Conservationism (Page 2)

TallGreenGuy
TallGreenGuy: The time's have shown that not only do we need a change of mindset and lifestyle but also a change in the way we create and use Environmental policy. Lightbulb's aren't the only sortof problems and example's, there is a plethora of other's, such as this laptop I sit at to type this message, It's screen like many other's is also containing a mercury lamp...the component's in many of our electronics contain heavy metals (nickel m cadmium, Beryllium, PVC's, Phthalates, Zinc, lead, mercury) and the list is ongoing. People in American society are often ignorant or lack the care or incentive to properly recycle or dispose of their electronics in an environmentally sound way, but also it stretches beyond that in that often there is also a lack of the facilities available to do so. Changes in policies might seem constricting but often they create a way for real change; an example of that would be a mandate for responsible disposal or recycling of these types of products(consumer and producer responsibility initiatives). In Germany there is an initiative called the Green Dot program and they have done much to balance the environmental responsibilities on both the producers and consumers so that both of them pick up the slack not just one or the other...I do believe we should all be more of citizen consumers and realize that each dollar spent counts as a "vote" and shows others what our preferences are in many many ways, afterall this is the information that recently has become so valuable to data miners and other businesses...Consumers often forget they are the ones creating the demand and therefore have great market power... although buying more eco-friendly is a great start, it can't and won't address all the issues we have concerning environmental degradation..I buy as environmentally conscious as possible and I will continue to do so, but there are some things that I wish I could change and under the current societal and political frameworks it seems futile until we have created and maintain better environmental policy coupled with an alteration in lifestyle.
10 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: So, lemme make sure I follow your train of thought;

By wanting to change some things, you mean making other people pay more, or forcing people to recycle more?

I find both to be appalling. The federal recycling program is utterly harmful to the environment, so suggesting we need to make it MANDATORY, is offense- and suggesting that things should go up in price as payment into alms towards the environment- that the government, or anyone, is in a position to free you of your guilt of contributing to the state of the environment, is delusional thinking. Paying the government, or charities, or organizations, or anything to "forgive" you, is a waste of time- especially at a time of economic downturn.

All you're doing is ensuring that people with less cash have a lower standard of living.
10 years ago Report
0
TallGreenGuy
TallGreenGuy: I work with Environmental Science. I'm sorry to say this but that is in no way, shape, or form an accurate statement. Ignorance and misinformation. The only thing I am looking to forgive is people like you who are clearly misguided and ill-informed, perhaps you are not seeing the point clearly which should require you to do some homework. There's nothing I feel guilty about concerning the issue and paying someone? what are you talking about? It's called consumer and producer responsibility,is that what you're referencing? My use was reference to a concept which has better requirements/regulatory processes which ensure that persistent organic pollutants, carcinogenic/caustic/toxic and radioactive materials and heavy metals don't end up in the soils and in ground water and also your bloodstream. In fact you'd be doing yourself and whatever future children a favor. There are already systems set up in Europe that are quite effective and actually quite profitable. It seems you do not know of the concept, maybe you should do your research before you spout off nonsense that is defamatory and use the old economic state scapegoat. What is wrong is perhaps your reading of the concern..an alteration of policies and lifestyles is in no way synonymous with burdening citizens and taxpayers, the only burden being done to them in this "economic downturn" is the fact that they cannot get their facts straight and therefore gobble up political jargon and misinformation. This was by no means a political statement, this is from a conservationist and environmentalist perspective. If you are not participatory in conservation or environmental schools of thought then I suggest you keep your personal and political commentary confined to yourself. There was nothing stated about "force people to recycle more" or politics be it left or right. The federal? recycling program, what exactly do you know of it to be harmful to the environment>? The Federal government creates initiatives yes. Contrary to what you're saying the states have the power over the policies which determine the recycling done within its borders, the Federal government does not have that jurisdiction (i.e state to state bottle/can returns=small example). Recycling is not a waste of time. Wherever you're getting your garbage information is a waste of time, in fact I see hypocrisy knowing that the supposed argument you're trying to frame has been recycled and reframed a thousand times and still you see it fit to be used. Hmmm.
10 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell:



They state their sources. You have not.
10 years ago Report
1
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: just on a side note... i f'n love that show
10 years ago Report
1
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: I know, right?
10 years ago Report
1
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: I hate to go the youtube video route, but damnit- they make a clear, well researched, succinct point- that the conservation and green movement have enormous flaws, that supporters refuse to acknowledge or discuss.
10 years ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: well... you have to also consider that its not just about the money... thats the major point that penn and teller make, the cost, sometimes its worth it to spend a little more to preserve the world, its forever more valuable than the dollar
10 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: whatever happened to 5 cents for returning a coke glass bottle? the cans offer 5 cents- in very few states. that is an example of private4 industry reycling that needs to be revisited
10 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: manufacturers could offer a few dollars for broken products for refurbishing
10 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: the chinese "recycled" obsolete microchips into us government hardware
10 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: buying used is recycling, shop at goodwill and consignment shops, yard sales, the used section of the car lot, ebay and craigslist (caveat emptor). at the same time, you can use ebay and craigslist as a way to recycle items that you would otherwise throw away, broken electronics often have salvageable parts, and could go for a few dolars.

the city dump may have a "purgatory" for undamaged, or easily salvageable items that can, for a time, be examined and reclaimed. dont ever take used mattresses- except, perhaps, from a family member in good standing with yourself.

