41–50 of 64 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Europe’s big problem is the hindered of millions of climate refugees on the doorstep. Even the most open heart liberal will baulk at the population doubling or more in 20 years. The only ones promising a solution will be the neofeudalists
Why would an open heart liberal have any concern with welcoming refugees?
The UK is consistently amongst the lowest household expenditure on food in the entire world. Only 3 countries in the world are self sufficient in food. If this "reasonable worst-case" scenario happens, surely the UK is one of the better placed to deal with it?
The UK is consistently amongst the lowest household expenditure on food in the entire world. Only 3 countries in the world are self sufficient in food. If this "reasonable worst-case" scenario happens, surely the UK is one of the better placed to deal with it?
Here is the solution nobody is talking about: The population of the UK or Europe did not explode in the last hundred years. It did not even double. The population used to be more rural and relatively self sufficient in terms of food. There is actually enough land in Europe to feed everybody, especially considering the great progress we made scientifically. You can actually sustain yourself on a few hundred square met…
Moving from the current situation to the situation you describe is impossible, because the UK has far too much debt and far too small an annual government income to pay for even the popular kinds of infrastructure spending, let alone the degrowth proposition you articulate. The millionaires really do take their assets and leave if taxes are raised and a Mossad-style international program to repatriate them in duffel…
The UK is consistently amongst the lowest household expenditure on food in the entire world. Only 3 countries in the world are self sufficient in food. If this "reasonable worst-case" scenario happens, surely the UK is one of the better placed to deal with it?
For only three countries to be self-sufficient, I suspect there is some funny definition like, "Well Americans eat 100pounds of pork each year, and they have to import pork to hit that number, ergo America is not food self sufficient." When instead you could switch calories to any number of alternatives.
Here is the solution nobody is talking about: The population of the UK or Europe did not explode in the last hundred years. It did not even double. The population used to be more rural and relatively self sufficient in terms of food. There is actually enough land in Europe to feed everybody, especially considering the great progress we made scientifically. You can actually sustain yourself on a few hundred square met…
Your politicians are actually subsidising the rural lifestyle with direct and indirect transfers. Eg in Europe, you can buy land, leave it more or less abandoned and cash in agricultural subsidies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Europe, you don't have global influence?" What is this? Disconnect, splinter and prepare for war?
> Disconnect, splinter and prepare for war? But this is what we are doing anyway... I am just trying to articulate a path where can have better food security and sustainability.
Here is the solution nobody is talking about: The population of the UK or Europe did not explode in the last hundred years. It did not even double. The population used to be more rural and relatively self sufficient in terms of food. There is actually enough land in Europe to feed everybody, especially considering the great progress we made scientifically. You can actually sustain yourself on a few hundred square met…
Europe’s big problem is the hindered of millions of climate refugees on the doorstep. Even the most open heart liberal will baulk at the population doubling or more in 20 years. The only ones promising a solution will be the neofeudalists
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think it's been possible to feed the UK domestically since before WW2. Of course you can, I know people being almost self sustainable right now on very little land. It is hard, frugal but highly rewarding and we have evolved to do it since very recently. Energy and heating is a bit more complicated. We obviously cannot burn wood or coal like we use to because this is actually very damaging to the planet. So…
Farming might feel rewarding while watching someone else do the hard work. I watched and had to help my grandparents do it and went through my own decade of "farming" and it never gets easier and you only get older.
Hence why traditionally farmers either had large families, hired outside workers, or most often did both.
(Source: I grew up in rancher/farmer territory and earned some of my earliest "spending money" working for local farmers or ranchers during harvest season.)