dying cyclist ignored by passing drivers

[fatboy]

he whole economy becomes like a huge conveyor belt digging resources out of one hole in the ground, and burying them in another, and the whole political system is predicated on the need for the conveyor belt to keep accelerating at 2% per annum........

Until there is a really big crash which is always necessary since 2% (or whatever) per annum since this can't go on forever. There was a nice article on the Guardian on-line website asking where all the economists are now things aren't going so well for the economy? I find that either economists lie, delude themselves or don't know what they're talking about because they always predict that there will be a slow down but no crash, or ask stupid questions like what can be done about house prices since no-one can afford to be a first time buyer? (Answer: Do nothing the house price will fall by supply and demand!) They seem incapable of grasping that boom and bust is inevitable in westernised economies.

It's funny that we as a race all care about having better than anyone else because it does nothing for our happiness, in fact quite the opposite. What's especially bad about the last spree of keeping up with the Jones/Smiths is that everyone did it on credit. You used to be able to judge wealth by car, clothes, phone etc but now you don't know how much (if any) of it they actually own.

As for me I spend a few quid on beer and a few quid on cycling stuff and that's it. I wish that I could save a bit more but I don't want much that I don't have (except for a better bike ) and it keeps me sane.

[axel_knutt]

Until there is a really big crash which is always necessary

The writing was one the wall the day man learned to farm. Natures methods of population control are famine, disease and predation. Once man mitigated against the effects of famine by the use of agriculture the population became out of control, and has been ever since. Eventually he learned to alleviate predation with weapons, and disease with medicine, and the problem got worse still. Latterly the whole problem got spectacularly worse when access to cheap abundant energy allowed us to live far beyond what is sustainable. Even if the 6.5bn people already on the planet keep to two children per woman the population will rise to 9bn, and there’s not much evidence that they will. Grain land per head of population has already peaked 27 years ago in 1981, and is now declining faster than ever. Every year millions of hectares of land are being trashed by overcropping, soil erosion, soil salinisation, flooding, deforestation, overuse of synthetic fertiliser, etc,etc.

The problem we face is unsustainable population growth, and unsustainable economic growth fuelled by cheap energy. Anyone who thinks the problem will be solved by carbon free energy is living in cloud cuckoo land. A limitless supply of clean energy will perpetuate the problem not solve it!! The paradox is that on current evidence, the best way to stop population growth is to reduce poverty. (Whether that’s absolute or relative poverty I wouldn’t like to say.) So given that the economic growth has got to stop, the only way to curb population growth without more consumption overall is with a massive transfer of wealth from the first to the third world.

The problem is that we don’t learn from experience. As Jared Diamond shows in Collapse, every failed society of the past has gone the same way: over consumption of resources through over population. Ours is the first civilisation in history with the knowledge and education to learn from the past, but we’re not doing it.

We have two choices: curb growth in the population and economy voluntarily, or continue as we are and have the environment curb them by force when the overexploitation of resources causes a collapse of civilisation. On present evidence, the smart money is on the latter……….

[BlueMeldon]

Sadly, and as we've seen in the press, killing someone with your car is no longer guaranteed to put you away even if you are wrong.

I agree there may be genuine accidents where circumstances do not warrant a custodial sentence - but at the moment the wrong message is being sent to those offenders who commit such acts.

These paltry fines and minimal driving bans trivialises it just when a shockwave of a message should be sent out loud and clear.

If you drive a car, your priority is driving the car and it's associated responsibilities to other roadusers, not answering the phone, choosing your next bit of music, putting on makeup, eating or drinking.

It's a mindset / personality / status symbol problem - as, unfortunately it's not unusual to see a car with a full boot rack of wheels "nailing" it past you ! We don't even look after our own !!

Rant over,
Blue