I’m a little more hopeful enough people vote and direct their efforts in a way now that will force a higher level of engagement with these sorts of issues over the long term, (ie, heat island effect, aggressive and hard suburban areas). I think the example of Bush Mead is a reasonable start, an estate that maintained some untouched bush, and other older trees in amongst the houses, is an indicator that attitudes have begun to shift a little.
Athough if we are at the beginning of an attitudinal change, it needs to be large enough to make a meaningful difference. Thats not Bush Mead. And it probably neccesitates changing the way we build dwellings. Options could include smaller footprints, built together with shared walls, i’m sure theres a lot more.
Age, or more specifically ‘Generations’ (eg, Boomer, Y, X) distinctions is something i put very little weight on now. The defining characteristics that people ascribed seem to me, to be a result of people acting in their own best interests in the micro or macro situations they find themselves on. The tricky part of this is to convince people to assess their self interest in a wider sense. But people, en masse, only seem to take this view on when that wider sense has inarguable existential difficulties.
Well, while i don’t disagree the Venn diagram between those who hate trees and those who said No would have more than a significant middle section, i was only saying ‘hopeful’ in regards the environmental policy area, not in general political winds.
And yep, for sure with the land clearing. I’d say the thoughtless attitudes go back further, the key difference being the industrial capability lessened the km^2 able to be cleared.
And the Greens were a fairly friendless bunch in the beginning thats for sure. But their success is actually one of many examples why I do have hope in this area. The Greens vote is as large, by memory larger last election, as the Nationals is now. There are key differences in the geographical positioning of those votes which result in less Greens reps and more Nats reps, but the raw numbers are still important, and the direction of travel is also. Momentum in these things builds slowly, but is hard to stop.
deleted by creator
Can you remember maybe one of the nore ridiculous excuses? for the giggles.
deleted by creator
Oh my lord, haha. Thats even worse than i imagined! Those blasted insects! What next, leeeaves!!
deleted by creator
I’m a little more hopeful enough people vote and direct their efforts in a way now that will force a higher level of engagement with these sorts of issues over the long term, (ie, heat island effect, aggressive and hard suburban areas). I think the example of Bush Mead is a reasonable start, an estate that maintained some untouched bush, and other older trees in amongst the houses, is an indicator that attitudes have begun to shift a little.
Athough if we are at the beginning of an attitudinal change, it needs to be large enough to make a meaningful difference. Thats not Bush Mead. And it probably neccesitates changing the way we build dwellings. Options could include smaller footprints, built together with shared walls, i’m sure theres a lot more.
Age, or more specifically ‘Generations’ (eg, Boomer, Y, X) distinctions is something i put very little weight on now. The defining characteristics that people ascribed seem to me, to be a result of people acting in their own best interests in the micro or macro situations they find themselves on. The tricky part of this is to convince people to assess their self interest in a wider sense. But people, en masse, only seem to take this view on when that wider sense has inarguable existential difficulties.
deleted by creator
Well, while i don’t disagree the Venn diagram between those who hate trees and those who said No would have more than a significant middle section, i was only saying ‘hopeful’ in regards the environmental policy area, not in general political winds.
And yep, for sure with the land clearing. I’d say the thoughtless attitudes go back further, the key difference being the industrial capability lessened the km^2 able to be cleared. And the Greens were a fairly friendless bunch in the beginning thats for sure. But their success is actually one of many examples why I do have hope in this area. The Greens vote is as large, by memory larger last election, as the Nationals is now. There are key differences in the geographical positioning of those votes which result in less Greens reps and more Nats reps, but the raw numbers are still important, and the direction of travel is also. Momentum in these things builds slowly, but is hard to stop.
deleted by creator