Okay, we're in harmony maybe on the pollution issue in general, but I seem to be far closer to "shut it all down and let the world re-order itself" than you are.
I've got money in the markets, and if the economy tanks, the corporations I have stock in will suffer mightily, and anyone in my position took a hefty IRA hit with the present crisis. And though my holdings have recovered a goodly portion of the losses I took last year, I know that it's all an illusion that's easily poofed -- ask any car dealer who's just been dropped by G.M. what their many-generations family business meant to them and what they thought they had for a secure future. I could be broke tomorrow if it all goes to hell. Yet, I say, let the BigCorp-cannot-fail concept be put to the proof. Layoff tens of millions, have bread lines around the block, have riots, have formerly-rich folks taking ten-story swan dives, have schools close, have pot holes the size of grizzly dens, have it all and get some serious national consciousness put on the goal of finding a truly sustainable lifestyle that doesn't harm the environment or force governments to go steal 1/3 of the world's oil reserves from Iraq at the cost of murdering one million women and children. It's all such a fucking mess, it would be a relief to shut it down and start all over with that disaster fresh in everyone's mind. The world simply cannot sustain an American lifestyle for everyone without the skies going to black, the oceans to a mucky ooze, and the dirt to a toxic combo that's as yucky to plants as gum under a theater seat. Yeah, we had our American fun, and no one else gets to do that, and that's not fair, but that's the bottom line: starting now we need to face a future in which some folks just don't have a job -- maybe for a lifetime, and what are we going to do about that? Are we going to continue to fuck over the Earth in order for everyone to have a chance to have a new car every two years? What're our values? -- a question no culture asks if it's not forced to. Obama's trying to keep the Titanic from sinking, and we all still think he's got a shot at it, but why? We're addicted to our luxuries and that attachment skews our POVs until we'd rather believe in Obama than face the fears he's facing and see that we're bereft of solutions. Frankly, when gas went to $4.00, it was a wonderful hit on our group consciousness. Suddenly it paid to not buy anything or go anywhere, and even though gas went back down to under two bucks, we all rather liked tightening our belts and putting off major purchases. It was so nice to see everyone taking a step back from consumerism. Thank you overly greedy BigOil! You showed us that we could at least survive not going on a bigass vacation, and, that much of our spending was on luxuries disguised as must-haves. As for global warming, if it's true, sooner or later, we're going to have yet another bad year with four major hurricanes hitting the US coasts. Give us another Katrina, and I think everyone will convert to the global warming dogma. I can wait until then. Truth be told, shame on us for even having to debate the issue. If we'd all been good citizens, if Congress had been vigilant instead of bought off, the pollution issue would be merely about how much of a fine we should impose on someone horking a loogie on the public sidewalk. Long long, so long ago, we knew the trouble we were brewing. Shit, the first monkey to throw a rock had a monkey next to him go "WTF are you doing Bongo? Don't you see where this will end up?" It's all the fault of women of course. If they'd stamped their feet and shook their curls back in the Stone Age, tribal warfare would never have evolved into National Tribes Warring. And if they'd said, "No Honey, this old cave is good enough," then Korackaghga wouldn't have had to kill extra mammoths to get the ivory to carve into trinkets to trade with the Mordits across the river for their oh-so-hep cave entrance curtains. I'm just sayin'! Edg --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon <mdixon.6...@...> wrote: > > Edg, forgive me for not going point to point with you on your reply. But I > think you have missed my original point that I was trying to make. I'm not > against cleaning up or preventing pollution. The United States has spent > enormous amounts of money to do just that and will continue and it shows. > Countries that are currently rising up out of the third world have not, yet. > They are simply trying to rise out of their poverty and I would think one day > they will all have the time and money to think about reducing the pollution > they create. We can't do it all nor should we. We could spend our entire GDP > year after year and not get it done and you want universal healthcare to > boot? Where is the money going to come from to pay for all this? No profits > for businesses or investors, whats the point of being in business or > investing your money? Think before you kill that goose that lays the golden > eggs. > > --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > > > From: Duveyoung <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 6:42 PM > > > > > > > > > Mike, > > If we focus on cleaning up pollution but don't do anything about how that > pollution is created, that's half-assed, right? > > The cost of cleaning up needs to be factored into pricing. Right now > corporations make profit by not paying for the cost-to-society of their > products. If we paid the true cost of maintaining our highways via gas taxes, > we'd be paying, what?, $10/gallon? Maybe. But BigOil doesn't have to pay for > road upkeep or the hospital bills of those who are dying from asthma. > > If we put a carbon tax on stuff, it makes the corporations have to find ways > to stop pollution. What alternate method do you suggest? > > And, your portrayal of America being so much better off than 3rd world > nations on the garbage issue is hardly a useful comparison. While India etc. > have massive garbage in the streets, America makes that pale when we compare > India's pollution to our toxic dumps and what we put into the ocean as an > industrial nation. Our production of truly toxic materials is to Indian > garbage as nukes are to bullets. > > It is the insanity of the consumer feeding frenzy that drives most of this. I > drive an eleven year old car even though I can afford a new one every year. I > don't need a new car to symbolize anything to the world, ya see? But the > whole world is quite unable to resist the "new, improved, better, faster" > line of products that add nothing new except newness to folks who already > have older products that do the trick. Keep up with the Jones or you're a > lower-class citizen...like that. > > Consider how little of a carbon imprint anyone really has to create to > sustain a simple lifestyle, and then consider the typical expenditures of the > typical person-with- recreational- capital. Going into a lesser state of > industrialization just makes sense, but the marketing forces extant are > powerful shapers of consumer consciousness. The American Dream isn't a home > and a chicken in every pot, it's several mansions, servants, air-conditioned > garages for their fleet of cars, and restaurant sized kitchens with freezers > filled with selected cuts from Angus steers. > > 2/3rds of the world survives on a bowl of rice a day. Shame on us. Shame on > the pollution. Shame on murderous blind corporate industry. > > Edg > > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon <mdixon.6569@ ...> wrote: > > > > Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? > > How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is > > many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because > > these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their > > streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants > > to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy > > water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do > > whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of > > preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished > > here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries > > mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up > > pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our > > civilization and economies. > > > > --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung <no_re...@yahoogroup s.com> wrote: > > > > > > From: Duveyoung <no_re...@yahoogroup s.com> > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming > > To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com > > Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 4:14 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike, > > > > Okay, I'll just say it yet again: it's not about the warming, it's about > > the pollution. > > > > If the warming concept is wrong, doesn't matter, addressing the warming > > concept entails addressing the pollution concept. I mean, what's not > > understood about, say, acid-rain? What's not understood about the hole in > > the ozone layer? What's not understood about 30,000 toxic dump sites > > leaching their poisons into the American water supply? What's not > > understood about 25% of L..A. smog is Chinese soot? What's not understood > > about that Texas sized garbage pile in the ocean? > > > > If we try to control "global warming," we have to be targeting pollution. > > > > If we have to suffer the fact that profiteers will find ways to suck at the > > public tit when we try to address pollution, so be it, we'll always have > > bastards like that finding niches. > > > > Morally, I see no difference between the Japanese whale killers and the > > Chinese smoke stacks. No difference between the torturers in Guantanamo and > > the American cigarette manufacturers. No difference between the Navy's > > underwater sonar "sound bombs that make whales' ears actually bleed" and > > the use of Agent Orange. And on and on. > > > > If we wrote up a precise plan to stop global warming, it would be virtually > > identical with the plan to stop pollution. > > > > To waste time blathering about if or if not the warming concept is valid is > > like letting the whalers keep harpooning while they do everything they can > > to keep the debate going lest it stop and they are forbidden to hunt any > > whale for scientific reasons. > > > > The debate about warming effectively delays the start of work on pollution. > > > > That's what you're doing Mike. You're helping profiteers with their killing > > the world, face it. > > > > Edg > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon <mdixon.6569@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > No Vaj, it's not something I've *realized* or believe. What I do believe > > > is, that the* man made global warming* issue is nothing more than a power > > > grab by politicians. > > > > > > --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Vaj <vajradhatu@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Vaj <vajradhatu@ ...> > > > Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming > > > To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com > > > Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 3:20 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shemp, notice how Vaj is trying to marginalize you, the same, as if you > > > were a holocaust denier. Vaj, really, more and more scientists are > > > jumping off the man made global warming band wagon as they take a look at > > > the studies and question the political motivations involved. A tanked > > > economy isn't going to be helpful for cleaning up our environment or > > > providing funding for scientific research on anything. > > > > > > Of course you do realize, since we have now entered Extinction-6, one of > > > the major extinction phases of sentient life on this planet, that Global > > > Climate Change will, in effect, make the Holocaust of WW II look like a > > > blip on the screen of loss of human and sentient life? That's not in any > > > way meant to trivialize the Holocaust, it's just to put into perspective > > > what the right-wing blue memers are in fact denying, all for a quick, > > > short-sighted buck. > > > > > > > > > BTW, I am not a supporter of cap and trade legislation. Personally I'd > > > like to see a Green marketplace based on American technology, creating > > > jobs and solutions, all assisted through tax incentives to consumers, > > > manufacturers and entrepreneurs. > > > > > >
