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

2007-01-17 01:16:33 · 12 answers · asked by rhorho 2 in Politics & Government Politics

and if bush did take an IQ test would he actually be an idiot, this is reflective of his supporters.bush and this attitude will be the downfall human race GREED-RULE-FORCE

2007-01-17 01:48:33 · update #1

12 answers

It is a myth that environmental concerns cost money. There is actually huge money to be made being on the cutting edge of green technologies. Being able to sell and recycle products with an earth friendly approach is where many countries and economies are headed.

There is not enough public concern in the USA over the environment. Generally the population is wrapped up in abortion and gay rights, and other issues of morality. The government Will echo those concerns in order to gain votes.

However case in point, how many smog days does a city like Los Angelas have? I am a resident of Toronto, last year we had 34. This may not seem like a lot, however it is responsible for a number of hospitalization and even deaths in those with compromised respiratory systems. There has been an increase in Asthma, a potentially fatal lung disease as well as certain carcinomas. Many of which are attributed directly to the air we breath.

It is up to the people to make the environment a concern. In Canada elections are lost and won over issues of the environment. Canada still maintains a strong economy even with putting money into environmental concerns.

granted Canada's current administration is very soft on environmental concerns. They have been consistently losing steam in the polls and will most likely not survive the next election. It is up to you the people to make environment a priority.

This isn't our planet to destroy we are just borrowing it from future generations.

2007-01-17 01:32:47 · answer #1 · answered by smedrik 7 · 1 2

Why should they? People aren't going to give up driving to work, keeping warm, and all the rest of the creature comforts because of something that might, I repeat might happen a hunderd or thousand years from now.

Now the problem is terrorism. Besides contrary IMHO environmentalists fail to realise the Mother Earth is one tough mother. She can correct anything that happens over time short of the Sun going Nova.

Sure this is projected to be the warmest year on record. But how far back do the records go? They don't even go back to before the Little Ice Age. Mother Earth goers through cycles. Imagine you are in the middle of the last Ice Age and you have the technology we have now that says the earth is going to get warmer. Do you panic and say OHMIGAWD!? Civilization as we know it will be wiped out in a thousand years. The sea levels will rise so high much of the land we now live on will be under water. the Wooly Mammoth, Short Nosed Bear, and Saber Tooth Tiger will go extinct. How are we going to get across from Asia to North American without the land bridge? What are we going to do?

The problem is we humans think too short term. If we die out, no biggie. Something will come along to replace us. Anyone see a dinosaur lately? But their descendants are all around us. If we go the way of the Dodo bird something WILL take our place.

There is nothing like I said before that Mother Earth cannot repair over time. We-- You and I are just bit players in the whole scheme of things.

2007-01-17 01:51:31 · answer #2 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0 0

This administrations attention is almost solely locked onto the war in Iraq and all the problems that is causing on a day to day basis. There must be little time left for anything else.
Another impediment may be Bush's position and relations with the petroleum industry which could be impacted in major ways by a serious effort to stop 'global warming' for instance.

2007-01-17 01:37:48 · answer #3 · answered by Nightstalker1967 4 · 1 1

If by addressing environmental issues you mean foisting more unfair standards onto the business sector and eroding personal property rights in a government land-grab, it'll never happen. If you think that the Bush administration should buy into Al Gore's eco-hysteria, that'll never happen either. The Bush administration advocates responsible stewardship of the planet, not a knee-jerk reaction to the psuedo-scientific rants of the left.

2007-01-17 01:24:51 · answer #4 · answered by krustykrabtrainee 5 · 4 1

They are, they are also weighing out the costs of getting you that environmental nirvana today VS a little later in the week. this is extremely expensive. Let me ask you. would you care about cleaner air today if you knew you couldn't afford the electric bill? The costs are going to be passed along to you, make no mistake on that.

2007-01-17 01:22:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Hey don't wait for the government to do their part I just hope you are doing your part to save the environment walking or bicycling to work or school using only reusable packaging, well are you?

2007-01-17 01:44:17 · answer #6 · answered by Ynot! 6 · 0 0

It's not a top priority. I think the war is most important as far as issues go with this administration

2007-01-17 01:20:03 · answer #7 · answered by Lisa V 3 · 0 2

Because Global Warming is a non issue.

2007-01-17 01:26:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Can you show me one place in the consitution where it says that the federal government should be dealing with THE ENVIRONMENT.

fck you lib

2007-01-17 01:45:56 · answer #9 · answered by kent j 3 · 0 1

environmental issues cost money, and the bottom line is that people care a whole lot more about money then saving the environment.

2007-01-17 01:22:45 · answer #10 · answered by NeonLoveChicken 3 · 1 4

fedest.com, questions and answers