www.transicionestructural.NET es un nuevo foro, que a partir del 25/06/2012 se ha separado de su homónimo .COM. No se compartirán nuevos mensajes o usuarios a partir de dicho día.
0 Usuarios y 12 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
(...)(*) Liberalista y turiferario son palabras que están en el DRAE. Liberalista es partidario del liberalismo (en nuestro caso, de boquilla). En relación con turiferario, se lee: «Del lat. mediev. 'turiferarius', y este del lat. 'tus, turis' incienso y el lat. tardío '-ferarius' encargado de llevar. 1. adj. Dicho de una persona: Encargada de llevar el incensario. U. m. c. s. 2. adj. adulador. U. m. c. s. Sin.: adulador, lametón, lambiscón, arrastrado, ayayero, jalador, labioso, sacón, chaquetero, cobista, lamerón». En el círculo de un servidor usamos una palabra parecida: botafumerio. Aquí se trata de hacer ver que el falsoliberalismo liberalista es incienso para los trabajadores-directivos y su pléyade de 'empleaos' lametraseros —es una retórica que no es procapital, sino prosupersalario—. Me pregunto, en particular, por Elon Musk, que ha hecho suya esta 'Kampf' (la 'vataya kurturáh' es la versión popcap del 'Mein Kampf'), pero resulta que él sí es capitalista, aunque de escuela inmobiliaria (el padre, un pisitos y recursitos naturales); algo me dice, pues, que Elon Musk sobra —además está comprometido con los supergafes Zelenski y Milei, por Starlink y el litio, respectivamente—.
El Botafumeiro es el enorme incensario usado desde la Edad Media como instrumento de purificación de una catedral en la que se apiñaban las multitudes. Hoy, 800 años después, sigue maravillando a los presentes cuando, tras la Comunión, suena el Himno del Apóstol en los órganos barrocos y este portento de la física comienza su asombroso recorrido pendular frente al altar mayor, para elevarse hasta casi rozar la bóveda del transepto.Para ponerlo en movimiento se necesitan ocho hombres, llamados ‘tiraboleiros’, que lo traen de la Biblioteca cargado de incienso y carbón. Tras atarlo a la maroma que pende frente al altar mayor con tres gruesos nudos, lo bombean tirando con fuerza y precisión cuando se halla en el punto más bajo de su recorrido. De esta forma el Botafumeiro alcanza en sólo minuto y medio una velocidad de 68 kilómetros por hora y llega a formar un ángulo de 82 grados sobre la vertical, describiendo un arco de 65 metros de amplitud a lo largo del transepto. Son en total 17 ciclos de vaivén que dejan en los espectadores un recuerdo para toda la vida.El Botafumeiro aparece ya en el Códice Calixtino, mencionado como Turibulum Magnum, por lo que el ritual data, cuando menos, del s. XII. Entonces era colgado de unas vigas de madera cruzadas en el cimborrio. El mecanismo actual, basado en el movimiento por poleas y la ley del péndulo, fue diseñado durante el Renacimiento por el maestro Celma.En el s. XV, el rey Luis XI de Francia costeó la fabricación de un incensario de plata, pero en 1809 fue sustraído por las tropas napoleónicas acampadas en el claustro de la Catedral. En la actualidad existen dos incensarios, que se guardan en la Biblioteca Capitular: el más antiguo es de 1851 y fue creado por el orfebre José Losada. Está hecho de latón bañado en plata, mide 160 centímetros de altura y pesa alrededor de 62 kg cuando está vacío. El segundo es una réplica en plata del anterior, obsequio de los Alféreces Provisionales a la Catedral en 1971.En su historia casi milenaria el Botafumeiro ha protagonizado pocos accidentes. El día del Apóstol de 1499, mientras honraban a la princesa Catalina de Aragón, el Botafumeiro salió volando y se estampó contra la puerta de Platerías. El segundo fallo tuvo lugar el 23 de mayo de 1622, cuando la cuerda se rompió y el Botafumeiro cayó contra el suelo. Y en el s. XX le rompió las costillas y la nariz a alguien que se acercó demasiado a admirar su asombroso mecanismo.
