Should corporations and/or individuals be held accountable for environmental damage?

Question

4sanity: as a scientist who has been following the trend of climate change (I do not refer to it as global warming) for more than a decade, I respectfully disagree when you say that "politicians, not scientists" are raising the concern. The issue that climate is changing on a global scale is a known fact, not open for debate. My question was not geared towrds this issue, though. It most likely is already too late. Now we have to deal with the effects. My question comes down to resource allocation and responsibility. If a company destroys a fresh town's water souce in order to mine copper, should they be accountable for the reparations to the town? What if the profits are so marginal that the cost of clean-up is more than the company would make? Should a land-owner whose RV use pushes erosion into a major watershed be fined? It's his land, right? Or is it? Should we be doing cost-benefit analyses of our actions, prior to making them?

Answer 1

I definitely agree that environmental damage should be subject to sanctions. Almost everything that individuals or corporations do in the modern world though has an environmental impact which is why there are laws and regulations covering what is permissible, designed to limit harm to what is (for want of a better word) tolerable. Individuals and corporations are culpable if they transgress.

The question of greenhouse gas emissions is an interesting one as looking back plaintiffs may argue that we knew now (or should have known) that we were causing damage that would result in death and destruction and did little to curb our activities.

Answer 2

Global Warming is a trojan horse for Socialism, wake up Americans. Global warming is at the fore front because politicians found how to use a new platform to get re-elected. The world leaders use it because they found ways to make money at it. This is a made up problem just like Global Cooling in the 1970's. Wake up people. I agree we need to be more efficient with our resources, and we should fine and jail companies who are dumping into our rivers maliciously. I want to stop the raiforest destruction, but to say that global warming is a serious man made issue and we need to destroy the American economy and bow down to the rest of the world certainly does not float my boat. Follow the money on this one and you will see that it is all for political gain and grant money for those scientists who profit off of the government if global warming stays at the front of the issues. Look deep into the Keoto (sp?) Treaty, first of all they took jets to a non-central resort location. Not very environmentally concious. THen in the parameters of the treaty they have a clause that makes it so you can buy or sell polution credits. This is all about shifting wealth and breaking down the United States. This is painfully obvious, just look at peoples agenda. The earth's mean temperature has risen .6 degrees C in the past 125 years. Greenland's icecaps have gotten colder in the past 10 years. The Scientists who do not gain anything on their posisition will tell you that the earth has a natural progression and this is what we are seeing. The UN report is made up of POLITICIANS not a good spread of scientists. THere are as many or more scientists who believe that man in NOT the reason and it is over hyped, but their voice is not heard in the LIberal Mainstream Media. This issue is 99% political, and an attempt to make the USA a socialist nation, and eventually communisim. WAKE UP AMERICA, IT IS TIME TO BE AMERICANS. FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE. STOP THE LIES

Answer 3

If you consider that individuals hold stock shares of corporations, and are responsible for the board elections, I would have to say both. Nevertheless I think the corps should set an example by leadership, fist within the company and then to support public efforts.
Maybe give corps a tax break on profits, if they can prove they are willing to keep an environmental conscience in force.

Answer 4

I agree. If a CEO immediately shares interior the earnings while a company is worthwhile, then he could share interior the criminal accountability while a company is in dire straits. trouble-free as that. yet our gadget rewards the two success and failure for the wealthy. For the rest persons, we are seldom if ever rewarded. working occasion, in the process the Bush administration, GDP rose constantly each and each 3 hundred and sixty 5 days. meaning we as human beings produced extra. yet in the process an analogous time, genuine wages went down for the middle classification and skyrocketed for the wealthy a million%. So the middle classification replace into punished for producing extra and the wealthy have been rewarded.

Answer 5

Definitely. So many people & corporations seem to need the "stick or reward" type of discipline in order to do something that is correct & just common sense. Making every taxpayer pay to fix a private corporations' stupidity is just wrong.

Answer 6

all should be held accountable. one cannot just point fingers for environmental degradation. we are at any rate be held to account for our own trash. i guess passing the blame for visible and blatant desruction to corporations and individuals will eventually end up in our own backyards. while we may hold them "legally liable", we are more than "moral and social offenders" ourselves. we just have to start cleaning our own rooms

Answer 7

both should be accountable for this we all know what the problem is ,we the people own the businesses that cause the problems and work in them and use the products and make the garbage etc.........the circle

Answer 8

Any positively identifiable source should be held accountable.

Answer 9

Of course.

Answer 10

How should we punish you for your 'transgressions'? I do not know anyone who is not 'guilty' as some level.