http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=663&tstamp=200705
it seems like most countries are more concerned about balance of trade policies than in protecting the environment. governments tend to operate to favor whoever is in power. we need new models. in the west we raise interest rates as a means of slowing the economy and thus combating inflation; yet, the principle argument against an energy tax is that it would be a drag on the economy. we should use energy tax policy in the same way that we use interest rates. why not keep interest rates permanently low and raise energy taxes on industry when the economy becomes overheated instead? unfortunately, it is not realistic to expect enough people to conserve on their own without punitive incentives. nor is it realistic to expect government to resist the influence of the corporate lobbies. eventually we may succeed in slowing down the rate of increase in greenhouse gasses after the damage is irrevocable. then nature may reach a new equilibrium and life will adapt. "think of it as evolution in action". the costs and repercussions of reducing habits using energy from an economy based on planned obsolescence to one based on limits and an environmentally friendly policy would be far less disruptive to our planet. when the rest of the world starts to consume at our conspicuous level then the consequence will be extreme collapse, unless means are found to implement cleaner technology and less waste. i agree that we need to conserve energy and and reduce our use of non-renewable sources of energy if society is to become sustainable. countries like china and india can lead the way by not emulating the west. china with its central government has the power to develop new approaches for energy, communication, transportation, distribution, consumption, education, agriculture and industrialization in general if they are willing to abandon the capitalistic model. countries like cuba have been forced to rely on organic farming and herbal medicines because of the embargo. in new zealand it is is illegal to use pesticides. their meat animals are not injected with steroids, anti-biotics or hormone, but they do damage the ecology with their grazing. reducing meat consumption by half would make an enormous difference. the scandinavian countries use their resources to benefit all of society rather than a select few so better models do exist. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Get your own web address. Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/?p=BESTDEAL _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