Se ha venido suponiendo que el plano de oscilación estaba fijado. Pero si ese planopuede rotar (péndulo "esférico"), el espacio fásico presenta más de dos ejes, incluso bajoexcitación óptima; surge, de nuevo, la Posibilidad de movimiento caótico. El botafumeiro, sinembargo, se mantiene sensiblemente en el plano perpendicular al eje de los tambores. Cabeseñalar, no obstante, que ayudan a ese propósito dos guías que cuelgan del armazón, porarticulaciones, para reducir el rozamiento; y que en cierta ocasión, en este siglo, el incensariose desvió de aquel plano y golpeó una columna del transepto. Esto suscita dos cuestiones deinterés. ¿Puede ser caótico, en el sentido moderno, el movimiento esférico del incensario bajoexcitación óptima? ¿Se descubrió, siglos atrás, que ese caos desaparecía si se restringía elmovimiento lateral? En otras palabras, ¿se introdujeron las guías en cierto momento delpasado tras observar la aparición de oscilaciones erráticas? No puede haber duda de que sehubiera considerado indeseable cualquier movimiento errático: sería difícil una acción eficazde bombeo, el botafumeiro estaría propenso a accidentes y el movimiento mismo apareceríainapropiado para un servicio litúrgico.En la actualidad sólo se dispone de una respuesta parcial a esas cuestiones. En 1984 seprobó que un péndulo esférico empujado en una dirección dada y siguiendo una ley temporalprefijada podía manifestar un comportamiento caótico por muy pequeña que fuera laexcitación. Y muy recientemente se llegó al mismo resultado para una excitación no prefijada,sino de ciclo óptimo. El caso del botafumeiro, al que se bombea y no empuja, puede exigir laconsideración de los efectos que el diámetro no nulo de los tambores introduce en elproblema.
The Great CompressionThanks to soaring housing prices, the era of the 400-square-foot subdivision house is upon us.Robert Lanter lives in a 600-square-foot house that can be traversed in five seconds and vacuumed from a single outlet. He doesn’t have a coffee table in the living room because it would obstruct the front door. When relatives come to visit, Mr. Lanter says jokingly, but only partly, they have to tour one at time.Each of these details amounts to something bigger, for Mr. Lanter’s life and the U.S. housing market: a house under $300,000, something increasingly hard to find. That price allowed Mr. Lanter, a 63-year-old retired nurse, to buy a new single-family home in a subdivision in Redmond, Ore., about 30 minutes outside Bend, where he is from and which is, along with its surrounding area, one of Oregon’s most expensive housing markets.Mr. Lanter’s house could easily fit on a flatbed truck, and is dwarfed by the two-story suburban homes that prevail on the blocks around him. But, in fact, there are even smaller homes in his subdivision, Cinder Butte, which was developed by a local builder called Hayden Homes. Some of his neighbors live in houses that total just 400 square feet — a 20-by-20-foot house attached to a 20-by-20-foot garage.This is not a colony of “tiny houses,” popular among minimalists and aesthetes looking to simplify their lives. For Mr. Lanter and his neighbors, it’s a chance to hold on to ownership.Mr. Lanter, who is recently divorced, came back to central Oregon from a condominium in Portland only to discover that home prices had surged beyond his reach. He has owned several larger homes over the years and said he began his recent search looking for a three-bedroom house.“I did not want to rent,” he said after a five-minute tour of his “media room” (a small desk with a laptop) and bedroom (barely fits a queen). After being an owner for 40 years, the idea of being a tenant felt like a backslide.And after living on the 17th floor of a Portland condominium, he had ruled out attached and high-rise buildings, which he described as a series of rules and awkward interactions that made him feel as though he never really owned the place.There was the time he sold a sofa and the front desk attendant scolded him for moving it down the elevator without alerting management a day in advance. Or the times he came home to find someone parked in the spot he owned and paid property taxes on. Try to imagine a random driver parking in a house’s driveway, he said — there’s no way.A single-family home means “less people’s hands in your life,” Mr. Lanter said.He wanted the four unshared walls of the American idyll, even if those walls had minimal space between them and were a couch length from his neighbor.A Chance at OwnershipSeveral colliding trends — economic, demographic and regulatory — have made smaller units like Mr. Lanter’s the future of American housing, or at least a more significant part of it. Over the past decade, as the cost of housing exploded, home builders have methodically nipped their dwellings to keep prices in reach of buyers. The downsizing accelerated last year, when the interest rate on a 30-year fixed rate mortgage reached a two-decade high, just shy of 8 percent.Mortgage rates have fallen since, and sales, especially of new homes, are beginning to thaw from the anemic pace of last year. Even so, a move toward smaller, affordable homes — in some cases smaller than a studio apartment — seems poised to outlast the mortgage spike, reshaping the housing market for years to come and changing notions of what a middle-class life looks like.