Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:05 AM Jun 2012

West must cut appetite for cars and TVs, says UN official

Rich countries will have to stop the consumer high life as part of any deal to heal the world's social and environmental stresses, a top UN official said ahead of a key development summit this week.

"We don't need more cars, more TVs, more whatever" UN Development Program chief Helen Clark told AFP in an interview ahead of the Rio+20 summit starting Wednesday.

The 116 heads of state and government and their populations -- rich and poor -- face "chaos" unless the three day summit can at least lay the groundwork for economic growth that eases poverty and preserves natural resources, said the former New Zealand prime minister.

"I think there is a high level of awareness that the planet is in peril, to put it bluntly," said Clark, who will be one of the key figures at the Rio de Janeiro event


http://www.france24.com/en/20120618-west-must-cut-appetite-cars-tvs-says-un-official
20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
West must cut appetite for cars and TVs, says UN official (Original Post) FarCenter Jun 2012 OP
Doesn't the West already have cars and TV's? bhikkhu Jun 2012 #1
They don't last forever, and forget about getting new ones. FarCenter Jun 2012 #4
An extremely UN point of view. TheWraith Jun 2012 #2
Yep. pipoman Jun 2012 #3
+1 FLAprogressive Jun 2012 #7
The planet is not in peril. MrSlayer Jun 2012 #5
can't buy them without money. HiPointDem Jun 2012 #12
That is true. MrSlayer Jun 2012 #15
Why doesn't the UN come out about no more bombs and bullets?? Angry Dragon Jun 2012 #6
Because "the West" (despite our fair share of them) wouldn't be the only ones they could criticize. FLAprogressive Jun 2012 #8
+100,000! Damn straight. I hate the UN for that reason. Zalatix Jun 2012 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author Zalatix Jun 2012 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author Zalatix Jun 2012 #9
Agreed Sherman A1 Jun 2012 #14
See: muriel_volestrangler Jun 2012 #16
they have and do regularly lunatica Jun 2012 #19
I wonder if Helen Clark owns a car or a TV? Fumesucker Jun 2012 #13
"Oh that's different!" Archae Jun 2012 #17
She said, as she was reading her notes Fla_Democrat Jun 2012 #18
And the poor countries need to stop reproducing at a stupendous rate. Ikonoklast Jun 2012 #20

TheWraith

(24,331 posts)
2. An extremely UN point of view.
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:12 AM
Jun 2012

Albeit not a very practical one, nor very likely. What will happen is that we'll devise more environmentally friendly means of maintaining our lifestyles, which is basically what has happened all through history.

 

MrSlayer

(22,143 posts)
5. The planet is not in peril.
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:53 AM
Jun 2012

I hate when people say this. We as a species are in peril but the planet is just fine.

Good luck getting people not to buy tvs and cars.

Response to FLAprogressive (Reply #8)

Response to FLAprogressive (Reply #8)

muriel_volestrangler

(101,316 posts)
16. See:
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:50 AM
Jun 2012
http://www.un.org/disarmament/
http://www.unicef.org/emerg/index_landmines.html
http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/

and, inevitably, it's the US trying to block things, especially Republicans:

As long overdue negotiations on an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) begin in early July under UN auspices, central to that discussion, by virtue of its international supremacy, will be the US export of arms that has facilitated the extensive sale of weapons around the planet. With only 19 out of 195 sovereign nations of the world with no military budget, the ATT conference will attempt to establish international standards for the $55 billion a year industry for the import, export and transfer of all conventional (small arms) weapons.
...
Initially suggested by a group of Nobel Peace Prize laureates in 2003, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 61/89 to establish an ATT working group with 153 nations in support, 19 nations abstained (including China, Russia and Israel) and one nation voted in opposition -- that one nation was the United States. In 2009, the Obama Administration reversed the US position with the caveat that all decisions at the conference be unanimous thereby providing one country with the ability to veto the Treaty.

As the ATT moves toward multilateral consideration in July, significant opposition to the Treaty has surfaced in the Senate with its 'advise and consent' authority on treaties. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Ks) sent the President a letter of opposition signed by 44 Republican Senators and Sen. Jon Tester (D- Mt) sent a similar letter along with 12 Democrats stating that "the Arms Trade Treaty must not in any way regulate the domestic manufacture, possession or sales of firearms or ammunition."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/renee-parsons/the-export-of-weapons-pas_b_1540165.html

Archae

(46,327 posts)
17. "Oh that's different!"
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:00 AM
Jun 2012

Helen Clark can go screw herself.

I happen to like getting new tech toys like my TV and mp3 player.

And guess what? I ride a bicycle, something Helen Clark probably hasn't been on since she was a teenager.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
20. And the poor countries need to stop reproducing at a stupendous rate.
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:40 AM
Jun 2012

Yeah, a few billion born into poverty each year aren't stressing the planet, either.

Anyone can play this game, try it, it's fun!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»West must cut appetite fo...