Mikes post suggests that there may be a genetic element to caring for nature. I am not so sure about that, though I guess it might be possible. As for the cultural background, well, how many children end up behaving as their parents would wish? Overall, I suspect the larger material culture has more influence over attitudes to Nature than either the local family culture or genetics.
On another front, we should realize that governments everywhere appear to fear population and cutlural shrinkage far more than they do population growth. Afterall, as the baby boomers work their way up the poulation pyramid (like a rat being digested by a boa constrictor), the world will age. And as we age we retire, buy less, probably pay fewer taxes and become, on average, more dependent. hence the various government schemes that have been floated to encourage people to have offspring. Ciaou Andy Quoting Mike Marsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > All of the people who believed that they could help to save the planet > by not having babies lived their life span and died. The rest of the > world's population went ahead and had babies. As the genetic (and > cultural) lines of those believers in birth control perished, the human > population grew even faster. > > Mike Marsh > --------- > Matheus Carvalho wrote: > > ... to reduce her CO2 footprint. > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=495495&in_page_id=1879 >
