No kids, no cars, no meat, no flying!

No kids, no cars, no meat, no flying!
BY LORRIE GOLDSTEIN, TORONTO SUN

The following opinion piece in the Toronto Sun discusses environmental steps and mentions that not having children as the most important one that a person could do.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/07/15/no-kids-no-cars-no-meat-no-flying

Well, I guess I'm doing better than average: no kids, only one car (2 person household), I'm vegetarian, and rarely fly anywhere. It's a start.

There is a documentary on Netflix, it is called Cowspiracy. It talks about how much water it takes to raise cattle.

How many Americans are eager to have no kids, no car, very little travel, and no meat? How many people will want to live in a 400 square foot home with no air conditioning in the summer? And just a wood-burning fireplace in the winter? No dishwasher? No refrigeration? No hot water? What we're talking about, in essence, is a return to a 17th-Century lifestyle.

None of this stuff is going to happen unless it is forced upon people due to scarcity, economic collapse, etc. etc.

Even the most rabid "environmentalists" I know would shutter at the prospect of the questions I proposed above. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. If you want to go full-environmentalist you've got to also advocate for the end of agri-business which consumes a huge amount of petroleum. This means our crop yields will go in the toilet. Food will become very expensive and scarce. Forget about eating less meat... people will be eating less everything!

Well, I love meat, have no kids, don't drive (although that's going to change soon) and I'm too scared to fly. Where's my cookie?

StudioFiftyFour mentioned one of the tenets of the OP as, "And just a wood-burning fireplace in the winter?"

This shows that in some ways the greens don't know what they're talking about. Burning wood in an open fireplace for heat is highly inefficient and does not help much at all if the temperature is much below about 20 F. It also produces noxious smoke—pollution!—and risks setting the structure on fire.

The Franklin stove in the 18th Century was considered a big advance because it allowed maintaining a room temperature of 50 F during chilly winter nights. That sounds a bit too cool compared to normal modern room temperatures, but back then that was miles ahead of the open hearth and open fireplace.

Return to the past? Another note: horses aren't environmentally friendly either. Motor vehicles are generally much cleaner than horses and draft animals.

The environmentalists are correct about population and children being part of a larger problem. But advocating everyone's return to a preindustrial way of life shows they really are off on the wrong foot in many other ways.

Justin can do his part, why doesn't he tell the world he is going to be neutered?

I know of the "live better electrically" jingle from the 50s and the logo shows a stick family of only 3, a man, woman and boy. I would make it "live better, with just three" and have a girl in there too. I know back in the 70s, India used to have signs to have only 2 kids, what happened to that?

Quote
kman
StudioFiftyFour mentioned one of the tenets of the OP as, "And just a wood-burning fireplace in the winter?"

This shows that in some ways the greens don't know what they're talking about. Burning wood in an open fireplace for heat is highly inefficient and does not help much at all if the temperature is much below about 20 F. It also produces noxious smoke—pollution!—and risks setting the structure on fire.

The Franklin stove in the 18th Century was considered a big advance because it allowed maintaining a room temperature of 50 F during chilly winter nights. That sounds a bit too cool compared to normal modern room temperatures, but back then that was miles ahead of the open hearth and open fireplace.

Return to the past? Another note: horses aren't environmentally friendly either. Motor vehicles are generally much cleaner than horses and draft animals.

The environmentalists are correct about population and children being part of a larger problem. But advocating everyone's return to a preindustrial way of life shows they really are off on the wrong foot in many other ways.

Very good points, kman. Unforunately, the "environmentalists" I know would blow you off completely, and eagerly remind you that they recycle, eat organic foods, and drive an electric car. (Unlike your gasoline powered vehicle, their power just magically comes out of the wall... ).

And by the way, I don't want to be misunderstood here. I'm not against the environment or keeping the earth as clean as we can keep it. But we're not going to operate the US military, agri-business, Wal-Mart, and a coast-to-coast electrical grid with service to every home in America on a solar panel and a few wind turbines. It's just not going to happen. And if you're driving your 6 kids around in a Prius for "environmental reasons" you have officially reached a level of cognitive dissonance that will make listening to reason on this matter even more unlikely.

The only way out of the environmental problems that we have is to get the world population to a manageable number over the next 100 years. I am not in favor of any draconian measures in the US, but I do think that it's okay to have a conversation with people and to be brutally honest. I don't think the world is going to be a better place 50 years from now than it is today. I'm quite pessimistic on this point, actually, and it's one reason why I don't have kids. I foresee a world of "peak" everything, lots of automation, household and government debt as far as the eye can see, unemployment, inflation, and a widening gap between the haves and the have nots.

Have no car, no kids, haven't flown in years, and eat meat a few times a week (meat is expensive on a low income.) Don't know if that is enough, or if the occasional meat eating still deducts points.

I think what drives a lot of meat eating is the fact it's cheap, a lot of the low price due to factory farming.

Make meat more expensive again, people won't want to eat it as much.

