English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

25 answers

the world will give up on us before we give up on money it is the nature of people greed and selfishness

2006-08-06 07:14:59 · answer #1 · answered by kirstie t 2 · 1 0

Destruction to the environment is, in the scheme of things, a slow process. You don't see most of the consequences immediately... therefore, people still do things thinking to themselves "well, it's not THAT bad, so it won't be THAT big of an impact." Most of what all of us do today (purchasing the big SUV, not running an energy efficient home, using aerosol cans, littering, not disposing of chemicals properly, ranchers overgrazing and developing cesspools that contaminate the groundwater...) is not going to really present itself as a serious problem until our grandchildren are adults. And by then, a lot of the damage we've done will be irreparable.

That's why we still see trash on the side of the road or floating in the water. Even on an individual level, most people can't even make the self-disciplined decision to hold on to their trash or dispose of it in a receptical, even where money ISN'T involved.

Sadly, I don't think that the environment will become more important than money. Because, once the environment starts to become seriously depleted, there will be opportunists who will take advantage of the rarity of fresh air, fresh water and green vegetation.

I think that, sadly, sooner or later only the rich and elite will be able to afford those things. And their continual depletion will only increase their value... as if you could set a value on air. Water. Trees. So, it'll still be about money and, even MORE sadly, some people will probably intentionally destroy things in order to artificially lessen the supply to the demand... thereby guaranteeing increased profit. It's unfortunate to say that, but it happens now. It always has. So why should I think that that's going to change?

All I can do, at this point, is make a conscientious decision to live responsibly while I'm here on this planet, and to teach my children to respect their 'home' as well. I can share that belief with family and friends... but all I can do is hope they will follow my example.

Thanks for a thought provoking question.

2006-08-06 14:26:36 · answer #2 · answered by A Designer 4 · 0 0

Funnylady's got it -- there could come a point (I hope not to live long enough to see it) when the environment is despoiled to the point where we have to do something about it, not as a matter of continuing profit but rather a matter of continuing survival. When it becomes more and more difficult to live on our planet because the toxicity of the air and water, lack of space on which to build, loss of habitat and ecological diversity to even maintain the other organisms on this world that help to sustain us, then we will all have to turn to one another and work towards improving the state of our world and to preserve what little wild places and natural environments are left. By that time, of course, there will be few edible fish in the sea, there will be few other animals except livestock and cockroaches, and the air and water will be so toxic that we'll have to spend hundreds of dollars a day just for clean drinking water and filtered air that we can breathe. Until then, since we are by nature selfish and greedy, we will probably continue as we have been and only make minor changes to our standard practices, mostly as lip-service to the few wild-eyed environmentalists who insist we need to do something before it's too late. Sad, I know, but unfortunately, probably true. I hope I'm wrong.

2006-08-06 14:19:47 · answer #3 · answered by theyuks 4 · 1 0

mad mav it is a nice thought, but i don't see how not unless peoples attitude start to change which requires a whole new minds set being drilled into the developing minds of the kids today.
We all need the environment more than we need profits. if companies stuck to attempting to a modest profit margin and a fair wage for all, who realy needs a million pounds or dollars a year no one thats who.
if we all started accepting the fact that everyone wants the same basic things out of life then we could start to get half way to having both a decent environment and profitable companies.

the planet is as we all know eventually going to be consumed by the sun when in a few million or billion years the sun starts to burn out. so we have to look after it until then or we all face death of the entire planet resulting in death of all known life.

governments need to take action and stop the abusiv of our planet. give housholds a tax break to install every single home with solar panels and wind turbines. yes the outlay per home will be in the region of £20,000.00 about a thousand pounds a year resulting in the entire system needing to be replaced every 20 years. so that's every home having a £1000.00 per year fuel bill for up to 5kwh per hour for 24 hours 7 days per week with approximately. (if i recall the research i did in to this some months ago). however if every home had the features i list then we could have a cleaner safer planet by doing away with nuclear power plants infact we could rely on only a few fuel burning (burning of renewable energy such as dead wood from forests, old wooden boats etc to name but a couple of sources.
i could go on here.

to sum up without radical attitude changes in the way people think about the environment and lets face it with the current state of our streets people dropping litter for example, we are just decades if not centuries away from the environment becoming more important in everyones lives not just business and there profit margins.

2006-08-06 14:29:17 · answer #4 · answered by thebestnamesarealreadytaken0909 6 · 0 0

Unfortunately, I think this will only happen when the state of the environment has deteriorated so far that it impairs corporations from making money. Their money and politics are so closely married that getting effective environmental legislation to pass is almost impossible. The people who live and work in blighted areas don't have the resources to fight them.

Groups opposed to environmental legislation have also been extremely effective in painting a picture of environmental activists as dope-smoking, hipppie, emasculated freaks. I don't know where you live, but in my area of the country the people most involved in conservation and wildlife preservation are sportsmen - people here still supplement feeding their families from hunting and are extremely concerned about habitat and sustainable wildlife management. They are not tremendously vocal about it, though, because they seem afraid of being tarred with with "hippie environmentalist" brush. They won't call themselves environmentalists, but their interests are more closely tied to the land than are those of more vocal people who live in cities on the coasts.

The divide is artificial and fed by a P.R. campaign that characterizes people interested in having sustainable environments in a poor light. At a grassroots level, it would be my approach to work on that so that a solid base of people can make their voices heard in Washington.

And cashcobra, yes there are more environmental regulations than in the 1970's, but they are only effective if they are being enforced, which is the job of the executive branch of government. Enforcement in this area has been deplorable.

2006-08-06 14:20:09 · answer #5 · answered by Novice restauranteur 3 · 1 0

This happened a long long time ago. Just think of the snail darter (a useless tiny fish) that held up development of the Tellico Dam in Tennessee in 1977, the spotted owl that wrecked our logging economy in the Pacific Northwest, and other environmental issues that have stopped oil refineries, power stations, nuclear power stations, offshore oil wells, ANWR, shopping malls and housing developments from being built. The electric power shortage in California was brought to you courtesy of the enviro-wacko lobby and Sierra Club. You can't build anything anywhere without a permit, and with Luddite enviro-wackos gone mad virtually everywhere it's a wonder anything gets built and our economy continues to grow. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 has ruined our economy and increased the cost of virtually everything we buy with the insane need to file environmental impact statements for every tiny ditch dug in America.

2006-08-06 14:26:40 · answer #6 · answered by Answers1 6 · 0 0

Lying about the environment is almost as important as profit,

2006-08-06 14:16:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Hopefully someday we'll at least get to where the Environment is a concern alongside profit.

2006-08-06 14:13:16 · answer #8 · answered by Charles D 5 · 0 0

we better get something done because right now our ozone is depleting and thats not gonna be a problem for a while (we wont be effected by it) but our great great grandkids or something will. thats a huge factor that in my opinion we are overlooking. its a hole in the god damn ozone layer, the thing that protects the very life on this planet, its a bigger problem then we tend to address it as.But so long as the guys in office are getting money and as long as they wont be effected by it i dont think they care, so no i dont think that profit will be less then the environment people are far to greedy.

2006-08-06 14:16:04 · answer #9 · answered by anarchism is peace 1 · 0 0

We can only hope, before it is too late, because it is very hard to make a profit when the human race is dieing off.

2006-08-06 14:18:16 · answer #10 · answered by ceprn 6 · 0 0

Hope not! If that ever happens, the human race will be destroyed. Profit is the reason that we live good. Without profits, billions will starve and die from disease.

2006-08-06 14:15:07 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers