G. Chad Snyder wrote:
>
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2002, Matt Schalit wrote:
>
>>Yes, that's a first year economics point of view that's valid. People
>>could argue that Nike shoes are better than others. People could also
>>argue that buying Nike shoes supports the poor treatment of children
>>in other countries. People could argue that Mitsubishi VCRs are the
>>best in their price range, but buying those would mean supporting a
>>company that destroys more rain forest in South America than any
>>other. Products made in America are required to conform to certain
>>social taxes and constraints. We attempt to harm ourselves and our
>>environment less than other countries do.
>
>
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Try again. Kodak is NY State's number one polluter
> for something like 12 years in a row.
>
> -Chad
Thanks for pointing that out. I took a look here:
http://www.epa.gov/tri/tridata/tri98/state/NewYork.pdf
and found what you were refering to on the last page
that showed they released over 6 million pounds of pollutants.
Do you have any reference to what Fuji releases?
What if Fuji was a bigger polluter?
What do you know about Taiyo Yuden?
Regards,
Matthew
_______________________________________________
etree.org etree mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://mail.etree.org/mailman/listinfo/etree
Need help? Ask <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
