SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: c.horn who wrote (381889)3/30/2003 8:33:02 AM
From: Rock_nj  Read Replies (1) of 769670
 
Take a look at what the environment in the U.S. looked like back in the 1960s before the environmental movement took hold. A river in Clevland caught on fire every year because it had so much pollution. Streams, once considered completely dead, are now fishable and swimable. Cities like New York and Los Angeles that were choked in smog in the early 1970s are much improved since then. That is the real world that we all live in.

You're making Rush Limbaugh's wacko argument (which is exactly the propagandization the elites want you to have) that mankind isn't significant enough to impact the environment, when the examples I gave above are real examples that show that man was impacting the environment and by changing our ways we have cleaned up the environment. It's the environment that we all live in day to day and I for one would like to see it remain clean for quality of life purposes and for future generations. Granted, on a really large scale, mankind doesn't have much impact. Earth will survive one way or another, no matter what we do to it. And yes, many species have gone instinct long before man showed up on the scene. That's just natures way; I'm not so concerned about that. But, I am concerned about my and my children's quality of life and would therefore like to see us progressing towards a cleaner environment.

The impact on jobs has been minimal; that's a straw-man arguement against environmental protection. The U.S. economy's growth and job growth have been enormous since the environmental movement took hold thirty years ago. We just experienced the strongest decade of economic growth in our nation's history during the 1990s. Some jobs have been lost as a direct result of the enviornmental movement, but many have also been created. I'm just about to start working for an environmental company in a few weeks. And in any case, job losses occur for many many reasons that have nothing to do with the environment. Sometimes technologies change, like when the automobile displaced blacksmiths. Or, sometimes economic conditions change, like when NAFTA went through and the cost of doing business in Mexico suddenly decreased significantly.

I'm all for doing environmental protection in a reasonable manner that takes into consideration things like job losses and economic impacts. But, Rush's bashing of the environment and wanting us to return to a less civilized time is not the way I think things should progress. I'm not buying his propaganda.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext