THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: THE NEW TYPE OF NON- CONSCIOUS INTELLIGENCE DRIVEN BY NON-CONSCIOUS ALGORITHMS IS GOING TO DESTROY WHAT IS LEFT OF DECENCY IN THE WORLD. (Guest post an unknown source.)

Featured

Tags

, ,

 

( A six-minute read)

The idea that humans will always have a unique ability beyond the reach of non-conscious algorithms is just wishful thinking.

The fact is, as time goes by it will be easier and easier to replace humans with computer algorithms, not because they are getting smarter and smarter but because humans are professionalising.

One would have to say are we all such naive bonkers that we are going to allow algorithms dictate our lives.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of algorithms"

The answer so far appears to be yes. We are going to become militarily and economically useless.

Technical difficulties or political objections might slow down the algorithmic invasion of the job market but while the systems might need humans, it will not need individuals.

These systems will make most of the important decisions depriving individuals of their authority and freedom.

They are already assembling humans into dividuals ie. humans are becoming an assemblage of many different algorithms lacking a single inner voice or a single self.

Its time we realized that if we continue down this path allowing large corporations platforms to introduce algorithms willy nilly with no overall vetting as to whether they comply with our values we will be replacing the voter, the consumer, and the beholder.

The Al algorithm will know best, will always be right, and beauty will be in the calculation of the algorithm. Individualism will collapse and authority will shift from individual humans to autonomous networks.

People will not see themselves as individuals but as collections of biochemical mechanisms that are constantly monitored and guided by a network of electronic algorithms.

We are already crossing the line. Most of us use Apps without any thought whatsoever.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of algorithms"

You might say that every age has its organizing principles.

The nineteenth century had the novel, and the twentieth had TV; in our more modern times, they come and go more quickly than ever—on Web 1.0 it was the website, for example, and a few years later, for 2.0, it was the app.

And now, another shift is underway:

Today’s organizing principle is the algorithm. (Though you could productively argue that our new lingua franca will either be artificial intelligence or virtual reality.)

Algorithms rule the modern world, silent workhorses aligning data sets and systematizing the world. They’re everywhere, in everything, and you wouldn’t know unless you looked. For some of the most powerful companies in the world—Google, Facebook, etc.—they’re also closely held secrets, the most valuable intellectual property a company owns. 

Perhaps it is naïve to believe algorithms should be neutral? but it’s also deceptive to advance the illusion that Facebook and the algorithms that power it are bias-free.

They are not neutral.

Facebook is intended to be the home of what the world is talking about. Their business model depends on it, even if that’s an impossible goal. As such, with now well over a billion users, and still growing, it’s worth asking:

What role should Facebook play in shaping public discourse? And just how transparent should it be?

After all, Facebook is mind-boggling massive.

It accounts for a huge portion of traffic directed to news sites; small tweaks in its own feed algorithm can have serious consequences for media companies’ bottom lines.

What can be done? ( See previous posts)

Evolution will continue and will need to do so if we humans are to exist.

We therefore should welcome all technology that enhances our chances of this existence in as far that it equates to human values.

All Algorithms that violate these values for the sake of profit or power should be destroyed.

After all if humans have no soul and if thoughts, emotions, and sensations are just biochemical algorithms why can’t biology account for all the vagaries of human societies.?

If Donald Trump is the best that twitter Algorithms can produce it appears to me that there is a long way to go and it’s not too late to change course.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the beauty of the earth"

All human comments appreciated. All like algorithms clicks chucked in the bin.

 

Advertisements

CAPITALISM CONTINUES TO PRIVATIZE THE PLANET.

Featured

Tags

 

 

 

This is the first post to this blog .

 The purpose of this blog is to start a world mobile phone movement to effect change by Uniting the combined Communication Powers of us all into one world voice that will have to be listened to by World Organizations  and World Corporations.

These days we are  served up doom and gloom daily with the last decade leading us down the path to disillusionment. 

DEMOCRACY ERODED, LIVELIHOODS DESTROYED.  WITH GOVERNMENTS EVERYWHERE BETRAYING THE MANDATES THAT BROUGHT THEM INTO POWER.

September 11 tragedy now turned into a convenient Excuse for any anti-people legislation denying civil liberties worldwide. The Arab Spring is a quagmire>The Euro a nightmare >The Afghan War a needless lost of life>The Israel Palestine Question a dark cul-de-sac>NATO a war machine>The United Nations a gum shield between the west and the rest>China a supermarket>Climate change a trading commodity>Football a religion>Austerity a goal>Economic Growth an aspiration that no one seems to know how to achieve.

IF WE ARE ALL HONEST WITH OURSELVES THE WORLD IS GOING WRONG:

By the year 2030 there will be 50% more of us-6 million a month.

Humanity will have to put aside the deep divisions it has maintained for thousands of years.

Find a new spirit of human co- operation. Stop spending trillions on arms. One-fifth of the world’s present days population live in the “rich world” consuming 86% of the world’s goods. While over half the people on Earth live on 2$ a day with the absolute  poor on a !$ making up billions. Where is the justice that the gross domestic product of the poorest 48 Nations is less than the wealth of the World’s three riches people.

You don’t have to look far to see why we have Terrorism. Poverty and lack of Education spawns it.

While we turn back the evolutionary clock pumping 8 billion tons of Carbon into the Atmosphere each year wiping out 50,000 species a year in collective denial.

There can be no trade-off between economic development and the protection of the Environment Even if it is possible looking back from the Moon and see no trace of human activities that show up.

Our Democracies seem unable to achieve any progress such as mitigating climate change, better managing ecosystems, creating a fair global trading system. However we have the knowledge, the data and the technologies to do all of these things.

The question is not so much ” How could we have learned so little in all these years after two World Wars? But ” How could we have learned so much and done so little?

So it’s time to stop supporting large World Corporations and the like that don’t show a corporate social responsibility and use the power of getting Smart with our smart phones.

Any comments, suggestions, are welcome.  My next blog posting will out line a plan to create a World Aid Tax to be applied on all World stock Exchanges.

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WILL POPULISM BE THE ULTIMATE STRESS TEST OF REPRESENTATIVE POLITICS.

Tags

, , , , ,

 

(Twenty-minute read)

Is democracy unravelled in the face of nationalism, racism, violence and populism? It seems even with the publicly supported compromise between countries and political parties are unable to cooperate to deliver anything.