Check out furniture upholstery REALLY good. you dont want to bring any parasites or bodily fluids into your home. bed bugs are a HUGE problem, and one of the reasons that it is illegal to resell used mattresses.
10 years ago Report
1
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: >>> well... you have to also consider that its not just about the money...

That's easy to say when its not your money on the line- how many business's have been torn down by federal laws trying to impose a green industry?

I'm all for freedom- if you can provide a better product- hell, if the consumer wants a more expensive product if it has some certain beliefs attached to it- then go for it. But to say the government should harm business's because they don't fit with a green economy? That kind of tampering is not helpful- we could persevere the entire world fairly easily if we sacrifice half of the world's population- but that is wrong. Just like it is wrong to sacrifice 20% of the world, or 1%, or even one person- it is wrong to destroy other peoples means of wealth to legitimize your own ideology.

Can we agree on that basic fact?

10 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: >>>sometimes its worth it to spend a little more to preserve the world

But it's not YOUR money you're sacrificing- it's others. I'm all for letting people spend more if they find value in it- to support whatever causes they feel have value- but to use TAX PAYERS money- all of our money- to support these programs are wrong. It should be up to the individual.
10 years ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: the world doesnt belong to us... its not just about US and what WE want, everything on earth deserves to live, id gladly sacrifice the profit margin to preserve the world for all life forms... without all other life we couldnt even exist, we owe our lives to the natural world...
10 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: Lol so we're arguing that property doesnt exist now?

10 years ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: property doesnt exist, its a temporary state of being, its not okay to slash and burn to get what you want, or keep things from everyone else, take what you want when you want... because when you are gone, the scar you leave behind remains... you would destroy the world for a thousand years just so you can have what you want for 50?
10 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: If you think it's so wrong to possess things.....what are you doing on the internet? Certainly the materials inside that computer, the energy used to power millions of servers, and the wires that are buried, dug up when worn out or obsolete, and reburied- all of these things are destructive- and you are using all of these destructive things.

Doesn't that seem kinda backwards? To be preaching to people about changes you're unwilling to do yourself?
10 years ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: as if we have a choice anymore, if you want human contact you have no choice but to participate, all one can hope to do is minimize the damage... i think thats more than worth a few dollars
10 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: Nonesense. There's Amish communities out there and hippie communes that do exactly what you want in life- don't try to change people- just join a like-minded community.

Did you know that the original founder of Dominios Pizza, Tom Monaghan(He doesn't own it any longer) has been in the process of building an entire town from scratch, attempting to make a Catholic town- no abortion clinics, no condoms in pharmacys, ect ect



Or how about the free state project? I heard about it years ago, so I dunno if it's still going, but the story is simple- there's a political belief system called Libertarians- and, given the Democrat-Republican system of the states, they don't get much of any representations(Ron Paul, for example, is a Libertarian)- so Libertarians are flocking to New Hampshire, in the hope that, by living together, they can enact real change to their society...



You got options. But trying to change everyone isn't one of em....
10 years ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: clearly changing everyone is never going to happen, and there personal way of life, particularly religous ones arent something i want to be a part of either, ultimately its a too little too late situation.... believe me, if i could change it i would. their little communities have little to no impact as far as making a significant change... it takes the collective whole, even if it were a million people, theres still billions of others doing more harm than good
10 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: So you're unwillingly forced live a greater standard of life, eh?

Damn society! Forcing you to surf the net! You're such a victim!

If only people would realize they're better off being worse off!
10 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: restore a proper oceanic ph balance, and healthy co2 consuming algae will counteract air pollution. the biggest problem is water pollution inhibiting the growth of green oceanic algae
10 years ago Report
1
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: thats entirely subjective... what is good... what is better, what you think is better doesnt coincide with what i think is better... and i may also add that these people trying to develope these communities are not exempt from surrounding civilization... the point is, this world isnt ours to do with what we wish, just because you think you deserve it all doesnt give you a right to crush anything that stands in your way... we are the antithesis of symbiosis... the least essential life form on earth = humans
10 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: better control of groundwater and river pollution, and advances in marine biology will have a greater impact on curbing global warming than directly taxing co2 emissions. china is a huge offender in groundwater and river pollution.
10 years ago Report
1