Are you against environmentalists? Why?
2006-12-20 03:55:55 · 12 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Against environmentalists? Where's the logic in that? I'd like to see economists' faces when they are huddling together for warmth in an old fallout shelter during the next ice age they caused by burning fossil fuels for 200 years.
2006-12-20 04:04:15 · answer #1 · answered by Syreus 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think everyone would say land and resource conservatrion is a good idea.
The issue is, as always, balance. How much is too much? How much is not enough? We try to balance the interest in preservation with other interests. If we just looked at preservation, we wouldn't have built a single new home in the last ten years. (Given all the suburban sprawl, maybe a good idea!) But we at least pay lip service to the idea of striking a balance.
The devil's in the details!!!
2006-12-20 04:35:22 · answer #2 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Land and resource conservation is a good idea.I'm pro environmentalists.
Not for the furry animals but for future generations of humans.Children,grandchildren,their children etcetera.I would like to see them grow up and be able to enjoy the earth like we do and not be forced to wear a gas mask when going outside or worse because we were too lazy and economically defensive to stop the destruction of nature.
Because the bottem line in this is,nature doesn't need us humans,we need nature.
2006-12-20 04:31:10 · answer #3 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Land and resource conservation is a good idea.
The bad idea is to let Washington bureaucrats decide that private property should be conserved.
One of the principles upon which America was founded is the concept of private property. When government steps in and takes property from Americans in the name of conservation then we have bad government and bad conservation.
2006-12-20 04:17:30 · answer #4 · answered by Zee HatMan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Land and resource conservation has little to do with sustaining the earth; we can tear this place apart and do whatever we want to it and the earth will be just fine billions of years from now. It's about sustaining humanity; we rely on this earth for our existence. It's a question of whether or not we want the human race to continue.
2006-12-20 04:04:04 · answer #5 · answered by Jordan H 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Its good idea, we should really respect the earth on which we live. If its not global warming it will be something else. At some point in the future we are going to have to get into deep space exploration and colonization.
2006-12-20 04:00:52 · answer #6 · answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I am for maximum productive output at a sustainable level.
Many environmentalists go too far in that they want to protect too much.
Many capitalists go too far in that they want to exploit too much without considering long-term implications.
2006-12-20 04:02:13 · answer #7 · answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you. Most people are only concerned about their own immediate needs & pleasures without thinking of the repercussions of their actions. Some actually get angry if you point out to them that what they are doing will harm the environment
2016-05-23 00:10:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, bad for profit. Profit before people! Corporatist rule!
2006-12-20 04:02:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. But if you have eyes only for business, yes.
2006-12-20 04:05:07 · answer #10 · answered by Mysterio 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