If one takes a look at the world today 9/11 and the “war on terror” helped bring the idea of a “clash of civilisations” between Islam and the west to the forefront of political debate leaving all the rest in the dustbin of democracy.

As a result in the last few years, a new kind of far-right activism has emerged.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of far right"

This new activism, comprised largely of online anger and offline protest, crosses borders, yet is heavily nationalist and growing.

In Britain, its icons tend to be entrepreneurial social media personalities, celebrities of a sort, who use their following to exert pressure on mainstream politics.

Nobody in England embodies the dynamics of this new movement more than Mr Fraieg with his tutor in the USA Mr Dump who both gave support to Yaxley-Lennon better known as Tommy Robinson. ( The founder of the founder and former leader of the English Defence League (EDL) now the voice of UKIP which was founded by Nigel Farage, has today more than 950,000 followers.)

We all know that Data-driven algorithms exert great influence on the political world by analyzing our voting potential.  By logging what we do, where we do it, how we do it, with whom we do it, – Facebook- Twitter – Social Media, TV, U Tube, Google.

The marketplace of ideas, with the best arguments, no longer win out.

Even more worrying is the extent to which it is “normalising” extreme right-wing ideas and ideologies helping to form governments rooted in racism and fear of others – with anti-establishment crusader, online propagandists attracting large amounts of the wrong type of money and attention.

Throwing its opponents into a fierce disagreement about how to respond with the potential to have quite dangerous and dire consequences.

Indeed, one of the goals of right-wing extremists has always been to appear “normal”.

But all of this is not inevitable, and it can be stopped if we recognise that keeping the far right out of power is only one part of the problem.

We need a better understanding of what “free speech” is and is not.

There is still no public control or oversight of what we should regard as our platforms.

The logical consequence of free speech at any cost is that someone will soon be successful in rallying together enough impressionable voters to form an electable far-right party.

It has happened before and it will happen again.

The accusation of betrayal by the elites is central to the way that far-right movements operate with single-issue campaigns mostly conducted via social media without any commitment to wider political action.

For many years, far-right views were outside the acceptable bounds of debate and should be denied a platform.

But the breaking down of these boundaries presents a dilemma: what does the anti-fascist principle of “no platform” mean when a far-right activist has their own independent platform anyway?

The majority of their supporters, have no formal political affiliation and answered to no party hierarchy.

The ideas of extreme right-wing movements are dangerous, as they are not institutional actors.

While only a few years ago such groups would have been widely reviled, in today’s more populist atmosphere, such views are now more mainstream, sideling voters from the political movements that were originally created for their benefit.

For me Far Right is a slippery term and one that people should rarely if ever, apply to their own politics. In everyday use, it describes a range of extreme nationalist activity.

For instance: Stephen Bannon, a white nationalist who has said the west is at the start of a civilisational war with Islam.

Luckily different currents within the far right do not always get on and may also see one another as enemies.

So far it is not a cohesive movement. Their various aims are profoundly undemocratic: A majoritarianism defined by race, ethnicity or religion, and the violent exclusion of internal and external enemies.

The best defence is a political movement that has anti-racism at its core and seeks to give people greater democratic control over the way their society is organised and run.

However in recent years, pushed by the election of Donald Trump in the US, and political changes in Europe, we have seen the breaking down of the taboo that kept far-right political ideas largely outside mainstream culture.

This can be rectified. It is mostly the result of technological change, which can be fixed by regulating social media companies.

In order to win political power, for any group, it should first be necessary to push for wider cultural acceptance of the ideas that underpinned their movements.

This is not to say that the claims being made by activists and the views of people who might support the far right should be ignored – either in political debate or in everyday life.

But the question is how these issues are presented, and how they are challenged: who is speaking, and why, matters as much as whether or not an issue is in the news.

Big media organisations must be aware that legitimisation of the far right is not acceptable. They cannot normalise nor be seen to give permission to what are, in truth, hateful ideas and ideologies.

They are most effective when unaffiliated and unaccountable, disavowed by politicians and commentators who echo his views but wish to look respectable.

But the greater danger is in the cumulative effect of the various types of far-right activism – political parties, websites, social media personalities, funding and coordination from wealthy US thinktanks and entrepreneurs – on the political mainstream.

The problem is that ordinary joe soap is becoming more and more detached from the political area paying more and more taxes in order to live a decent life while feeling shut out of the system.

With the views of the far right how taking advantage of wider political failures all fueled by food banks, benefits cuts, homeless, job insecurity, pension erosion shifting the mainstream debate in its favour. Its public messages are focusing on popular fears about identity and economic security.

IE: Europe is overrun by Muslim immigrants; liberal elites have allowed all this to happen.

So far no alternative vision has won out.

Simply pointing out their factual mistakes is insufficient they must be challenged, locally and internationally, before it starts to do serious damage.

Why?

Because we are mechanistically sleepwalking towards an inability to effectively confront problems such as Brexit, Inequality and Climate Change.

There is only one way to get the voters to engage with the modern world and that is not by voting every five years as an expression of free will. 

It is offering the citizens of a country to own some of its prosperity by:

ISSUING CITIZENS GUARANTEED (NON-TRANSFERABLE BONDS.)

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "picture of bonds certificate"

These bonds could be bought for as little as a Dollar to as much as?

They could mature in as little as a year or?

They could be inherited but not sold.

They could be for every environmental, health, or whatever project that is not for profit for profit sake.

They will engage people in the direction of a country countermanding

negativity, allowing all citizens no matter what their political views,

creed, or colour to take pride in their nation.

They will countermand inequality and stop the rise of the far right.

THEY WOULD IF ADOPTED BY DIEM 25 FORFILL MOST IF NOT ALL OF ITS POLITICAL ASPERATION FOR EUROPE.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S. Is it what remains underexplored is what convinces audiences of their leaders’ competence, caring, and trustworthiness.

Tags

, , , , ,

 

( An fifteen European Election read|) Image associée

Politics these days is an ugly game of lies and responsibilities.

It is said that if you want the best and brightest people to represent you in politics you can only attract them by offering lucrative remuneration.

Almost a third of MEPs have second jobs or outside income, according to Transparency International, which is calling on MEPs to be obliged to provide more detail about their earnings and employers.

Why?

Because these days, politics attracts career professional politicians who are more likely to lien their own pockets. Take two prime examples-  The Nigel Farage’s and Donal Trumps of this world.

It is us that cast the votes and it is us that determine that leaders have certain traits or skills.

However, in this world of data algorithms and Social Media Platforms perhaps this no longer holds true rather what really matters is the competencies that are projected on to leaders by their authorizing environment. In other words, the key to leading is to mobilize others toward the prescribed course of action to address the identified problems.

But only identifying a problem and formulating a solution is not enough if people do not act upon it. We witness this every day with Brexit and Climate change.

So let’s look at CREDIBILITY AS A SOURCE OF POLITICAL CAPITAL:

Political capital refers to citizen feelings about the political regime as a whole, not just about the party or coalition which is currently incumbent.

Or is political capital not linked to structural, system characteristics but to a quality associated with individual citizens.

Or is the political capital of global leaders their ‘ability to use
power or authority to gain the support of constituents in a socially effective way.

Or is political capital just a commodity that professional
politicians need. An asset that leaders own.

However, it should not be forgotten that without an audience, without citizens or constituents, there would be no (political) leadership.

In other words: leadership is relational.

Political capital can thus relate first of all to the confidence and legitimacy one bestows upon political institutions.

To get things done a politician must have political capital.

To be able to take the necessary but perhaps unpopular decisions, and to survive taking them as well, leaders need political capital.

This can be summed up in three main forms: skills, relations and reputation.

How political leaders perform that some of them are attributed to credibility whereas others are not.

Is it up to audiences to attribute credibility to political leaders?

After all, political capital is a form of credit founded on credence.

If people don’t believe in the messenger, they won’t believe the message. Political leaders need to be credible not like Trump or Farage.

It is hard to believe that only appearing to have – for example – knowledge of the economy or Brexit without actually having a clue can be considered a political resource.

Unfortunately, Communication between politics and society is to a large extent mediated:

Where in British politics is the counter to the resentment and the populism—along with the real, earned dismay at the incompetence of Parliament when it comes to Brexit?

Where is the logic of a USA president that denies climate change, that’s starting a trade war with China and looking for a war against Iran, that thinks rape is an ok weapon of war?

Its time we their employers evaluate their performance to see if we are getting our money worth.

In the European Union, it is time to vet MEP spending, replacing the current MEP-led system.

There are several ways of looking at government performance.

Broadly speaking, the objective of governments is to maximise

their citizens’ welfare.

The ideal way to assess government performance would be to measure all the outputs that government produces or outcomes that it achieves, and compare these with the money it spends and resources it uses to assess its efficiency and productivity.

This isn’t possible, given how difficult it is to define and measure many of the outputs of government. A proxy for performance is whether departments are using technologies and working practices which are believed to be productivity-enhancing.

If information is power, then performance measurement is surely tightly linked to the creation and use of power.

If the whole chain is considered, it is possible to better analyse why performance is being measured, how and by whom, what is seen to be of value, what is being gained and what is being lost, and who is benefitting and losing from this.

However quantified measures lead to measurement becoming more technical, costly and politically controlled.

What is needed is a blend of political purpose and rationality.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of POLITICAL CAPITAL"

This form of measurement cannot be demanded by force but needs to be gained through persuasion and involvement.

How can we achieve this?

There is also potential for directed collaboration to engender a more realistic-political approach to performance measurement, and allow it to become more critical, iterative and reflective.

Citizens bonds could and would counteract the plunder of Democracy by Data algorithms that make a profit though Hedge funds  (The Brexit-supporting hedge fund manager Crispin Odey made £220 million and was filmed by a BBC documentary crew saying: “The morning has gold in its mouth.” ).

Their performance would measure governments programmes by their return on investment.

BUILDING TRUST BETWEEN THE POLITICIANS AND THE TAXPAYER THUS CREATING REAL POLITICAL CAPITAL:

Ultimately, these Bonds can be distilled into power in its purest form.

You must remember that without the man on the streets, politics is a zero-sum game. Without people, the pursuit of power is meaningless.

Around the world with climate change governments are dancing with disasters.

Despite the fiscal constraints of the day, the rationale and the resources can be found – if the political will is there.

To bolster political capital it is not tax, tax and more taxes which leads to popularism.

Let us all invest in the future. THERE IS NO POLITICAL CAPITAL IN Brexit.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of POLITICAL CAPITAL"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: WITH CLIMATE CHANGE WE NEED TO THINK IN VERY DIFFERENT TERMS ABOUT THE COORDINATION OF A GLOBAL RESPONSE.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

(Eighteen-minute read)

We are rapidly approaching the era of ubiquitous surveillance, a time when virtually every aspect of our lives will be monitored. Leaving us vulnerable to all manner of manipulation and persuasion.

The goal is to automate us’: welcome to the age of surveillance

capitalism.

Google, Facebook Amazon, U Tube, Supermarket Loyalty Card,

Credit card spending, you name it and it is creating the

surveillance data and we continue to ignore the most vital data

that we are alive and can do something about climate change.

It’s impossible to take a long view of what’s happening.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of surveillance"

SHOULD WE BE WORRIED?

While most of us think that we are dealing merely with algorithmic inscrutability, in fact what confronts us is the latest phase in capitalism’s long evolution – from the making of products, to mass production, to managerial capitalism, to services, to financial capitalism, and now to the exploitation of behavioural predictions covertly derived from the surveillance of users.

During all this surveillance some elements of our world will change beyond recognition while others will stay reassuringly (or disappointingly) familiar.

Some innovations we might not notice, while others will knock us sideways, changing our lives forever.

For example The use of biometric recognition devices to ensure the identity of a person.

Three things, however, are certain: technology will get smaller, smarter and cheaper while Climate change will cost TRILLIONS  by the end of the century.

Perhaps there’s a technological barrier that can’t be surmounted, such as artificial superintelligence or weaponized nanotechnology but Global warming will no doubt disproportionately hurt the poor, broadly undermine human health, damage infrastructure, limit the availability of water, alter coastlines, and boost costs in industries from farming, to fisheries and energy production.

How different might life be 20 years from now?

I would bet you that it probably will be much like it is today.

Unfortunately, GDP is still viewed as a prerequisite to achieving global goals, even though it can’t stand for everything.

Food, clean water, good education and infrastructure, all these things need money to support so it’s inevitable and sad that climate change will become a product for profit.  

However, the effects of Surveillance and Climate Change are going to be felt for hundreds, and possibly thousands, of years to come.

