IslandRoad wrote on 07/28/18 at 17:45:03:


Yeah, I agree, this stuff is starting to suck the air out of the room.
I can’t drink booze because I’m a rummy......
I wouldn’t go into a bar and expect everyone to not drink, however, this kind of topic already has a existing place, and accommodations on this site, don’t extend the ugliness from it, into the others rooms.
Whatever happened to being considerate of others?

The problem here Mr. Faffi, is that you live in a country where the people think that the government, or the collective, can create laws and rules to control people. Humans inherently reject control. We have been blessed with free will and innately reject oppressive regulation. We see this type of control manifest in unintended consequences of laws.

Living with great freedom comes with great responsibility. Teaching and educating free people how to best act (in the USA it's called "civics") and allowing each to contribute in that manner best suited for them results in a well functioning and happy society. In a free society, your freedom ends when it impacts the freedom of others to live their lives.

That's the beauty of living in a republic. In a democracy the people can vote away the rights of the people, creating tyranny. In a republic, proposed laws must be ratified through several channels before becoming law. And even then the law can be subject to constitutional review by the courts.

Now, getting back to your original post. I fully agree that it is important to preserve and conserve resources so we make a minimal impact on nature and society. But simply passing laws does not necessarily accomplish the desired end goal. It is far better to enducate the populous so they are stake holders in the outcome, rather then threaten them with a financial consequence or a further loss of freedom. In short, laws are a lazy and unproductive method to accomplish change. True change comes from people exercising their freedom to drive towards a desired goal.

Your original post says nothing about laws or rules, but when I see posts like yours from people from socialist countries/governments, I know what follows; rules, regulations, taxes and punishment. No thanks.

IslandRoad wrote on 07/28/18 at 15:25:34:


First, those who goes to work early in life are typically better off financially until they and a university educated person reach the age of 50 or so. Why? Because the highly educated will spend about 7-10 years longer at school, and although the education is free, living isn't. So the student will build up a substantial loan to finance that decade, and these money must be made back with interest.

As an example, the average monthly pay for a psychologischst is NOK 49.500, while a blasting worker makes NOK 52.000. So here, not only have one gone far longer to school, the person also makes less money. Yet the same thing holds true; those with lower education live shorter and have poorer health.

I must also add that you do NOT need to go to a gym or buy any equipment to stay fit, although it does make sense to have a cheap outfit to wear as to not ruining your everyday clothes.

IslandRoad wrote on 07/28/18 at 15:25:34:


Although that's how the saying goes, I'm not sure it is correct. Even if it is, at least there is a chance the new bad habit has a smaller overall negative impact on you and society. Like quitting drugs and indulging heavily on religion, or quit beating people and bashing drums instead  

IslandRoad wrote on 07/28/18 at 15:25:34:



That may be, but only because they allow an environment where drug dealing is easy enough to consider as a business. But, yes, there is a real issue to consider here in that in order to keep us safe for everything considered bad, we must give up freedom in return. And give more control to those in power. Where to draw the line? I don't know. It will differ from one individual to the next.