“This is the front end of what we are going to see,” said Ken Perlman, a managing principal at John Burns Research and Consulting.Extremely small homes have long been an object of curiosity and fodder for internet content; their tight proportions seem to say large things about their occupants. On social media and blogs, influencers swipe at American gluttony and extol the virtues of a life with less carbon and clutter than the standard two-car suburb.Now, in the same way décor trends make their way from design magazines to Ikea, mini homes are showing up in the kinds of subdivisions and exurbs where buyers used to travel for maximum space.The shift is a response to conditions that are found in cities across America: Neighborhoods that used to be affordable are being gentrified, while new condominiums and subdivisions mostly target the upper end of the market, endangering the supply of “starter homes” in reach of first-time buyers. That developers are addressing this conundrum with very small homes could be viewed as yet another example of middle-class diminishment. But buyers say it has helped them get on the first rung of the housing market.“They should help out more people that are young like us to buy houses,” said Caleb Rodriguez, a 22-year-old in San Antonio.Mr. Rodriguez recently moved into a new community outside San Antonio called Elm Trails, which was developed by Lennar Corporation, one of the country’s largest homebuilders. His house sits in a line of mini dwellings, the smallest of which is just 350 square feet.On a recent evening after work, neighbors were walking dogs and chatting along a row of beige, gray and olive-green two-story homes of the same shape. The development has a pond where residents picnic and catch bass and catfish. The houses do not have garages, and their driveways are wide enough for one vehicle or two motorcycles — proportions that pushed the sale prices to well under $200,000.“I wanted to own, and this was the cheapest I could get,” said Mr. Rodriguez, who moved in this month and works at a poultry processing plant in nearby Seguin, Texas. He paid $145,000 and hopes the house can be a step toward wealth building. Maybe in a few years he will move and rent it out , Mr. Rodriguez said.Homes under 500 square feet are not taking over anytime soon: They are less than 1 percent of the new homes built in America, according to Zonda, a housing data and consulting firm. Even Mr. Lanter, who evangelizes about his newly low heating bill and the freedom of shedding stuff, said he would have preferred something bigger, around 800 square feet, if he could find it.While these floor plans might be an edge-case offering reserved for certain kinds of buyers — “Divorced … divorced … really divorced,” Mr. Lanter said as he pointed to the small homes around him — they are part of a clear trend. Various surveys from private consultants and organizations like the National Association of Home Builders, along with interviews with architects and developers, all show a push toward much smaller designs.“Their existence is telling,” said Ali Wolf, chief economist of Zonda. “All the uncertainty over the past few years has just reinforced the desire for homeownership, but land and material prices have gone up too much. So something has to give, and what builders are doing now is testing the market and asking what is going to work.”Builders are substituting side yards for backyards, kitchen bars for dining rooms. Suburban neighborhoods have seen a boom in adjoined townhouses, along with small-lot single family homes that often have shared yards and no more than a few feet between them — a kind of mash-up of the suburb and the urban rowhouse.The great compression is being encouraged by state and local governments. To reduce housing costs, or at least keep them from rising so fast, governments around the country have passed hundreds of new bills that make it easier for builders to erect smaller units at greater densities. Some cities and states — like Oregon — have essentially banned single-family zoning rules that for generations defined the suburban form.These new rules have been rolled out gradually over years and with varying degrees of effectiveness. What has changed recently is that builders are much more willing to push smaller dwellings because they have no other way to reach a large swath of buyers.