Same thing with cars, make gas expensive (like it is in Europe) people won't drive so much, and will try and use more public transportation, walking and bikes.

However, it will be harder to get people to have less kids unless having kids creates immediate dire consequences or people are culturally opposed to having more then one or two. Plus some politicians tell people that more people full the economy, so they always make it sound dire whenever birth rates drop.

I am not 4 for 4 in the subject of this thread, but I do pretty well. No kids, the most important one. I haven't flown in 13 years, and no need or desire to fly again. I do have a car (a small, economical one) but I drive only about 3,000 miles a year. I do eat meat (including chicken) most days, though.

I don't think trying to improve the environment would nescescarily mean cutting back to a 17th century lifestyle. I think the problem could be solved by getting to zero population growth until it stabilizes. I'd like to see solar panels made more affordable {I'd like some but can't afford them at the moment}, but I don't think it needs to be an all or nothing situation. I think people should stop breeding, and anything else gets bonus points after that.

Lock him up or put him down.
Stolen from Shiny.

A 17th century lifestyle won't be sustainable with the present population (let's take into account that modern medicine is available and cuts down mortality so we could have the present population number). We did manage to make very good advances in technology, environmentally speaking but it will be useless if people breed at this rate. Resources are finite anyways.

It made me laugh few days ago when our media started panicking again about lower birth rates but the same newspaper published an article how Finland might deal with food shortages in the future. I laughed because i thought well, get those birth rates up so we can eat babies.

As for me, i don't have a car although this might change because most of the jobs here require a car and usually people live in the middle of nowhere. You need to get around somehow and public transportation is expensive and very inefficient if you live in the countryside. I don't eat meat that often, too expensive and besides chicken and fish, i'm not a big meat fan. I don't fly often because, again, can't afford it.

Didn't mention kids but that's obvious.

And besides i think that cars and flying would be quite impossible to give up from a logistics point of view. Economy also relies on exports/imports plus the goods that we need from other countries. Bananas and lots of other foods don't grow here for example. Even the simple thing of transporting milk from the factory in X town to the Z town, you can't teleport that.

Edit: Here you have the article whining about birth rates. We get these so often i started being really annoyed.

Quote

If you want to go full-environmentalist you've got to also advocate for the end of agri-business which consumes a huge amount of petroleum. This means our crop yields will go in the toilet. Food will become very expensive and scarce. Forget about eating less meat... people will be eating less everything!

I don't know. How many Americans currently have yards that they water and put chemicals on that are currently yielding nothing but grass to be cut? I get far more produce than I can eat from my small garden. If everyone planted their yards with food plants, especially things like potatoes and beans, I think there would be plenty to eat. Dehydration and canning make it possible to store the excess without refrigeration. Every apartment building should have a rooftop garden for the residents, as those have environmental benefits beyond the food they produce.

For those that want meat, entomophagy is the environmental way to go. Bug meat takes much less water and space for lots of protein and micronutrients. Bug livestock can also be raised in an urban environment.

I'm not sanguine about the future, given that your average welfare MOO thinks that chicken nuggets, Happy Meals and cable TV are necessary for survival, but it really takes very little in the way of resources to provide adequate food and shelter for a human. The average diabetic, screen-addicted child would probably be better off after a year of beans and potatoes and candlelight reading.

judging by my area of the country large numbers of American homes still worship lawn care! In my neighborhood, EVERYONE must apparently have zero-turn riding mowers (maybe with air conditioning and stereo systems?) , and fire them up EVERY weekend. If rain is predicted, the guys all run outside and frantically mow their only-2"- high 3 acre lawns! It 's downright insane. One of my coworkers set off on a catalog of all his lawn machines when I made the mistake of asking advice about what basic mower to buy. He listed the costs of each, and some machines were up over $1000!! The prices shocked me so, I could not focus on the actual figures! He has given up golf in favor of lawn care, he said. Sigh

Yea, I have an electric push mower, and I let my lawn go brown in the summer. We don't bother with the watering, because really, it just means more lawn mowing, and I'm just not into that. My garden is quite pretty, though.

I know some people who are obsessed with their lawns, and I can't figure out what is the fascination about it. Grass always comes back after Summer.

I guess, besides the meat, I've been pretty eco friendly. I think the fact that I never sluiced kinda lets me off the hook with that, though.

I do eat meat, but I don't drive, fly, or have brats. I live in a boarding house with no lawn. My guilty pleasure is my computer.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!

Quote
happyhiker

I don't know. How many Americans currently have yards that they water and put chemicals on that are currently yielding nothing but grass to be cut? I get far more produce than I can eat from my small garden. If everyone planted their yards with food plants, especially things like potatoes and beans, I think there would be plenty to eat. Dehydration and canning make it possible to store the excess without refrigeration. Every apartment building should have a rooftop garden for the residents, as those have environmental benefits beyond the food they produce.

For those that want meat, entomophagy is the environmental way to go. Bug meat takes much less water and space for lots of protein and micronutrients. Bug livestock can also be raised in an urban environment.

