Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBuoy
You just illustrated my point perfectly. In your example, the government was enlisting people. The government was encouraging people to buy bonds. The government was encouraging the planting of victory gardens, imposing rationing, etc.
Do you believe that if the government put out a call tomorrow for people to join an army of workers to build a carbon-neutral energy grid, nobody would enlist? If the government offered green bonds for sale, no one would buy them? That no one would plant gardens if the government encouraged them to? That no one would accept rationing in the fight against climate change?
I'm not saying everything has to come from the government, but right now, government policy stands in the way of meaningful action on climate change.
|
Almost all of the things on my list were voluntary (although there was limited conscription towards the end of the war). No, I don’t think people would enlist to build a green grid.
The way you can tell if somebody takes an issue seriously is if they propose activities and initiatives that are against there ideology. When Chrétien thought the deficit was a crisis he went after the sacred cows of the Liberal Party to balance the budget. Flarety abandoned a long time commitment to a balanced budget when he was convinced the global financial crisis necessitated huge deficits. Free marketeers of WW2 eras took over the means of production to facilitate the war effort. If Trudeau was serious he would be going after his own sacred cows, not a little carbon tax that mostly affects Tory voters.
I remember an interview with David Suzuki when the host asked about his own carbon consumption. He said that his family takes the bus if they go downtown during the day.
Threaded Mode