How sustainable are you?

We are getting solar panels to put on the roof. Also, I have a large vegetable garden where about half of my fruit and vegetables come from. The only thing I would need to be self-sustainable would be a fresh clean water source as well!
If you are considering the investment of Solar Panels, I highly suggest it. They are expensive but excellent in the long run.

As to Piotr, if as a (theroretical) father my wife died, and my little girl asked where she was, not understanding the concept of heaven (in this case an idea or state of mind, I don't believe in the place all that much) I'd tell her shed gone away for a while. This would be a lie.

Yes, not legal. Simply tell the truth or change subject.

If I did tell her that she was dead and shed never see her again, I'd still be breaking a law, by stealing her innocence.

No, I can't see that. She asked and that means she wanted to hear the truth, you didn't do to her what she didn't want to be done to her. It's logical and your action would be legal.

If (again all theretical), a gunman held my wife at gunpoint and gave me the option to either take his life or he would take hers, I would have to break four laws.

No, they have broken the law, you would simply be dealing punishment. Punishment for kidnapping in progress is death, it's logical to expect that punishment and they know that.

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 12:26:48 PM

As to Piotr, if as a (theroretical) father my wife died, and my little girl asked where she was, not understanding the concept of heaven (in this case an idea or state of mind, I don't believe in the place all that much) I'd tell her shed gone away for a while. This would be a lie.

Yes, not legal. Simply tell the truth or change subject.

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 12:26:48 PM

If I did tell her that she was dead and shed never see her again, I'd still be breaking a law, by stealing her innocence.

No, I can't see that. She asked and that means she wanted to hear the truth, you didn't do to her what she didn't want to be done to her. It's logical and your action would be legal.

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 12:26:48 PM

If (again all theretical), a gunman held my wife at gunpoint and gave me the option to either take his life or he would take hers, I would have to break four laws.

No, they have broken the law, you would simply be dealing punishment. Punishment for kidnapping in progress is death, it's logical to expect that punishment and they know that.

So I wouldn't be breaking the do no harm law? Or the do not murder law? Or rather specifically, don't break the law to uphold the law, or that the ends don't justify the means?
You can't change the law just so it fits the way you see it Piotr.

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 10:12:13 AM

Quote from: Piotr on May 15, 2013, 10:00:18 AM

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 09:47:46 AM

This is a little frowned upon but I dumpster dive, hardcore. It's so disgusting what some company's throw out, on any given night I find 40-50 bread loaves that most of the time aren't even day old, pounds of fresh fruit and veggies, assorted cereals and box meals, etc. These companies often throw them out as damaged or just a day after they reach their "sell by" date, which is alright, but they go straight to the dumpster, not to shelters or the homeless/needy.

There was this famous and big case in Poland, where a company went bust because they were forced to retrospectively pay tax on bread which they gave away to charity over years. I don't think the law is so bad in the US, but you are getting there.

You are completely wrong

Another words, you call a lie on my statement

Can you donate food past the expiry date?

No
In LA many film sets used to feed homeless with excess food instead of throwing it away. One day a guy sued a studio and won big; needless to say you cannot give food away anymore if you're a business. You will get sued by an .rearexit.

www.gpo.gov/.....4publ210.pdf
Read that and tell me differently

While what that law reads is there is no penalty. Other than pastries - we never donated sandwiches, milk and older fruit.

Movie sets no longer give food away as someone actually sued Hollywood in the last 20 years and won big. So perhaps it is prepared food specifically somewhere?

I feel like most 99cent only stores have nothing but expired product

Shouldn't the discussion about imtg law go to the ultimate law discussion thread?

How about we drop the law talk and stay on topic.

How are YOU sustainable? Ever keep track of how much waste you produce in a week?

Those of you who consume fast food still: for a week, hold onto all the trash you would otherwise throw a way, wherever it may be. If you didn't change any of your normal habits by doing this (other than tossing trash) you will see your carbon footprint.

For the 1 minute you eat a McDonald's hamburger - you've created a few forms of waste: excrement (hard to prevent that), 1 sheet of wax paper, a bag that can fit several hamburgers and possibly a napkin or two.

Plus you probably got more as a hamburger doesn't fill up anyone at McDonald's.

This is just your lunch! You got a soda too?!! Add that to the pile. If you eat on the road at least twice a day, just imagine that amount of trash you created with one meal. Now with how many humans there are, just imagine how much waste is being produced!

You could have not driven to McDonald's and cooked a meal at home (sandwiches only need your kinetic energy - unless u like em toasted ): oh you're a student? Wake up earlier and make your food. Use a small Tupperware set to keep it fresh and you don't have to produce waste...

It's too much to carry around? We're gonna have to bury more and more trash near us as we produce more of it (trash).


I wanna hear about how you sustain!

Quote from: Piotr on May 15, 2013, 02:19:30 PM

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 12:26:48 PM

As to Piotr, if as a (theroretical) father my wife died, and my little girl asked where she was, not understanding the concept of heaven (in this case an idea or state of mind, I don't believe in the place all that much) I'd tell her shed gone away for a while. This would be a lie.

Yes, not legal. Simply tell the truth or change subject.

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 12:26:48 PM

If I did tell her that she was dead and shed never see her again, I'd still be breaking a law, by stealing her innocence.

No, I can't see that. She asked and that means she wanted to hear the truth, you didn't do to her what she didn't want to be done to her. It's logical and your action would be legal.

Quote from: Vyse on May 15, 2013, 12:26:48 PM

If (again all theretical), a gunman held my wife at gunpoint and gave me the option to either take his life or he would take hers, I would have to break four laws.

No, they have broken the law, you would simply be dealing punishment. Punishment for kidnapping in progress is death, it's logical to expect that punishment and they know that.

So I wouldn't be breaking the do no harm law? Or the do not murder law? Or rather specifically, don't break the law to uphold the law, or that the ends don't justify the means?
You can't change the law just so it fits the way you see it Piotr.

The law says: 'or you will be punished regardless of your will', punishment is exempted from 'do not do to others'. If there is a flaw in iMtG Law, you haven't found it yet, but please keep trying.

try to keep it biodegradable, and if you can't, and it is incendiary, you can just burn it. Global warming people are opposed to this but there is much less solid waste, and you provide more carbon for plants, burning can be a good thing, as long as you do it right.

NASA just recently released a report, and they found that additional C02 in he atmosphere actually helps cool down the earth, so global warming is a bunch of garbage.  The earth is just going through normal changes.

Regardless, I agree that it's better not to pollute, mainly because who likes to breathe gross air.

Can I see your source for this information, please?

No harm can come from being conscious about being more efficient.

Probably not much, unfortunately 'global warming' or 'climate change' is not about being more efficient, it is about making bankers, politicians and PWC rich, via carbon credits. The amount of scaremongering and blatant lies which are being spread in the process is quite appaling too, and more and more scientists are leaving the bandwagon.

And as for Piotr... People getting rich selling things goes for everything you stand for, and basically has been what you claim is the only way to a successful economy for the last month.

 I hope im just misunderstaning the implication thay the notion that these noble capitalists spotting a business venture and intending to get rich on the backs of the planet isn't something that upsets you, as that would make you extremely hypocritical.

Carbon Credits are instrument of reducing free market and as such, logically, are something absolutely against everything I stand for

Carbon Credits are not a product, they are a form of company tax. Companies are forced to buy them (pay tax) if they exceed emission quotas decided by politicians.

I'm not sure I understand how a country selling carbon credits is different than a company, except that a company is not reaponsible to anyone other than itself.

It is different because nothing happens when you do not buy a proper product. On the other hand, if a company which surpasses its emission limits does not buy Carbon Credits, it is penalised with fines far exceeding the value of Carbon Credits. There is no option to refuse to buy your 'product' the same as there is no option to refuse to pay taxes.