Minimus Dickus wrote: >> I am in favour of paying, say Brazil, for not deforesting it's rain >> forest. It is one of the few remaining lungs of the planet. Even a >> simpleton can understand that we need breathable air and that it's >> vegetables that allow that to happen. On the other side Brazil has every >> right to exploit it's natural resources (just as your country did and >> does), so it's only natural to pay them for the air (and weather >> patterns) they produce. >> >> > > Vaska dear: > > Great, then pay us not to drive our SUVs. Don't force us to stop > driving them AND have to pay you some arbitrarily obnoxious sum > because we did. > No dear, it's the other way round. Let's see if I can put it sufficiently easy for you. Brazil also has to pay. The BALANCE of what Brazil has to pay for it's SUVs and what it is owed for saving the forest is what the rest of the world owes Brazil. In your case, if all you do is destroy the environment and nothing in favour of it, then you'll have to pay (as will any other country in your position, don't play "Oh! poor me!" bullshit).
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
