Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (8014)	3/8/2001 12:31:08 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

A thought just occurred to me. In debates about environmental regulation I think it quite possible that both sides think they are losing. Those who think there are too many laws and regulations, keep seeing more of both added, costing more money and more lost freedom. Those who fear environmental damage, loss of habitat, and species extinction also see more of these things happen. Both sides can get fearful and angry because they see they think they are losing. Tim

To: TimF who wrote (8014)	3/8/2001 1:01:09 PM
From: coug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Thanks for the links, But the point I am trying to make.. Is how can a subjective, open-ended issue be "cost out", when the risk can not be properly assessed at the time. IMO, the numbers are pure guesses.. Do the best job possible at the time, when errors are found, correct them and for goodness sake, do not devalue a certain population and area, by placing the offending issue AWAY from YOURSELF or MYSELF, (not you just a figure of speech).. NIMBY syndrome.. And after the fact, if it turns out, the risk can not be controlled, Admit the mistake, clean it up and move on.. The worst case of NIMBY, IMO, if I rember right, was when our esteemed Sec. of Treasury, Larry Summers, under the Clinton administration had suggested in the early 1990's that we ship our toxic waste to third world countries for disposal.. disgraceful. but it didn't stop or slow down his career. Anyway that's sort of off the topic.. But it does show, the worth diminishes as distance increases, in the minds of many, which includes the leadership. But I will disagree, that environmental lobbyists are more powerful than industrial lobbyists, if that's what I understand you to say..