“A large fraction of climate change is largely irreversible on human time scales.”

Climate change and variability (e.g. increasing water scarcity), mounting / unresolved conflicts and refugee crises, increasing global inequalities which seem irreversible, and the questionable performance of the global economy (which is still very linked to increasing resource use) will still rule the roost.

Many people do not know what it really amounts to, either due to unreliable sources or deliberate misinformation, which has led to a series of myths about climate change.

First, it is important to be clear that climate change cannot now be avoided.

Climate change presents perhaps the most profound challenge ever to have confronted human social, political, and economic systems.

One of the central social, political, and economic questions of the century is: how then do we act?

It will present one of the most profound challenges to the way we understand human responses.

National governments are embedded in market economies that constrain what they can do.

We first have to get past controversies over cost estimates and distributions. (See previous posts: World Aid Commission Of 0.050% )

Activists think that the key here is simply getting the public to understand the facts by providing information.

The public should not, however, be understood as simply mass publics, which are problematic when it comes to mastering complex issues simply by virtue of their mass nature.

Increasingly, justice frameworks are being used in the development of climate policy strategies and as such, national governments can deploy this discourse when it suits their interests to do so. So developing countries can point to the history of fossil fuel use on which developed countries built their economies, such that fairness demands that it is the developing countries that should shoulder the burden of mitigation.

The response on the part of the wealthy countries is that for most of this history, their governments had no awareness that what they were doing could change the climate, and so ought not to be held uniquely responsible for future mitigation.

Dealing with major climate change issues has however never been a part of the core priorities of any government.

Governments acted swiftly and with the expenditure of vast sums of money in response to the global financial crisis in 2008–9. They have never shown anything like this urgency or willingness to spend on any environmental issue.

To date, very few national governments look at all like decarbonizing their economy or redesigning energy systems to reverse the growth in energy consumption.

This is why it is necessary to reframe the effects of climate change to where the government might involve recognition of the security dimension of climate change. Climate change can threaten the security of populations and vital systems, even in some cases threaten the sovereign integrity of states.

BUT: Neither coordinated collective action nor discursive reframings can stop at the national level.Image associée

Even if this was achieved Climate change involves a complex global set of both causal practices and felt impacts, and as such requires coherent global action—or, at a minimum, coordination across some critical mass of global players.

Like the heading to this post state:

Perhaps we need to think in very different terms about the coordination of a global response. 

The Western Antarctic Ice Sheet has already gone into an unstoppable decline.

Currents that transport heat within the oceans will be disrupted.

Ocean acidification will continue to rise, with unknown effects on marine life.

Thawing permafrost and sea beds will release methane, a greenhouse gas.

Droughts predicted to be the worst in 1,000 years will trigger vegetation changes and wildfires, releasing carbon.

Species unable to adapt quickly to a changing climate will go extinct.

Coastal communities will be submerged, creating a humanitarian crisis.

Thankfully, we’re not completely out of options yet.

There is little point if we as the data is implying that the world is warming planting trees or hoping that some future technology is going to solve the effects of climate change.

We are all riding on the one big blue ball together, and no matter what happens we will be finally all be confronted (Thanks to climate change with our societal problems.)

Millions of voters will no longer cast their ballots based on emotional cues, defying their own clear self-interest or reason that has created a society that is consumed with looking out for yourself first.

So here are a few things that you can do now.

Reduce the emissions that are warming the world the fastest.

Vote Diem 25 in the forthcoming European Elections.

Lobby your Television Stations to include a least once a week a weather report on Climate change.

Use your buying power to stop purchasing products with Palm Oil or products wrapped in plastic or are transported from on side of the world to the other.

Support local products.

Demand from your government free education.

Protect our privacy at all costs (It won’t be easy to fix because it requires us to tackle the essence of the problem – the logic of accumulation implicit in surveillance capitalism. That means that self-regulation is a nonstarter.

Digital technology is separating the citizens in all societies into two groups: the watchers and the watched and it will become increasingly disruptive throughout this century and beyond with profound consequences for democracy because the asymmetry of knowledge translates into asymmetries of power.

Governments know this.

Whereas most democratic societies have at least some degree of oversight of state surveillance, we currently have almost no regulatory oversight of its privatised counterpart. This is intolerable now while climate change will be intolerable in the near future. 

The fourth Industrial revolution will be the last. In effect, we are forcing future generations to retroactively subsidize our decision not to increase energy efficiency and move to cleaner fuels.

The warmer it gets, the less productive a country’s economy will likely be. Perhaps more concerning, however, is what could happen in a world where climate change is allowed to continue unmitigated.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of economic climate change"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: IS IT TIME TO DISMANTLE THE ARCHAIC MONARCHY IN ENGLAND.

Tags

, , ,

 

( A two-minute thought)

In a previous post, I posted this question.

Who are the European Union negotiating with when it comes to Brexit.

Is it England, Britain, the United Kingdom, or is it the Queen?Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the royal family today"

The serious question is this;

How will English Democracy and its institutions be dragged into the 21st century after Brexit while bowing to a feudal system?

The Queen cannot be blamed but she presides over the institutions that symbolise and legitimises the inequalities that have lead to Brexit

The First Past the post-politics, representation infiltrated by Social Media cannot cope with globalisation, migration, or technological changes.

Only when the monarchy is replaced and ordinary people become true citizens not surfs will constitutional reform be possible.

By all means, protect the historical pomp that acts as a focus for national identity, unity and pride and tourism; gives a sense of stability and continuity but remove the hereditary privileges with a written constitution.

Only then can England become a sovereign country.

The Crown Estate holds many more assets than those listed above. Here is a snapshot of the sheer scale and volume of its assets, ranging from retail parks to forests to Scottish oyster farms.

Here is a snapshot of the sheer scale and volume of her assets.

The Crown Estate announced in June last year that it returned a

record £328.8 million ($464 million) to the Treasury in 2016 as

the value of the overall estate rose to an astonishing £13.1

billion ($18.5 billion).

Forests:

The Crown Estate holds around 11,000 hectares of forestry in

areas including Berkshire, Somerset, and Cairngorms in

Scotland.

Wind farms:

The Crown Estate owns a £1.1 billion ($1.5 billion) offshore

energy empire which includes 30 wind farms.

The Savoy, London:

The Queen privately owns an 18,433-hectare estate called the

Duchy of Lancaster.

Historic Castles:

The Duchy of Lancaster also holds around a dozen historic

properties, including Lancaster Castle in Lancashire and

Pickering Castle in Yorkshire.

Sandringham House, Norfolk:

The 8,000-hectare estate in Norfolk, England, is privately owned by the Queen.

Balmoral Castle, Aberdeenshire: 20,000-hectare.

Ascot Racecourse in the south of England is part of the Crown

Estate.

Regent Street & St James’s Market, London: The Crown Estate

owns the entirety of Regent Street in London.

The Crown Estate owns around 106,000 hectares (263,000

acres) of farmland across the UK.

The Crown owns the rights to salmon fishing and gold mining in

Scotland.

Windsor Castle & Great Park, Berkshire: 6,400-hectare.

She does not own her official residence, Buckingham Palace.

She merely occupies the 775-room home, which is held in trust

for future generations by the Crown Estates.

So, to sum it all up, the Queen owns 2 homes (Sandringham House and Balmoral Castle), while the rest of her residences are owned by the Crown Estates.

All royals are millionaires.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S: HERE WE ARE AGAIN ANOTHER EUROPEAN ELECTION.

Tags

, ,

 

(Eleven-minute read)

Will the elections be completely irrelevant?

Because of Brexit.Two activists with the EU flag and Union Jack painted on their faces kiss in front of the Brandenburg Gate, Berlin, 19 June, 2016.

No, and certainly not from a British political point of view. They could be a sounding board for a host of other domestic political issues, including the viability of new political parties – and the sustainability of established ones. In short, the elections will provide a mirror for the UK’s increasingly fractured, and fractious political landscape.

“When the UK was in, all it wanted was opt-outs. Now it’s going to be out, and all it wants are opt-ins.”

In Europe, the elections have a number of known unknowns.

“The European elections will be a referendum between the Europe of the elites, of banks, of finance, of immigration and precarious work; and the Europe of people and labor.”

The 2019 election campaign is a debate on Europe’s priorities.

The populist radical right will focus almost exclusively on migration because this is how they can best mobilize their voters.

So far, most populist MEPs have used their seats largely to fund their domestic political activities or as a platform for anti-EU rhetoric. If they were to start using them to block legislation and important measures, member governments would likely seek to bypass parliament by doing deals among themselves.

Their opponents need to counter the politics of fear by building electoral platforms based on liberal principles, pointing out the big challenges surrounding technology and climate change, and showing that migration is just one issue among many.

Who finishes first?

Is not very important as far as gauging public opinion goes.

If the existing power balance changes, a complex constellation of forces could develop with more ad hoc coalitions across traditional party divides. While this might detract from the parliament’s legislative efficiency, a more open decisionmaking process might have a positive effect on public interest in democracy at the EU level.

However, if the populist parties gain enough power to block crucial decisions, all the other parties will have to pull together to keep the EU functioning.

If one looks beyond the left/right dimension, the EUROPEAN PARLEMENT is divided into promoters and sceptics of European integration.

NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS there are two key elements for genuine parliamentary democracy at the EU level missing:

First, it is almost impossible for voters to assess the performance of individual MEPs, and, second, there has been no change in regime, as the center-right/center-left Grand Coalition has long dominated the EP.

Without a list of transnational of candidates, this will remain so.

Given the key role of the commission in shaping what the EU does, electing its president from a list of transnational candidates would give the voter a real say on the union’s future. However, this time, parliament might be more fragmented, making it difficult to assemble a majority for a lead candidate.

Rather than through institutional reform, change in the EP’s functioning may come through a deeper structural transformation of European politics.

Paradoxically, the rise of nationalist parties has created the first real opening for turning the coming EP election campaign into a truly transnational debate about the future of Europe.

Luckily there is a glimmer of hope with the arrival of DiEM25 to break the national parties’ grip on the composition of the parliament.

The dominant dividing line of the new parliament could become a contest between politicians who want to find common EU-level solutions to current challenges and those who favor safeguarding and reaffirming national sovereignty.

The number of disillusioned voters has increased, with many people frustrated about the powerlessness of national governments in a globalized world.

One of the biggest money-printing programs of all time, a geyser of cash that may have prevented the collapse of the eurozone, will officially ended in December

The European Central Bank stop adding to its stock of government and corporate bonds, the so-called quantitative easing program it has used to hold down interest rates and encourage lending.

In recent months, growth has slowed and risks have grown, including a rise in global trade tensions, China v USA.  Tumult in Italy’s politics and the continuing chaos surrounding Britain’s plans to decouple from the European Union.

The DiEM25 whats to reinvest the money the European Central Bank gets when the bonds mature into creating Green energy programs.

This, as I have posted in a previous post, could achieve a transformation in the European Union.

Before you cast your vote just think.

It’s clear that not everybody participated in the benefits of the common currency.

What if the European Central Bank were to issue European Citizens Bonds.

It would afford all citizens of the Union an opportunity to invest in the future of Europe.

It would create thousands of top quality jobs, supply green energy to the whole of Europe.

It would make Europe the leading light in the fight against Climate change.

It would protect the value of Pensions.

It would break the hold of the rich by spreading the benefits evenly throughout Europe.

It would take the wind out off populous movements.

This is what the EU should aim to do too if it really aspires to eventually become a political union.

Vote DiEM25.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S; (DON’T READ THIS UNLESS YOU ARE WILLING TO COMMENT). WE ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE 12 YEARS LEFT TO TAKE ACTION BEFORE ITS TO LATE

Tags

, , , , ,

 

(Fifteen-minute read)

YOU WOULD THINK THAT WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF CLIMATE CHANGE WE WOULD BE FAR BEYOND THE VERBAL WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT BY NOW.

Unfortunately or perhaps, fortunately, we are animals and like the dinosaurs, before us, we have no appreciation of what lies in store.

One could get highly philosophical about the reasons behind climate change but the beaten reality is that it will be the driving force that will be shaping the world for some time to come.

It is going to take more than verbal diarrhoea to do anything worthwhile and it is going to cost trillions whether we take rapid concreted actions on a global scale or not.

Any action on a global scale cannot be achieved under the current Capitalist Market Systems or present-day politics which is hostage to economics who’s carbon footprints are more multi-dimensional than is usually understood by joe soap.

Our historical climate measuring rod shows tectonic tensions building up warning us of a pending disaster so we all need to open our eyes an see the world, not through the lens of the media which is turning it into a product. Already we see climate change coverage on television asking should we change the plants we grow in our gardens.

