state.
A third explanation refers to a unique aspect of the Netherlands, that it consists in large part of polders, land reclaimed from the sea, which requires constant pumping and maintenance of the dykes. So ever since the Middle Ages, when the process of land reclamation began, different societies living in the same polder have been forced to cooperate because without unanimous agreement on shared responsibility for maintenance of the dykes and pumping stations, the polders would have flooded and everyone would have suffered. Crucially, even when different cities in the same polder were at war, they still had to cooperate in this respect. This is thought to have taught the Dutch to set aside differences for a greater purpose.
So the city is sinking many inches, even feet per year(due to excessive ground water withdrawals). With all the problems the city has, how does climate change(an average sea level rise of a few millimeters per year) even wind up on the reporters radar? I'm no denier, but it aggravates me when someone tries to force a connection to global warming/climate change.
Say for example there is a terrible disease outbreak in your community. The first people that die will probably be people that have weakened health because of health problems other than the particular outbreak. But that does not mean that the disease does not exist and the ones that survive should not be trying to address it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sea levels are projected to rise from 0.6 to 6 meters this century. [1] So while urban sinking is a much bigger immediate threat, climate change will pose a significant problem in the near future, and—crucially—will affect every coastal city in the world , not just Jakarta. [1]: https://sealevel.nasa.gov/understanding-sea-level/projection...
>will affect every coastal city in the world, not just Jakarta. 1) No duh. Who was that statement for? Nobody is debating that GW is terrible. But we're not talking about global warming. 2) You're doing exactly what he's talking about. Shoehorning in global warming where it's not needed. You can discuss murder rates of a single city without shoehorning in murder rates of the "highest murder rate city in the world" ev…
That said, while a spurious connection need not be drawn I. The article, it is relevant to compare and Co Trasylol the rate of change with global sea level rise (while pointibg out the distinction). Similarly to if we were talking about the murder capital of the world it would be relevant to compare and contrast to worldwide averages, and possibly less unique causes for that city.
Well it seems like the people there are trying really hard to ruin their country. It's all self-inflicted. Seems like they deserve what's coming to them.
That's a really careless and thoughtless opinion, and it completely dismisses the complexity of human organizational decision making.
Jakarta feels like Gotham without Jim Gordon and Bruce Wayne
And we just wait the mosnters come up from the tunnel
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You used a lot of words to hide the lack of any support for your argument.
Do the simple calculations yourself and see what they need to explain.
How about instead of throwing the term "politically correct" around three times in the same post, you show us something "mathematically correct"?