Posted by alexandra_k on February 2, 2006, at 17:47:02
In reply to Re: okay so maybe i'm missing something... » alexandra_k, posted by James K on February 2, 2006, at 12:22:42
> ---I want to expand a little bit about what I meant about the solution being about money...
okay
> First off, many people who have much are not going to change what seems to be working just out of the goodness of their heart, or because it is right. That isn't just cynical on my part, I believe it's been proven time and time again.
yes. because... there is no accountability. i think i understand the rationale around the kinds of arguments you are thinking of. if we want people to work on not f*cking up the environment then we need to show them how it is in their own (fairly immediate) best interests. because otherwise... they simply won't do it.
i do have some degree of sympathy for this approach.
but i guess i also take something of a fairly hard line. IMO it is 'working around' a ego-centric world view. where it is considered perfectly acceptable to put oneself ahead of other people around the globe. where it is considered perfectly acceptable to put oneself ahead of future generations (including ones own decendents). if you really unpack the latter view... we are talking about how our children and our grandchildren and our great grandchildren and our great great grandchildren will be placed in the world. i personally think that if we can work towards expanding peoples minds and circle of care so that people appreciate that they are merely one person amongst millions and billions and trillions of others then this would have significant consequences for current business and also for the way in which we view ourselves as being related to the earth.
i think we need to change from an ego-centric world view to an eco-centric world view. human beings have a symbiotic relationship with plants (for example) and we need to maintain a healthy balance of that ultimately for ourselves, yes. because we have a symbiotic relationship with out environment. and our future generations will too. and to exploit the world. to bomb the world. to hunt species into extinction. to cut down the rainforests. to pollute the waters. we don't own the world. IMO we have a duty of care to it. we are best to think of it that way for the long term healthy survival of our species.
but really, who cares about any of that when it comes to my personal wealth and assets. people think that passing on money to future generations is the best thing you can do. but money... doesn't buy you happiness. you can have all the money in the world but be really rather unhappy being part of the rat race (i can be in that top 10% if only i work hard enough!) and the 'conspicuous consumption' that has so much waste associated with it and the money that buys you what? none of that matters when you have cancer because of the pollution. when you live in a city filled with smog.
how much money goes to the starwars project?
more than enough to provide a decent severance pay to each oil worker?
priorities...
> Pollution from farms and pigs and lawns runs into the river into the gulf creating economic problems for fishers and raising cost and safety of fish.
we have a similar issue with dairy farming. nitrogen fertaliser helps the grass grow. but the cow crap is full of nitrogen and that gets into the waterways and leads to 'dead' rivers and lakes. currently... they are going to tax the fertaliser. farmers pay more for it. they can get a cash back on the tax if they have some verification of fencing... 10 meters from waterways i do believe. but... that is a lot of land. and moving fences (and losing grazing land) is expensive.
> policies of impovrishment instead of legitimate economic incentive haven't worked well.
yes. because there is no accountability.
IMO... the UN needs control of troops so they can enforce UN policies. If the US really wanted to help... They should turn the troops over to the control of the UN when the troops are fighting on foreign soil. Ditto for allies. That way... It is about the UN stepping in and helping. That way... US economic takeover won't be seen as teh main motivation behind their involvement...
> We'll never eliminate hate or greed.there need to be consequences. maybe you can't eliminate it... but if there are consequences we can prevent the repetition of hateful and greedy acts from people in power. but there need to be consequences and accountability yes.
> I don't believe capitalism is the answer to everything, but selective thought out capitalism can help with the greed part of the equation.
by giving the message that greed is perfectly acceptable?
i think i hear what you are saying. my ideas are too radical... i just don't want to condone greed :-(
poster:alexandra_k
thread:605246
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20051121/msgs/605568.html