Dr. Mercola May 08 2008 44,894 views
The environmental movement has been hijacked. All we hear is – sustainability – recycling – green – carbon footprint – conservation.
They are attempting to instill a feeling of guilt and shame on us, when they are the ones who are doing severe damage.
The corporations are doing the polluting and the envionrmental damage. And since government is corrupt, they face no consequences.
Monsanto Hid Decades Of Pollution
Heaven forbid someone make you feel guilty. Do you ever use paper towels when a rag would do? Do you take your own sacks to the grocery store? Do you always car pool when you can? Do you drive a gas efficient car? Do you take two minute showers? Do you water your lawn? Do you support golf courses (they are one of the worst offenders)? Do you turn off the light when you leave the room? Do you turn off the TV when not really watching it? Do you reuse bags? Do you reuse aluminum foil? Do you reuse plastic cups? Do you always use up left over food? Do you keep the A/C set at 78 degrees or above in the summer? Do you keep the temperature set at 68 degrees or cooler in the winter? I could go on and on - you get the point
Nobody can MAKE you feel guilty regardless of what tactics they may use. You either feel guilty or you don't. It's your choice.
Even the green companies out there can be some of the most dishonest corporations out there. They wouldn't be successful if they weren't profitable. If guilt is working, than using that as a marketing tactic will be used until it doesn't and than the method changes. Just keep those eyes and ears open.
Go on YouTube and search for "The Story of Stuff." One of the issues that Annie Leonard addresses is the fact that corporations have grown to be larger than government. Everyone should see this video. It would start a revolution. Remember, "Reduce" and "Reuse" are the first two words in the mantra: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
Corporation greed is no excuse for the citizen to act like a hog. The citizen has a responsibility to others and that will never change. In this county we are lazy, greedy and grasping. It please us to have the children in other countries suffer and starve so we can have unreasonably cheap goods, TVs in every room, SUVs that guzzle fuel, too much food we don't eat, closets of clothes we don't wear, alcohol and drugs. We spit on every dime of tax we pay for the elderly and infirm and then vomit out our love for God. We create fake wars, slaughter innocents and continue to glut and whine, glut and whine, glut and whine.
PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS –
The federal government has proven itself untrustworthy with environmental policy by facilitating polluters, subsidizing logging in the National Forests, and instituting one-size-fits-all approaches that too often discriminate against those they are intended to help.
The key to sound environmental policy is respect for private property rights. The strict enforcement of property rights corrects environmental wrongs while increasing the cost of polluting.
In a free market, no one is allowed to pollute his neighbor's land, air, or water. If your property is being damaged, you have every right to sue the polluter, and government should protect that right. After paying damages, the polluter's production and sale costs rise, making it unprofitable to continue doing business the same way.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/environment
This is what economists call market failure. Property rights are not well defined in the case of clean air and water, so someone else can usurp your clean air and water wihout paying for it. Coase's theorem, that voluntary bargaining (eg lawsuits) can lead to efficient outcome only works if transactions costs are small. But they are not. It is hard to sue, and even harder to prove that the corporation caused your cancer. It could have happened anyway. So corporations end up polluting for free. So there is a role for government having pollution laws to restrict this bad activity.
Your case for the inefficiency of public lands is much stronger, however. Private firms who use public lands have no incentive to keep it up or to conserve the resource. With private ownership, they have such an incentive.
For intersting reading try: Coase, Ronald "A Problem of Social Cost" Journal of Law and Economics (1960). I believe for an academic article, this is actually readable, and it addresses this debate. This is available at most university libraries.
Speaking of suing, are you aware that your government dollars are being used to help the "big guys" (Big Pharma in particular) - in lawsuits against the drug companies where a teen killed himself and similar situations. I never knew they could use our tax dollars that way. What the heck are they doing involving themselves in our only remaining recourse to justice? I know there is a campaign going under the guise of "get rid of nuisance or frivolous lawsuits" and unfortunately it seems to be very successful. People aren't asking themselves nuisance by whose definition - a judge can already throw a case out if he deems it frivolous.
Personally, I have been thinking we need a movement to get the manufacturers to stop using permanent materials (plastic) for items we only use a few minutes or a short while, like water bottles, hamburger boxes, even plastic bags. They had me fooled for a long time that plastic bags took no more fuel to make than paper but they didn't mention (or know) that the ocean is filling up with plastic and killing birds and probably fish too. That leeching we worry about with our food is leeching into the ocean in a big way along with the mercury, etc. We can each stop buying those items, but there is little or no alternative so most of us won't stop buying. But if we contacted the companies en masse (one at a time), and then boycotted if necessary, then they would listen. If one company changed and they got the lion's share of business for being green - the others would soon follow. I nominate Coca Cola for first company.
federal government is nothing, they report to black government which arent one of our kind it consist of aliens/cia/nsa entities so all your why federal gov does what it does make no use, there is coming alien invasion along with 2012 planet x dont get involved in riots over food or gas they are waiting for this so they can put you in guantanamo without lawer to gas you
on't you find it amusingly ironic that the picture of the "all natural" girl has her sitting on a wall made with cement, one of higest chemical-containing construction materials? All of modern industrial society has been inundated and overwhelmed with "pollution for profit" items.
And yes, I agree there should be "Balance in all things"... Also, big business is the biggest polluter, but they react to the demand of the consumer. We can make a difference. Make your next car a 4-cylinder, and get rid of your cell phones. (Are you willing to make sacrifices like that for a better world?)
If green living interests you this link is a great read. Micahael Pollan is a journalist that puts out great articles on health, the industrialization of food... and most recently, green living. You might recognize him as the author of "The Omnivore's Dillemma" and "In Defense of Food".
www.nytimes.com/.../20wwln-lede-t.html
Thanks Bryson -- that's a great article. I loved "The Omnivore's Dilemma" and need to get my hands on a copy of "In Defense of Food." (Right now I'm too busy reading "The Vegetable Gardener's Bible" by Edward C. Smith, and getting very inspired!)
I like the gist of this article - individual responsibility and action. That is what we can all do. I'm not into blaming gov't, corporations or attempting forced sterilization of the populace!! Oh, my, that just makes it easier for me to chew on my feed lot beef while talking on my cell phone and drinking my 4th cup of cheap Bolivian coffee. It isn't my fault, so I have no responsibility, so why try to act "green?"
I think the point of the article was to show us we can EACH take INDIVIDUAL responsibility for our effect on the world around us. We can make simple accommodations that will impact our impact on the world. That is the point. Do we make responsible choices?
Some of what we do at our house:
1. No clothes drying with electricity - except in extreme cases (rain for 2 weeks can make you resort to drying a load of jeans in the dryer). We use a clothes line, or do laundry before bed and hang it on racks in the house.
2. Wood stove - highly efficient, multi-tasking, Pioneer Maid stove designed and built by the Amish in Canada. They get paid a fair price, we get renewable energy. (Not renewable in some areas mind you, but the trees grow fast and are in constant need of thinning on our 80+ acres) The stove doesn't just heat the house. It also heats our hot water, humidifies the house, AND cooks our meals. All for a few pieces of wood daily that needed to be thinned to keep our luscious forest vibrant.
3. Lights out - brightness up! Lights don't need to be on if the windows are large enough and efficient, the wall colors are bright and reflective, and the ceiling is NON-textured, semi-gloss white. We use little electricity in our 2200 sq ft house. Gives me a few kilowatts to spare for a computer and internet - one of our electrical splurges. Oh, and NO CFL mercury laden bulbs. Just incandescents that rarely need to be used.
4. Vehicles, the right vehicle for the right job. Yes, that is a Suburban you see in our yard!