It is imperative that we understand what profit for profit sake is doing to the world.

There is no more time to leave it up to Capitalism markets or future technologies to change the way we live our lifestyles.

Any activity that generates lots of methane, nitrous oxide or other non-CO2 greenhouse gases will have a much faster warming effect than its carbon footprint, as traditionally expressed, might suggest. That would include meat and rice farming, landfill sites and fridge production, for example.

If we want to buy ourselves as much time as possible to avoid climate-tipping points, it may not just be how much warming something generates that matters, but when that warmth kicks in.

If indeed we have twelve years left, climate change today is struggling to remain a subject rather than becoming merely an object of world politics – to avert it.

It is too late to educate the great unwashed or to expect different countries of the world to address the problems.

If we want a world worth living on we to have to pay for it and the best way to do that is making a profit for profit the destroyer of the planet pay.

(It is now or never that we need the planet and what is left of our ecosystems to exist.) Every drop of fresh water, every forest tree, every species, every ounce of carbon, every breath of fresh air must be paid for.

Right, what can we do about it as individuals?

A new form of economic thinking is becoming increasingly urgent.

The existing models are clearly ill-equipped to address the intertwined challenges on the horizon.

Of course, as individuals, we can cut our carbon emissions but since the dawn of man, nobody is willing to pay for the future. As countries and governments, we are unable to put aside self-interest.

Rest assured if we remain on the present course with escalating geopolitical tensions there will be no multidisciplinary scientific understanding of climate change.

We don’t have the time for second-guessing, worthless promises, carbon pricing, or market-oriented mechanisms.

Not because of rising seas, melting ice, etc but because once a population is destabilized it has a knock on effect.

Like all problems that require vast amounts of finance to eradicate or alleviate Climate Change, will require trillions of investment in the long term.

The solution long term:

(As I have outlined in my previous post:  World AId Commission of 0.005% on Profit for Profit sake.) is the creation of a war chest which has perpetual funding on permanent bases.

This will ensure that everyone has the means to satisfy their basic needs and preserve what is left of our ecosystems.

In the short term.

If we shifted the focus to a much shorter time period of twelve years – which arguably would make more sense, given that the next decade or so could turn out to be make-or-break in terms of avoiding climate tipping points – then the impact of vapour trails and other short-lived impacts look massively more significant.

If we focus just on the impact over the next five years, then planes currently account for more global warming than all the cars on the world’s roads. ( Declaring Climate emergency while building additional runways is England response)

CO2, released by all fuel-burning vehicles, can remain in the air for centuries, vapour trails and tropospheric ozone produced by planes at altitude – cause much more potent but shorter-lived bursts of warming.

I see that there are claims of 100,00 scheduled airline flights per day in the world, But that does not include military, charter, cargo and private aeroplanes.

Then you would get nearly 305,000 global takeoffs per day. That’s an average of 212 take-offs per minute worldwide.Cross of vapour trails

So let us say that the average number of people per flight is one hundred that is over 10 million people.

On average, a plane produces a little over 53 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) per 1.61 km or one mile.

One transatlantic flight can add as much to your carbon footprint as a typical year’s worth of driving.

A flight from London to Cape Town is  9673.77 km producing co2 emissions of 7.5 tons of CO2 equivalent to one household for a year. 

On the other hand, if I’m understanding the numbers correctly, over a five-year time frame the world’s ships cause enough cooling to offset the total warming caused by every car, plane and bus combined.

What I’d like to know next.

Is how much work has been done on analysing how near-term rates of global warming fit with the risk of overstepping climate-tipping points.

Any pointers?

So here’s the deepest challenge of this moment:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of climate change"

Do we really need to lose it all in order to find it again?

If you want it to stop, you have to cut emissions to zero. But emissions are still rising. Perhaps it can be done, but it certainly cannot be done without funding.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK’S WHY IS ENGLAND IN SUCH A MESS.

Tags

, , , ,

 

(Six-minute read)

Here is a country with growing numbers of food banks, people sleeping on its streets, trying to negotiating its way out of a market with over 500 million people while renewing its worthless Trident missiles at a cost of anything between 30 and 200 billion.

A country that voted by a small majority to take what it calls sovereignty back from Brussels while giving the green light to letting China Huawei 5G network get involved in domestic infrastructure.

It also beggars belief that on the very same day Donald Trump is threatening to veto a United Nations resolution against the use of rape as a weapon of war, Theresa May is pressing ahead with her plans to honour him with a state visit to the UK.

Mr Donal Dump to visits ( His first visit costs £18 million) this visit will cost the Conservative party a political price with social liberals, ethnic minorities, the young and Remain, voters.

It’s difficult, to put it mildly, to see what the overall benefit of a state visit by Trump is from a British perspective never mind Chinese surveillance.

Readers will have noticed that there is never, these days, the money to properly fund schools and hospitals, and provide the elderly with the care and dignity they deserve.

But, always, billions are available to the military.

HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. The two ships have cost more than £14bn to build and equip, double the original budget.

Both might well be floating piece of sovereign territory, but  “gunboat diplomacy” on steroids is not what the world wants.

Then we had the debate in the House of Commons marking the 50th anniversary of the UK’s continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent, Trident. The date for replacing Britain’s nuclear fleet keeps being put back … a missile firing from HMS Vigilant.

 

To use the fabrication of a threat from North Korea as a justification for the renewal of Trident is beyond defence.

It’s no wonder that a General Election is needed not just to give the people a voice on whether to remain in the EU or not but to drag an out of a dated system of governance into the twenty-first century.

Members should be elected to represent their constituencies, their country and not a queen or king who ascends by heredity birthrights. 

According to “The Parliamentary Oath” even if the entire country were to vote in a general election for a party whose manifesto pledge was to remove the monarchy, it would be impossible by reason of the present oath, and current acts of parliament, for such elected MPs to take their seats in the House of Commons.

The oath of allegiance has its origins in Magna Carta, signed on 15 June 1215.

If an MP refuses to take the oath or the affirmation to the Queen they will be unable to take part in parliamentary proceedings and will not be paid any salary and allowances until they’ve done so.

By swearing allegiance to the unelected monarch, her heirs and successors. It is an insult to democratic values, to all voters who participate in any General or other election. 

It has to change.