I'm not sanguine about the future, given that your average welfare MOO thinks that chicken nuggets, Happy Meals and cable TV are necessary for survival, but it really takes very little in the way of resources to provide adequate food and shelter for a human. The average diabetic, screen-addicted child would probably be better off after a year of beans and potatoes and candlelight reading.

FWIW, I believe that when the shit hits the fan, the urban and suburban poor are far more likely to take their grievances to the streets than to even think about starting a garden or canning food.

I have no doubts that you, happyhiker, are doing the seeding, weeding, harvesting, and canning... and I am sure you are darn healthier as a result! And that's great for you. But one of these days you should take a stroll into your nearest urban/suburban/ex-urban fast food joints. If you have the audacity, ask some of the folks in there if they've ever thought about canning foods. I guarantee at least 50% of them will have no idea what you are talking about.

Yeah, like I say, I'm not sanguine. Most breeders can't even cook a proper meal.

It just irks me every time when I hear how people have to eat crap because crap is cheap. Crap IS cheap, but so are many healthy staples. In every region of this country, there are certain plants that will yield with very, very little effort. Like, throw the seeds down and forget it. I've decided that where I live you basically have to try to kill your squash and okra.

I live in a larger, newer house, but it's a lot more energy efficient than a smaller, older house. I drive a smaller SUV (best gas mileage in its class) due to a lifestyle choice: I'm often hauling around animals or a disabled elderly relative, and I use the room for her walker. I haven't flown for personal reasons in a decade, mostly because I do a fair amount of business travel. The last thing I want to do on my leisure time is more of that crap.

Conventional agriculture, particularly the meat and dairy industries, are heavily subsidized in America, yet your "Average American" will bitch when meat goes up 10 cents a pound. And many Americans eat more meat than they need--it should be a condiment but many Americans are brainwashed due to propaganda from these industries. I was recently with the in-laws for several days and in many ways they are "Average Americans." They want cheap food and they want it regardless of methods to obtain it. (Factory farming, Round-up Ready crops.)

They eat meat and dairy at every meal because "you need protein." They take foods that typically don't have meat, for example, Rotel cheese dip, and put hamburger in it. (Hamburger has got to be the grossest food ever and they put hamburger and sausage in everything.) They are more than happy to get into an argument about how organic foods or non-factory farmed meats are a "waste of money." People in the family grow Roundup ready crops. Even my SIL, who is definitely left-leaning, will say using Roundup on genetically modified crops is good because "anything that increases yield is good."

Factory farming is an abomination for the animals and it's killing the environment as well. Being concerned with yield yield yield to the exclusion of all else is poisoning the Earth and us. Of course, over population is driving all this.

I thought of this thread today when I was watching a fluff news piece. The premise was that women are getting into politics because they don't believe they are represented in the Trump administration. Of course women = Moo and one twat said, "As a mother and an environmentalist, I am concerned about the Earth." Anyone who utters the words "as a parunt and an environmentalist, I" should be zapped with a cattle prod. Why doesn't it hurt to be stupid?

It's positive that articles like this are getting some play, but you know any academic who starts calling out the population crisis is probably paying a professional penalty. A lot of research is government subsidized and it's all about money.

I'm not against GMO crops, simply because I'm against starvation, and if we can feed people in Africa who have no food, then it's all good. Non-organic food is a waste of money - IF YOU ARE STARVING. Anything that increases yield is good in places where nothing will grow. The problem is hearing these arguments from obese Americans.

I am always skeptical when I hear about the number of people who are food-insecure or about children who go hungry during the summer in this country. Beans, rice, potatoes and apples are practically free. You can get all the calories and nutrients you need for pennies a day (except for B-12, so add in the cost of $3 a month for a supplement). That's before mentioning that if you have a yard, for very little cost you can cultivate hundreds of dollars of organic produce a year.

And I agree that being a parent and an environmentalist are mutually exclusive, just as being a meat-eating environmentalist is not possible. I also think it is impossible to be a patriotic American and buy goods at Wal-Mart made by exploited foreigners if you can afford not to. I imagine that Wal-Mart is full of people wearing MAGA hats with grocery carts full of Venezuelan beef, Vietmanese-made clothing and children's toys made in Taiwan. But, I wouldn't know. I don't shop at that hell hole. Breeders are fantastic hypocrites and nothing they do or say would surprise me at this point.

@happyhiker: I also have my small garden but i have to be honest, it takes quite an effort to take care of it from planning the crops and taking care of it. I live in a place with very cold weather and if you don't have a greenhouse, you can't grow most of the stuff. The last summers have been pretty cold and rainy and some of my stuff just died. Plus i can't grow lots of things because of the climate. For example, last summer i didn't even get onions because they rotted in the ground and i had to cover my strawberries because we had freezing nights in June, it would have killed them. So, we kind of rely on greenhouses and imports.

I mentioned here though breeders who chastised me for using absorbants and the pill because i'm polluting. Oh really, how about those diapers and the actual kids? Because that judgement, i don't know how, but it always comes from people with 3+ kids.