“There is a market opportunity and people are using it,” said Michael Andersen, a senior researcher at Sightline Institute, a Seattle think tank focused on housing and sustainability.A Big House on a Little LotAmerican homes have long been larger on average than those in other developed countries. For most of the past century, the country’s appetite for size has only grown.The iconic Cape Cods in Levittown, N.Y. — often considered the model post-World War II suburb — were typically about 750 square feet, roomy for a one-bedroom apartment but small for a free-standing house with two bedrooms. Today, though, the median American home size is about 2,200 square feet, up from around 1,500 in the 1960s. Lot sizes have remained more or less the same, which means the typical home is built to maximize the size of the kitchen and bedrooms even as its yard contracts and its proximity to neighbors increases.The expansion came despite a profound shift in household composition. Over the past half-century, America has gone from a country in which the predominant home buyer was a nuclear family with about three children to one in which singles, empty nesters and couples without children have become a much larger share of the population. Meanwhile, housing costs shot up in recent years as cities around the nation grappled with a persistent housing shortage and a surge in demand from millennial and Gen Z buyers.This has created a mismatched market in which members of the Baby Boom generation are disproportionately living in larger homes without children, while many millennial couples with children are cramped into smaller houses or in rental apartments, struggling to buy their first home.Even buyers who are willing to move across state lines are finding that affordable housing markets are increasingly hard to find. In the Bend area where Mr. Lanter lives, housing costs have been pushed up by out-of-state buyers, many from California, who have flocked to the area to buy second homes or work there remotely.The influx of money has helped raise the median home price to almost $700,000 from a little over $400,000 in 2020, according to Redfin. Driving through the downtown on a snowy afternoon recently, Deborah Flagan, a vice president at Hayden Homes, pointed left and right at storefronts that used to be boarded and are now part of a vibrant ecosystem of retailers that includes numerous high-end coffee shops, a “foot spa” and a bar where people drink craft beer and throw axes at wall-mounted targets.The upscaling extends well beyond downtown to adjacent neighborhoods, where the small-footprint “mill houses” that once served a blue-collar work force now sit on land that is so valuable they are being slowly erased by two-story moderns with seven-figure sales prices. Toward the end of the snowy driving tour, Ms. Flagan pointed toward one of those old mill houses — a compact, ranch-style home with fading yellow paint and a white picket fence pocked with broken boards. She estimated it was no more than 800 square feet, and framed it as an example of the small and affordably priced housing whose stock needs to be rebuilt.“What we are doing now is what they were doing then,” she said.Four Walls, Close TogetherHayden builds about 2,000 homes a year throughout the Pacific Northwest. Its business model is to deliver middle-income housing that local workers can afford, Ms. Flagan said, and it does this by skipping larger cities like Portland and Seattle in favor of lower-cost exurbs like Redmond (where the company is based).Like a lot of builders, Hayden has spent the past few years whittling back sizes on its bread-and-butter offering of one- and two-story homes between 1,400 and 2,500 square feet. But because its buyers are so price-sensitive, it decided to go further. After rates began rising, Hayden redesigned a portion of Cinder Butte — the Redmond subdivision where Mr. Lanter lives — for homes between 400 and 880 square feet.Most of Cinder Butte looks like any subdivision anywhere: A mix of one- and two-story homes that have faux exterior shutters and fill out their lots. The corner where Mr. Lanter lives is strikingly different, however, with a line of cinched homes that front the main road into the development and have driveways in a back alley.The alley is where neighbors say hi and bye, Mr. Lanter said. And because nobody has much space, people often throw parties in their garages.The smaller houses sold well, so Hayden has now expanded on the idea. It recently began a new development in Albany, Ore., in which a third of the 176 homes are planned to be under 1,000 square feet. “Our buyers would rather live in a small home than rent,” Ms. Flagan said.A decade ago, Jesse Russell was a former reality TV producer looking to get started in real estate. He had just moved back to Bend (his hometown) from Los Angeles, and began with a plot of two dozen 500-square-foot cottages sprinkled around a pond and common gardens. When he pitched it at community meetings, “the overwhelming sentiment was ‘nobody is going to live in a house that small,’” he said.Then the units sold out, and his investors nearly doubled their money in two years.Mr. Russell’s company, Hiatus Homes, has since built about three dozen more homes that range from 400 square feet to 900 square feet, and he has 100 more in development — a thriving business. How does he feel about subdivision builders getting into a product that used to belong to smaller companies like his?“I love it!” he said. “I hope that at some point a tiny house just becomes another thing. It’s like, ‘Oh, that’s a duplex, that’s a townhouse, that’s a single-family house, and that over there is a cottage.’ It just becomes another type of housing you get to select.”