It’s one of the great ironies of a political system that is in dire need of a written constitution. 

In parliamentary terms, a pledge of loyalty to the state is invalid without a pledge of loyalty to the monarch.

The Queen is responsible for appointing the Prime Minister after a general election or a resignation, in a General Election.

The Queen has the power to prorogue (suspend) and to summon (call back) Parliament – prorogation typically happens at the end of a parliamentary session, and the summoning occurs shortly after when The Queen attends the State Opening of Parliament.

It is The Queen’s right and responsibility to grant assent to bills from Parliament, signing them into law.

The Queen is commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces and all members swear an oath of allegiance to The Queen when they join; they are Her Majesty’s Armed Forces.

I believe in an elected head of state.

There is no point in pledging loyalty to God or the Queen when elected by the people.

As long as being an MP means pledging loyalty to an unelected

head of state, the English parliamentary system will remain

undemocratic.

Requiring politicians to pledge loyalty to the monarch confers greater power to a symbolic ritual than to the democratic right of MPs to act in the name of the electorate.

As long as parliamentary participation is contingent on pledging allegiance to an unelected royal, the English parliamentary system will remain staunchly undemocratic.

So let me ask this.

When verifying the credentials of the newly elected Members of the
European Parliament, MEPs take no oath when they are elected, but Judges and Commissioners do.

With the Brexit negotiations now extended into the European elections, it throws up potentially uncomfortable scenarios for the New English Commissioner taking the oath of allegiance to the Commission which would require him – like all Commissioners – “to neither seek or take” influence from governments, not hereditary monarchs.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S; THIS TIME NEXT YEAR WE WONT BE TALKING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE.

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

(Ten-minute read)

WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT WHY WE CAN’T FIX THE PLANET.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the planet earth"

At the moment we are basically being sold three misapprehensions concerning the scale of the threat of climate change.

The deadlines aren’t the problem. It’s our failure to heed them.

Remember, we are being told that carbon pollution needs to be cut in half in just 11 years. And to zero by mid-century.

The speed of change. The matter of sea level rise. The matter of air pollution.

There is little about what it would mean for public health. The lack of fresh water or food.

We’ll just invent our way out of the problem.

In reality, what’s stopping us is political inertia, which means the solution is political action.

The relationship between climate change and economic growth, climate change and conflict are not appreciated or understood or explained.

Only when you and others experience this future threat in the present (rather than something that is still a generation away) will it have enough motivational force to get you to engage in actions that take more effort today.

2% is an abstract concept and simply does not motivate people to act as forcefully as a specific one does.

On the path that we’re on now, climate threats are not taken as seriously because so much of it feels abstract or distant.

WE MIGHT NOT GET THERE AS SOON AS 2030.

BUT THE PATH THAT WE ARE NOW ON WILL DEFINITELY GET US THERE BY 2050.

THERE IS A LOT TO LOOK FORWARD TO BEFORE THEN AND IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE TO IGNORE IN A HOSTILE WORLD.

It is now becoming quite obvious that we’re not going to get below 2 degrees, and we’re on track for something like 4 by the end of the century. I don’t think that any climate scientists would argue with any of that.

We’re marching into a completely unprecedented environment. And we simply don’t know what it will look like or how it will impact us.

It’s not a matter of whether climate change is here or not, or whether we’ve crossed a threshold or not. Every upward tick of temperature will make things worse, and so we can avoid suffering by reducing it as much as possible.

Collective human action will determine the climate of the future.

Acting on climate change represents a trade-off between short-term and long-term benefits. It will transform the way that we relate to one another, our politics, etc.

WHAT IS NEEDED IS meaningful global action than was generated in Paris in 2015 and 2016.

The corporate world must now be made by law and economic incentives to align with climate action whether it like it or not.

Why?

Because Capitalist productivity the most powerful source of economic and social advancement is now with Artificial Intelligence becoming financialised.

( Financialization is profit margin growth without labour productivity growth.)

Of course, this will not happen as it will turn Climate change into profit for profit sake. We are beginning to see this already with the treatment Television is giving to the subject.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the planet earth"

Therefore as I have advocated in previous posts Profit for profit sake can be made to contribute to resolving and paying the cost of reducing world emissions.

A world aid commission of 0.005% on all profit-seeking algorithms, on all high-frequency stock trading, on all sovereignty wealth fund accusations, on all foreign exchange transactions over $50.000, on all lotto winnings worldwide, on all sports winnings.

This will create a perpetual world aid fund that can be granted with no strings attached, other than total transparency to support all projects to reduce our carbon footprint worldwide.

It can be achieved with the click of a button.

All human comments and suggestions much appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the problem would be solved. carbon tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE ASK: As a culture and a polity, when it comes to climate change, have we arrived at a point where we are now expected – even trained – to abandon hope and submit to the inevitable?

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

 

(Twenty-minute read)

TWO PER CENT MEANS NOTHING TO THE VAST MAJORITY HUMANITY NOW LIVING.

When it comes to carbon emissions, the resulting overheating of the atmosphere and our oceans it means nought other than training citizens to accept the prospect of inexorable loss, unstoppable chaos, certain doom.

It would also seem to be the case when governments are still spending billions on emergency-level funding and infrastructure to meet what they view as a crisis of national security.

But in the case of climate change, there’s no equivalent sense of immediacy, no sense of priority commensurate with the dangers it poses to our future ability to feed ourselves, defend our largely coastal settlements, insure our homes, maintain national security and keep our children safe from harm.

The four great capacities of humanity to solve a crisis Рingenuity, discipline, courage and sacrifice Рthese seem to be reserved for more important enterprises. The future, by all accounts, can wait.R̩sultat de recherche d'images pour "picture of climate change protest"

To most of our current governments, climate change is but a dry-lightning storm in a district unknown.

It’s a licence for nihilism, a ticket to hell in a handbasket.

And the cohort responsible for this mixture of denial and fatalism is far removed from the daily experience of the ordinary citizen, especially the youngest and poorest of us. They have become a threat to our shared future and we must hold them to account, immediately and without reservation.

We must replace the Donald Trumps of the world.  We can no longer wait patiently for our leaders to catch up. We cannot allow ourselves to be trained to accept hopelessness.

It is time to remove those who refuse to act in our common interest, time to elect people with courage, ingenuity and discipline.

Because there’s something bigger at stake here than culture wars and the mediocrity of so-called common-sense. It’s the soil under our feet, the water we drink, the air we breathe.

