Re: united governments of planet earth

Boppo wrote:

On Jan 10, 11:09 am, "Jay Linn"
environmental impact of a Hummer is less than that of a Prius,
counting the impact of manufacturing and disposing of the car as well
as the pollution created during the car's operational lifetime

Discredited nonsense which gets regularly trotted out as 'fact',
Evidence Boppo?

[Removed "evidence" of extended process that can be done with anything.
Some of it is worth concern, but is mainly bogus. Yes, present day battery
technology isn't completely clean, but neither is fossil fuel technology.]

In contrast, Hummers just use a lot of gas and a lot of iron, but
little else. Oil will last far longer than many elements, and can be
made by other methods anyway. Iron is not rare by any measure. That is
my case for "less environmental impact."

Total BS, if you extended out the nastiness of oil refining we could make
fair comparison.


[Removed more anti-governmental ranting and pro-business crap.]

I strongly suggest that you not venture into the territory of arguing
that capitalist corporations are worse environmental stewards than
governments are. Nah, I changed my mind. I *dare* you to go there.
Do you feel lucky?

The EPA was set up to protect the environment and many corporations want
to kill it so that they can freely exploit the environment.

Let's see, you're a tree hugger. So you must like trees. Maybe you
love trees. (I won't ask.)

Sure, I "love" trees. They give out oxygen and I give out carbon dioxide,
it's a symbiotic relationship, but purely platonic. I think we need to
make sure the balance of plant life matches the animal biomass is
maintained.

Who is the better custodian of trees? The National Park Service or
any horrible, reviled capitalist timber company? For starters, the
hated timber companies actually *see economic value* in trees and it
is *in their financial interest* for the trees to be numerous,
healthy, and well-managed.

You are making assumptions and trying to put words into my mouth that I
did not say, nor ever implied. I don't hate private business or the
government. It is bad policies I hate, regardless of who does it. I worked
for the US Forest Service, so I did get to see what went on from the
inside. I am also a land owner and I have talked to many other land owners
that have dealt with pulp wood/timber companies. So, this is an area that
I do have some empirical knowledge and not just some theoretical
free-market philosophical BS, honed at some college bar.

Yes, they cut them down from time to time
when wood is needed, but they replant, and in a manner that maximizes
the future value of their assets, namely, the forests that they own
and manage. Compare that in any way you care to with the forest
service, which at worst suppressed *all* small fires in the mistaken
belief it was the best thing to do, leading to the accumulation of
tinder needed to create the unstoppable inferno of 1988

Yes, this was when I was in the US Forest Service and I went out to Oregon
to fight fires that year. I remember flying over Yellowstone and other
places on the way out and seeing forest fires. Not doing control burns is
a bad practice that has mostly been abandoned. Even then, the US Forest
Service in the east did control burns as a matter of course, but out west
they didn't see the danger of not doing them.

Most people don't realize that the US Forest Service and the National Park
Service are not the same thing. National Park lands and US Forestry lands
are completely different, too. Personally, I think the majority of
Forestry lands should be converted to Park lands and the US Forest Service
should be disbanded, or their mission statement be changed. Some of their
land could go back to your precious private sector again. Let the timber
companies pay taxes on them and get the government out of subsidizing
their business.

Timber companies do own some of their own land, but the tax payers get
ripped off by private companies buying the timber rights for far less than
they are worth on US government land. The reason timber companies do
replant and practice BMT (Best Management Techniques) is because of
governmental regulations, which they try their darndest to avoid. 95±% are
common sense and good, in my opinion. 5±% is bureaucratic BS, but that is
to be expected. Nothing is perfect. Even with these regulations,
practically every land owner I know has been screwed over by pulp
wood/timber companies. They come in, make a mess, and try to pay much less
than the timber is worth. As a land owner, I'd like to see more safeguards
for me. I want my fair share of the profits and not have to get stuck with
cleaning up the mess they leave behind.

Now: Are casinos socialist?

I wasn't dodging this question, I just don't understand it. No, I don't
think of them as "socialist," do you?

I don't buy into your basic premise: government = bad and private
sector/free market = good

Both are entirely capable of doing good and doing bad. You can list bad
government practices and policies as long as you like. Most of them I
would totally agree with, but that doesn't mean that I think everything
should be turned over to the private sector. I can easily match your list
with atrocities of big business/corporations.

In many ways government and big business are in a symbiotic relationship,
too. The government wants a strong economy and much of it's functions are
there to assure economic growth. There probably isn't a department in
government that doesn't have an equal and opposite department with the
complete opposite goals in mind.

Ideally, the US government is an arm of the American people, just like on
here, some people are consumed with only with economic concerns and
totally ignore humanity, and others are more reasonable. So, that is what
the government is, too. The so-called "Free Market" is not free and it
needs reasonable restrains.

Dave Altman

--
----== posted via www.jugglingdb.com ==----
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Rainbow Lawyer / Representation
    ... The creation of an operating plan is the proper function of our ... public land. ... caring for our forest create and implement an operating plan. ... The government and the process has never ever been flawless whether we ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • Re: Rainbow Lawyer / Representation
    ... public land. ... caring for our forest create and implement an operating plan. ... hope the the government would engage in good faith discussion. ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • Re: Rainbow Lawyer / Representation
    ... The creation of an operating plan is the proper function of our ... public land. ... caring for our forest create and implement an operating plan. ... The government and the process has never ever been flawless whether we ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • Re: REPOST: Nichols brief
    ... In theory, under the regs, anyone in the forest at any time ... Government as to how it defined Group and was told "anyone that was in ... ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE COURT ... Defendant-Appellants are all members of Group 10. ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • A trip into Indias rebel-held territory
    ... government can't stamp out ... This land has been occupied. ... Mr. Purusiti has title to five acres outside the village of Bikrampur, ...
    (soc.culture.pakistan)