41–50 of 117 posts
Possibly good news of course, but I find something is a bit out of place given this is coming from a petro-state. They could surely have more impact on global warming etc by simply shutting down oil exports.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a matter of different politics. Norway chose not to basically let private companies take all the profit from natural resources, while in the UK there's this weird system in place that has politicians ruining public orgs like infrastructure providers to afterwards claim they fixed it, once they pushed for privatization, and all they did was get it back to where it was before in quality of service. After that, it'…
Norway is turning UK year by year...
It's not that petrol cars will be forbidden but buying a new non zero emission car in 2025 will be financially not beneficial, according to Norwegian press. 99% of the electricity in Norway comes from hydro power plants, it's a huge exporter of gas and oil and it's rich. That makes it easier to make such a progressive decision but congrats for setting the first deadline.
Their problem is that once more they can't think beyond the capitol. There already are all kinds of silly taxes and such to try to get people to drive less etc. But outside of the biggest cities public transport only runs during office hours. End result is that owning and using a car i vital to continued survival. So expect this to turn petrol cars into something of a Giffen good, if not an outright Veblen good.
And even on that island with only ferry connection and 600 residents there is an hourly bus going the whole day to the local mainland town.
How far into the woods do you live? ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US should do it too, if only for ending it's dependency on imported oil.
The US is a net exporter of Oil, but like with many other products it imports as almost much as it exports. Just be aware that the US imports 40% of it's Oil from Canada if it stops doing so it will have a major impact on Canada's economy which is a thing no one wants especially considering the current issues with the Canadian economy. However it if wanted too it could stop importing oil all together today since it h…
There are more exports of finished products than there are imports, but that's not really the same thing... refinery capacity is much more a function of money than oil production.
(as an additional point: 40% of the total US oil consumption is a lot more oil than Canada produces each day! - I expect 40% of the total imports are from Canada.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The more opinions there are from different people the harder it is to reach consensus?
Are we talking about ideological diversity or ethnical diversity?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are we talking about ideological diversity or ethnical diversity?
I'm talking about the former, the latter i guess is at least somewhat correlated with differing opinions too. Reaaly its the vast difference in size that matters -- USA has SO many differing constituencies with differing needs and wants and opinions. Norway is a municipal government by comparison.
Also how do different parts of the US have different needs?
It's not that petrol cars will be forbidden but buying a new non zero emission car in 2025 will be financially not beneficial, according to Norwegian press. 99% of the electricity in Norway comes from hydro power plants, it's a huge exporter of gas and oil and it's rich. That makes it easier to make such a progressive decision but congrats for setting the first deadline.
Its like a drug dealer that doesn't do his own drugs. You're still part of the problem. Out of sight out of mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Norway is culturally optimized for safe equilibrium. America is culturally optimized for risky advancement. It's pretty starkly different and makes direct single-variable comparisons into shallow exercises in meaninglessness
Norway is also tiny and SOVEREIGN. Any similarly inclined USA state must answer to the other 49.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm talking about the former, the latter i guess is at least somewhat correlated with differing opinions too. Reaaly its the vast difference in size that matters -- USA has SO many differing constituencies with differing needs and wants and opinions. Norway is a municipal government by comparison.
How do you measure ideological diversity? Also how do different parts of the US have different needs?
Ideological diversity can be measured by simply conducting public opinion polls on a range of public policy issues (social, economic, foreign, domestic, etc etc). This is a pretty well established science. Add in the distribution of said opinions -- a lot of different opinions in about the same mix everywhere is much different from large concentrated enclaves in different geographic regions (ie the Big Sort[1]).
As for different needs, before we even get into ideology simple geography dictates a lot already. California has a lot of forest fires, Louisiana and Texas have a lot of floods, New England has a lot of snow.
Then you get into urban vs. rural -- America has some of the most vast expanses of rural land and many of the world's biggest cities. Urban areas have very different needs from rural ones.
THEN you get into the differing needs of the peoples themselves which is affected by a million different variables. Education levels. Income levels. Health. Languages spoken in different regions. Populations with many recent immigrants have differing legal and social needs from populations of ninth generation native-born citizens. And on and on and on.