Donald Trump ordered to pay more than $350mn in New York fraud caseJudge also bans former US president from doing business in the state for three years after civil trialA New York judge has ordered Donald Trump to pay more than $350mn in penalties for “blatant” fraud committed by the real estate empire that brought the former US president fame and fortune.Justice Arthur Engoron also banned Trump from conducting further business for three years in the state. He and his businesses are prohibited from applying for loans from financial institutions registered with the New York regulator during the same period. However, Engoron reversed an earlier decision that had ordered the dissolution of the former president’s existing businesses.Trump and his company, The Trump Organization, were ordered to pay about $355mn — the vast bulk of a total $364mn in penalties in the case. His adult sons Donald Jr and Eric were ordered to pay more than $4mn each and individually barred from doing business in New York state for two years.Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s former chief financial officer who served jail time for tax fraud, was ordered to pay a further $1mn.With interest, the total amount of penalties handed down could exceed $450mn, New York attorney-general Letitia James said in a statement after the decision.The decision delivers another costly blow to Trump, who is mounting another run for the White House while fighting numerous legal cases. In addition to the civil trial, which cut to the heart of his business holdings, he is also under indictment in four separate criminal cases.In remarks delivered outside of his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, Trump denounced the decision. “It all comes down to [Joe] Biden,” he said, referring to the US president he will probably face once again in the 2024 election. “It’s a witch hunt against his political opponent the likes of which our country has never seen before. You see it in third-world countries — banana republics.” Engoron’s ruling came following the conclusion of a heated, weeks-long civil fraud trial in which lawyers for the New York attorney-general detailed how the Trumps vastly overstated the value of their residential and office buildings, hotels and golf courses by hundreds of millions of dollars. Doing so had allowed them to obtain loans on more favourable terms from the likes of Deutsche Bank, among other benefits, the court found.The attorney-general’s lawsuit was a direct assault on the reputation Trump cultivated over decades as a billionaire businessman with a Midas touch. Instead, James’s lawyers claimed he would press underlings to puff up valuations for his properties in order to push him up the ranks of the annual Forbes billionaires list.Trump was a frequent presence in the courtroom during the non-jury trial. During a combative and chaotic statement to the court, he noted his lenders had been paid back in full and on time — and so there were no victims — and insisted his net worth had, if anything, been understated over the years.Trump, Donald Jr and Eric, also testified they had relied on the expertise of their outside accountants when signing off on financial documents. The former president railed against James, a Democrat, and portrayed the case as a politically motivated witch hunt.Trump and his associates’ “complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological”, Engoron wrote in his ruling on Friday. “Defendants did not commit murder or arson. They did not rob a bank at gunpoint. Donald Trump is not Bernard Madoff,” he said of the late Ponzi scheme architect: “Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways.”Engoron added Trump “severely compromised his credibility” by often refusing to answer questions directly.Rather than express regret for the overvaluation of his properties, Trump testified he believed his accountants had “underestimated” their worth, insisting that Mar-a-Lago was worth up to $1.5bn, Engoron wrote.This, he added, would value his Florida home higher “than the most expensive private residence listed in the country by approximately 400 per cent”.Engoron also dismissed Trump’s claim that there was no fraud as the loans had been repaid in full and there was no injured party.James said in response to the judgment: “Everyday Americans cannot lie to a bank to get a mortgage to buy a home, and if they did, our government would throw the book at them. There simply cannot be different rules for different people.”Chris Kise, an attorney for Trump, said: “The court today ignored the law, ignored the facts, and simply signed off on the attorney-general’s manifestly unjust political crusade against the front-running candidate for president of the United States.” He confirmed Trump would appeal against the decision.Engoron’s decision comes a day after a judge in a neighbouring Manhattan criminal court refused to dismiss or delay the “hush money” case brought against Trump, in which he is accused of paying off a porn star in the run-up to the 2016 election and then covering up the payments in his business. A trial has been set for March 25.Although it falls short of the $370mn sought by James, the fine is also the second large financial penalty issued against the former president. A jury last month awarded writer E Jean Carroll $83.3mn in damages from Trump for defamation, after he denied sexually assaulting her. That came on top of a separate $5mn award last year for her after he was found liable for battery and defamation.
