conserving the environment should be the individual's duty and not the government's responsibility.?

Question

do u oppose or agree? state down points. give some links if you have something related. thanks so much!

Answer 1

If we want to survive as a race it would seem to be everyone's duty. We and future generations need an environment that's livable. I can't think of a better, more evident point than the need for place we humans can live.

Answer 2

Personally, I believe the govt should not regulate personal or commercial conduct, except for crimes that harm people or destroy property. That's basically the libertarian mindset.

After a certain point, harm to the environment is no different than direct harm to people and property. So, in such cases, the govt should prevent one group of people from harming another.

That's where the line gets fuzzy -- where harm to the environment is the same as battery or vandalism, and where it's just a matter of improper interference in business.

Answer 3

I disagree. Clearly too many people are not willing to take steps to conserve our environment. If that were the case, then global warming wouldn't continue to increase:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2005/ann/global-blended-temp-pg.gif

Climate scientists have concluded that if we don't start significantly reducing our greenhouse gas emissions within the next decade, it may be too late to avoid the worst consequences of global warming. There's no way that we can make these reductions by relying on individuals to take action. We need governments to take large scale action to make these reductions possible.

Answer 4

I'm a libertarian. I personally believe governments shouldn't enforce anything. Peer pressure should enforce conserving the environment. And it works, since Global Warming was brought to the attention, we've significantly reduced our emissions.