Here, this is more appropriate...
Sustainable Development Strategy in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bob Rae preaches sustainable development of oilsands
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Sustainable Development Strategy in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Looks like a workable definition as well.
Whether or not that strategy is working out is clearly up for debate.
Are you going to keep posting different definitions of 'sustainability', hoping you'll get people to agree with you?
Cutting down a forest to plant grain is developement for future social needs. Maybe it's not all that bad???
Huh?
No, I'm just posting all the common links on the subject so that you guys finally agree on something yourselves, lol
Well, don't get your knickers in a twist. It seems to have you quite worked up.
Sustainable development and bolshevism have few similar attributes, as concern for the sustainability was a minor concern for people like Lenin who had much more immdiate problems to deal with, and a much larger world to draw sustinence from.
Since the topic is sustainable development I don't know the relevance. But if you would like to show that please, enlighten me more. For your information sustainable development is of considerably more importance now that we have realized that we have only one world to live on and that our present consumption habits indicate a need for four Earths. Would cutting back on such extravagence be a serious burden for the wealthy peple of the planet like you and me?
Geeze, I see someone of similar ideological bent doesn't get asked the same questions, or faces the same scrutiny....
Not surprising, lol.
Maybe you should read them first, come to an internal consensus and get back to us.
Not surprising, lol.
That depends on scope and scale.
Pffft, you still think Harpco hasn't made a statement on it.
Maybe you should read them first, come to an internal consensus and get back to us.
Last edited:
If food production were put into the sustainable development scheme, acres seeded would remain static but population would end up being the factor use to control and limit those acres.
Marx and Engles would hve been proud of these greenies.
Recently there was an International Conference on 'sustainable development,' in which most nations participated. As a suggestion, those who are conflicted about this could look there to discover what it is.
Why?
In Canada, amongst most Canadian ideologues and politicians, it's just buzzwords.
Marx and Engels might well have been, (whatever you think you mean by 'greenies.' which is one of the most foolish pejoratives I have ever seen since it can only rebound on the deadheads who use it).
The Bolsheviks would not since they had no interest in stewardship of the Planet.
The Bolsheviks would not since they had no interest in stewardship of the Planet.
A funny thing about international development. .0.02% of our GDP goes to develope the developing nations. The more we make from our resources the more the poor nations are developed.
You don't want to cut off Botsawana do you?
Would it be possible for you to say what you mean when you post something. Like relating this to the topic and explaining why I "want to cut off" Botswana?
You do raise an interesting point if out of context. Canada has cut off aid to several countries under Harper: concentrating it where the countries are in sync with Harper;s religious mania. As with the Maternal Health programme.
Also, Canada is embarrassingly parsimonious when it comes to Foreign Aid and Harper is worsening this.
Why pay twice? As our economy increases so does our input into UNDP because it's based on our GDP. Get it?
Be serious! As our economy increases, we fall further and further behind the .7% of GDP that developed nations long ago agreed as the appropriate share to devote to aid.
Our aid is an embarrassment and is in the lower half of that given by the rich nations. Only one (Denmark or Holland, I forget which) meets the commitment.
And, like the USA, quite a lot of our commitment is "tied." That is, it is to be spent here and benefit us.