['El capitalismo ha fallado en la provisión de vivienda' es un lema rompedor. Provisión no es producción, que conste.
Cita de: asustadísimos en Febrero 15, 2024, 13:53:26 pm[La vivienda ha dejado de funcionar en el capitalismo, señoras, señores. No hay posibilidad de reforma alguna. Llevamos 4 décadas intentando de todo. Es más, toda ocurrencia que se pone en marcha (hoy es el día de los avales públicos para jóvenes) agrava la situación. El capitalismo solo tiene una opción: que el Estado la provea masivamente, haciendo que sea abundante, de buena calidad y barata —bastaría con que el precio fuera al 'coste incrementado', por lo que el efecto en la política presupuestaria sería nulo—. Se trataría de hacer con la Vivienda lo que se hace con la seguridad. Al no funcionar la vivienda, falla la base para la satisfacción de casi todas las necesidades humanas. Estamos ante el final del capitalismo porque no puede con su modelito popularcapitalista. El capitalismo es una mierda.]Yo esto no lo puedo entender:1) La provision de vivienda ha fallado. 2) La situación es tan grave que el modelo pone en peligro el sistema. 3) Se podría solucionar si el Estado la proveyese (y no sería tan difícil ni costoso).Pero el Estado no lo hace. ¿Qué nos estamos perdiendo?A ver si en cuatro décadas se ha intentado de todo excepto esto, que es lo que hubiese funcionado. ¿Y por qué?
[La vivienda ha dejado de funcionar en el capitalismo, señoras, señores. No hay posibilidad de reforma alguna. Llevamos 4 décadas intentando de todo. Es más, toda ocurrencia que se pone en marcha (hoy es el día de los avales públicos para jóvenes) agrava la situación. El capitalismo solo tiene una opción: que el Estado la provea masivamente, haciendo que sea abundante, de buena calidad y barata —bastaría con que el precio fuera al 'coste incrementado', por lo que el efecto en la política presupuestaria sería nulo—. Se trataría de hacer con la Vivienda lo que se hace con la seguridad. Al no funcionar la vivienda, falla la base para la satisfacción de casi todas las necesidades humanas. Estamos ante el final del capitalismo porque no puede con su modelito popularcapitalista. El capitalismo es una mierda.]
Por lo mismo, al poner en venta nuestro propio suelo hemos dejado de construir nuestro hábitat.
Cita de: Cadavre Exquis en Febrero 16, 2024, 17:26:31 pmCitarY ahora la pregunta ¿es el cambio climático el causante de esto (causa)? ¿o es precisamente esto lo que está causando que cambie el clima (consecuencia)?Y en caso de que sea la causa, ¿es la acción del hombre el motivo por el que está pasando? Que en el artículo se mencione el CO2 como causa (cuando su porcentaje en la atmósfera no llega al 0.05%) me parece llamarnos idotas a la cara.Supongamos que la acción del hombre no es responsable del colapso de la AMOC. ¿Qué hacemos? ¿invertimos todos nuestros esfuerzos en que la AMOC se mantega, alterando así el clima artificalmente por nuestra propia supervivencia? ¿Dejamos que la madre Tierra siga su curso y nos adaptamos nosotros moviéndonos a otros lugares? Pagaría por ver las caras de todos estos ecologistas radicales cuando tuvieran que lidiar con estas contradicciones.Es lo que pasa cuando gritas "que viene el lobo" tantas veces.. que luego viene de verdad (o no) y la gente no te hace ni puñetero caso. Sobre todo cuando la única manera de frenar al lobo es con más impuestos EN EUROPA.En teoría el cambio climático es causante de la parada de la AMOC, por el aumento del agua dulce y ausencia de vientos. Hombre, Turiel radical no es. No veo que gane nada exponiendo lo que piensa (siempre basado en datos, otra cosa es que te los creas o no), pero vamos, cambiar el clima parece que está cambiando. Y lo de adaptarse está muy bien, hasta que no se puede.