In less than a few years from now, unfocused rage may become the signal human disposition of our time.

Because the futures of the young are being traded away before their eyes. They see what many of their elders and betters refuse to acknowledge. That they’re being robbed.

Here’s the thing.

But the future is already with us.

It’s now glaring obvious what need to do and what we should not be doing.

However, it’s also glaringly obvious after the Paris climate change agreement that the world as a whole will not engage as one soon or in the near future.

That means calling bullshit on what’s been happening in our name for the past 15 years.

Profit-seeking algorithms and technology have no ethical connection to the health of the globe and current Ideology, prestige, assets and territory are now tacitly understood to be worth more than all life, human or otherwise.

We can have another world climate conference to address the crisis but without trillions of investment to get our house in order – and fast- as any tipping point will cause runaway climate change.   

We will then be witnessing the destruction of all that exists on the Planet that no nuclear bomb could achieve.

This should not stop us from taking action. Planting a tree, stop buying air-freighted foods, products containing palm oil, converting to green renewable energy, eat less meat, stop having babies. The list is endless.

But none of our actions or others will change the chemistry of climate change sufficiently fast enough.

No matter what action is now taken it must apply to one and all.

The first step has to be how or who is going to finance the changes required and how this can be fairly distributed between the rich and poor nations.    

So once again I submit my World aid commission of 0.005% to be applied to all profit for profit sake that can be applied with the click of a button. 

It would create a perpetual funded resource to pay for the things we value now and in the future. ( See previous posts)

Admittedly the context is not rosy. Trump, Brexit, tax-dodging corporations, attacks on refugees, populism, intolerance, extremism, billions of people in poverty or ‘just about managing’, droughts, wildfires, floods, etc.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "picture of the world in the future"

There is no way we can deliver environmental sustainability by only campaigning on green issues.

All human comments and suggestions appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the

bin.https://images.app.goo.gl/nWHcrs31yntqGpNB6

   

    

  

 

 

 

 

this narrative is profoundly dangerous, not only for individuals, but for the entire community.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE BEADY EYE SAY’S. THE SOONER WE ALL COME TO REALIZE THAT THERE IS NO NEGOATING WITH THE PHYSIC OF CLIMATE CHANGE THE BETTER.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

(Four-minute read)

Most of us sit in front of our TV sets and watch the devastation of Fire’s, Hurricanes, Floods, Droughts, Heatwaves, Bleaching coral reefs, Ice Melting, Nature destruction, and forget about it in the morning.

THE SOLUTION TO CLIMATE CHANGE IS IN FACT JUST A CLICK OF A BUTTON AWAY.

Climate Change Environment Green Carbon

You would think that by now we should all be waking up to climate change and instead of blaming everything, realise that the hard fact is that the chemistry of climate change cannot be changed no matter what action we or the world does.

What we have done and now do in life echos in climate changer. On a human scale, inequality and climate change are going to mess together so the blame games will achieve nothing.

Climate activists will achieve nothing except resentment.

The Paris Climate promises are achieving little or nothing.

As they turn climate change into profit, technological fixes or geoengineering will not stop it.

Unfortunately: IT TAKES YEARS FOR TREES TO GROW AND OVERALL HUMAN HISTORY WE ARE INCAPABLE OF ACTING AS ONE.

It’s becoming plain that not only are we affecting the other living things with which we share the planet, we’re also altering the physical systems of the planet itself.

In every respect, the world we inhabit will henceforth be the world we have made.

We can’t keep using the atmosphere as a free waste dump for carbon and expect to have a safe climate no matter what. Many aspects of climate change and associated impacts will continue for centuries, even if anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are stopped.

When we insert ourselves so deeply into the workings of a planet, we are unlikely to be able to predict all of the consequences of our actions.

If you take seriously the amount of harm that unchecked global warming will cause, if you recognize that these harms will fall disproportionately on the global poor, if you acknowledge that these populations are not only the least equipped economically to cope with climate change but are also the least implicated in the rise of greenhouse gases in the first place, and if you concede the undeniable reality that conventional strategies for reducing the harms of climate change are not being implemented quickly enough, then there seems to be a strong moral case for doing something dramatic.

THE INEVITABLE REALITY IS AS NO ONE IS WILLING TO PAY AND THERE CAN BE NO SOLUTION WITHOUT TRILLIONS.

However, rest assured;

BY THE TIME WE HAVE MILLIONS OF CLIMATE REFUGEES LIFE AS WE KNOW IT WILL BE DISRUPTED BEYOND REPAIR.

It is already shaking up social, health and geopolitical balances in many parts of the world. The scarcity of resources like food and energy gives rise to new conflicts.

CLIMATE CHANGE CANNOT BE HALTED BY PUTTING SOLAR PANELS ON ONE HOUSE AT A TIME OR PLANTING A TREE, OR DRIVING ELECTRICAL CARS, OR EATING LESS MEAT, OR REDUCING OUR OVERCONSUMPTION/POPULATION OR BY US AS INDIVIDUALS- ONLY SLOWED.

SO HERE IS A SOLUTION TO CONSIDER. BEFORE WE ARE  GENETICALLY ENGINEER INTO PRODUCTS.

WHY NOT MAKE PROFIT FOR PROFIT SAKE GENERATE A SELF PERPETUATING FUND OF TRILLIONS TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS WORLDWIDE.

THIS CAN BE ACHIEVED WITH THE CLICK OF A BUTTON BY APPLYING A 0.005% WORLD AID COMMISSION ON ALL HIGHT FREQUENCY TRADING, ON ALL SOVEREIGN WEALTH FUNDS ACCUSATIONS, ON ALL FOREIGN EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS OVER $50,000, ON ALL WORLD LOTTOS AND GAMBLING WINS, ON ALL PROFITSEEKING ALGORITHMS, ON ALL PRODUCTS CONTAINING PALM OIL.

WITH THIS FINANCIAL CLOUT WE COULD TRANSFER WORLD ENERGY TO GREEN ENEGERY, CREATE MILLIONS OF JOBS WORLDWIDE REDUCING INEQUALITY, BOOST OUR ECONOMIES AND REVERS THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE DAMAGE.Climate Change Weather Environment Green

I believe that humans have the ability as a species to change this planet for the better I just hope we can achieve that before it is too late.

All human comments and suggestions appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.