Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearcat
What's the debate though?
It's either real, and we should take care of the environment, or it's not, so..... **** the environment?
And even if the impact down the road is overblown... how could taking care of pollution be a bad thing?  |
How about we start with encouraging people to do the right thing instead of taxing them into compliance?
I'm NOT a "denier" as I was IMMEDIATELY branded, simply because I had the nerve to disagree.
I do my part. I use a fuel-efficient vehicle (I live in the country, an electric car for me is simply not feasible) and burn bio-fuels as much as possible. I grow and raise animals organically. I recycle not only plastics, metal and glass but I recycle offal and plant material for mulch and fertilizer and I recycle rainwater as well.
I personally don't exploit the environment for personal gain because it's MORALLY WRONG. How about that answer?
My problem is that the guy that lives down the road from me isn't ME. He has a different living situation and some of my choices won't work for him. Furthermore, the young couple that lives the other direction simply CANNOT AFFORD to make the changes I've made, they're working 2 jobs each already.
And therein lies my problem - the "climate change" movement chooses the earth over people. Most of the legislation that's been proposed or put in place puts an unequal burden on the people in the US that can afford it least. The party that is supposedly for the "poor" is championing climate policy that is HURTING THE POOR.
Meanwhile, countries like India and China are pouring pollutants into the atmosphere at an alarming rate and we're doing nothing about it. We'd rather punish our own citizens than, you know, actually stop climate change.