CitarY ahora la pregunta ¿es el cambio climático el causante de esto (causa)? ¿o es precisamente esto lo que está causando que cambie el clima (consecuencia)?Y en caso de que sea la causa, ¿es la acción del hombre el motivo por el que está pasando? Que en el artículo se mencione el CO2 como causa (cuando su porcentaje en la atmósfera no llega al 0.05%) me parece llamarnos idotas a la cara.Supongamos que la acción del hombre no es responsable del colapso de la AMOC. ¿Qué hacemos? ¿invertimos todos nuestros esfuerzos en que la AMOC se mantega, alterando así el clima artificalmente por nuestra propia supervivencia? ¿Dejamos que la madre Tierra siga su curso y nos adaptamos nosotros moviéndonos a otros lugares? Pagaría por ver las caras de todos estos ecologistas radicales cuando tuvieran que lidiar con estas contradicciones.Es lo que pasa cuando gritas "que viene el lobo" tantas veces.. que luego viene de verdad (o no) y la gente no te hace ni puñetero caso. Sobre todo cuando la única manera de frenar al lobo es con más impuestos EN EUROPA.En teoría el cambio climático es causante de la parada de la AMOC, por el aumento del agua dulce y ausencia de vientos. Hombre, Turiel radical no es. No veo que gane nada exponiendo lo que piensa (siempre basado en datos, otra cosa es que te los creas o no), pero vamos, cambiar el clima parece que está cambiando. Y lo de adaptarse está muy bien, hasta que no se puede.
Y ahora la pregunta ¿es el cambio climático el causante de esto (causa)? ¿o es precisamente esto lo que está causando que cambie el clima (consecuencia)?Y en caso de que sea la causa, ¿es la acción del hombre el motivo por el que está pasando? Que en el artículo se mencione el CO2 como causa (cuando su porcentaje en la atmósfera no llega al 0.05%) me parece llamarnos idotas a la cara.Supongamos que la acción del hombre no es responsable del colapso de la AMOC. ¿Qué hacemos? ¿invertimos todos nuestros esfuerzos en que la AMOC se mantega, alterando así el clima artificalmente por nuestra propia supervivencia? ¿Dejamos que la madre Tierra siga su curso y nos adaptamos nosotros moviéndonos a otros lugares? Pagaría por ver las caras de todos estos ecologistas radicales cuando tuvieran que lidiar con estas contradicciones.Es lo que pasa cuando gritas "que viene el lobo" tantas veces.. que luego viene de verdad (o no) y la gente no te hace ni puñetero caso. Sobre todo cuando la única manera de frenar al lobo es con más impuestos EN EUROPA.
Cita de: neutron_mortgages en Febrero 17, 2024, 10:19:35 am Cita de: asustadísimos en Febrero 15, 2024, 13:53:26 pm Si se vendiera el aire como escaso dejaríamos de respirar-Por lo mismo, al poner en venta nuestro propio suelo hemos dejado de construir nuestro hábitat-Qué tienen en común ? Ni el aire ni el suelo son bienes del comercio-Son derechos, Fundamentales, El suelo es un derecho de conquista, que en su caso opones a los habitantes anteriores, Es la base del derecho griego o romano, con las colonias, o del derecho medieval, que nos dio la enfiteusis (ocupación por concesión a plazo o por evento que la impida),Supongo que hacia el XVii la propiedad privada del suelo cobró su carta de derechos de la venta de tierras comunales, y se extendió a la colonización hispana e inglesa (entre las dos sólo variaba la maturación del derecho y cómo oponer éste a los colonizados),Acabamos vendiendo el suelo que habitamos- De la metrópoli, Y dejamos de seguir construyendo nuestra ciudadanía,
Cuando nos habla de casasen España cualquier ismo,aparecen ieneuvesque recuerdan al franquismo.