Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Human Environmental Impact: It's no Myth.
Allow me to get on a non-hockey rant as I go off on the topic of the environment. Inspired by a conversation with Wayne, our Southern correspondent.
The NHLPA recently signed an agreement with David Suzuki to go 'carbon neutral'. While I think carbon credits are merely a sham that allow people to feel guilt-free while polluting at the same time, it's definitely a good first step. It's about time that sports leagues starting noticing that the extensive travel comes at an environmental cost.
Now, there are those who claim that 'Global Warming' is a myth, CO2 is not a pollutant, and that humans really haven't damaged the environment all that much.
Sounds silly, doesn't it? Unfortunately, too many people seem to think this way, and that needs to change.
In the spirit of Glenn Beck (ugh), here is what I do know.
Yes, global warming and cooling is a naturally-occurring phenomenon, and this allows the 'deniers' to jump up and down and say, "See, it's not OUR fault". This is akin to saying breast implants aren't fake, because silicon is a natural element of our planet. Uh-huh.
So, stop using Global Warming, which is a very generic term, and think of terms of the overall pollution that humans generate. Oil spills and fish farms don't contribute to global warming, per se, but they certainly damage the environment painfully. (On another note, do NOT buy BC-grown farmed salmon. Kthx)
Do a little research and find out about the authors of these 'denier' studies. You will notice who funds their research. The Cato Institute is a big sponsor of such studies, and the oil companies are a BIG sponsor of the Cato Institute. None of the scientists who is a climate change denier is doing this on their lonesome because of 'good science'.
The fact is that we should NOT be using old technology for our automobiles. Why is that we can have cell phones that allow you to watch movies, and we've had exponential growth of technology in the computer industry, but we still use a combustible engine that was invented decades before we were born? Simply put, the gov't (taxes), oil companies, and car companies don't want us to switch. If somebody invents a cleaner technology, and many have, the cartel buys it up and locks it in a vault.
Occasionally, the cartel will let some new tech out of the bag, but won't put any effort into marketing the product, and wait for it to fail. Then, they can justify that 'nobody wants it', even though people do.
The movie Who Killed the Electric Car? has a great example of how people in California weren't even allowed to KEEP their new-tech vehicles because the car company wouldn't allow it.
Due to the taxes, capital cost, and high revenues, the Triad does not want us to have cleaner-burning fuels. All of their 'efforts' are simply PR bullshit that allows them to keep raping our environment while making huge profits. They'll hold out as long as possible as long as the general public remains apathetic and disinterested. People are too lazy to change their lifestyles, including YOU.
Let's face it, humans are a wasteful species, and create a lot of waste from their lifestyles. North Americans, especially, are the worst of the lot (I'm no exception). Think about what you consume and do on an average day. Think of how much packaging is required for your food and drink?
Fossil fuels? Plastic wrapping? eating food? Yes, those things require a lot of energy and resources, and then you have a lot of garbage left over. Think of the fuel that is needed to transport your milk, oranges, meats, and so on. The fact that anyone could claim that humans aren't environmentally damaging in their everyday lines is absolutely insane and delusional.
The worst argument is when the governments claims that being environmentally friendly will 'hurt the economy'. So, money, simply a tool for trade, is more important than having an inhabitable planet? Are humans really that greedy that they'll sacrifice the health of their environment for money? We know the answer, and it speaks to the human race's downfall. Just watch as your government does all it can to support the oil/car companies and stop any environmentally-friendly bills from being passed. Yet, all people talk about is the war in Iraq. Kinda shows you our priorities, eh?
Oh, kiddies, don't worry about the planet. Mother Nature will be just fine. It's been here millions of years before humans, and will be here millions of years after humans. It will adapt and survive.
No, you should be worried about humanity. Eventually, our species will help make the planet so unlivable that we'll eventually go extinct. The planet will simply watch as new life forms evolve, and probably be happy that it won't have to deal with being fucked around with all the time.
The NHLPA recently signed an agreement with David Suzuki to go 'carbon neutral'. While I think carbon credits are merely a sham that allow people to feel guilt-free while polluting at the same time, it's definitely a good first step. It's about time that sports leagues starting noticing that the extensive travel comes at an environmental cost.
Now, there are those who claim that 'Global Warming' is a myth, CO2 is not a pollutant, and that humans really haven't damaged the environment all that much.
Sounds silly, doesn't it? Unfortunately, too many people seem to think this way, and that needs to change.
In the spirit of Glenn Beck (ugh), here is what I do know.
So, stop using Global Warming, which is a very generic term, and think of terms of the overall pollution that humans generate. Oil spills and fish farms don't contribute to global warming, per se, but they certainly damage the environment painfully. (On another note, do NOT buy BC-grown farmed salmon. Kthx)
Occasionally, the cartel will let some new tech out of the bag, but won't put any effort into marketing the product, and wait for it to fail. Then, they can justify that 'nobody wants it', even though people do.
The movie Who Killed the Electric Car? has a great example of how people in California weren't even allowed to KEEP their new-tech vehicles because the car company wouldn't allow it.
Due to the taxes, capital cost, and high revenues, the Triad does not want us to have cleaner-burning fuels. All of their 'efforts' are simply PR bullshit that allows them to keep raping our environment while making huge profits. They'll hold out as long as possible as long as the general public remains apathetic and disinterested. People are too lazy to change their lifestyles, including YOU.
Fossil fuels? Plastic wrapping? eating food? Yes, those things require a lot of energy and resources, and then you have a lot of garbage left over. Think of the fuel that is needed to transport your milk, oranges, meats, and so on. The fact that anyone could claim that humans aren't environmentally damaging in their everyday lines is absolutely insane and delusional.
Oh, kiddies, don't worry about the planet. Mother Nature will be just fine. It's been here millions of years before humans, and will be here millions of years after humans. It will adapt and survive.
No, you should be worried about humanity. Eventually, our species will help make the planet so unlivable that we'll eventually go extinct. The planet will simply watch as new life forms evolve, and probably be happy that it won't have to deal with being fucked around with all the time.
Labels: environment, Global Warming, Off-topic
Comments:
<< Home
*applause*
The planet is a largely self-cleaning system, sure--but that capacity only goes so far, and humanity's waste and environmental gaffes are far outstripping the planet's self-cleaning capacity.
So no, global warming isn't a myth. It's a natural cycle that's being accelerated by the actions of the dominant lifeform on the planet, and being accelerated beyond the planet's capacity to cope.
The planet is a largely self-cleaning system, sure--but that capacity only goes so far, and humanity's waste and environmental gaffes are far outstripping the planet's self-cleaning capacity.
So no, global warming isn't a myth. It's a natural cycle that's being accelerated by the actions of the dominant lifeform on the planet, and being accelerated beyond the planet's capacity to cope.
One problem on the individual scale is lack of options.
Transit? Not always an option. Buses suck, are overcrowded, late, and not frequent enough. Skytrain is good, but if where you`re going has no station, its the slubmobiles for ya.
Alas, I have yet been able to convince my bank to let me take my work home. :p
Transit? Not always an option. Buses suck, are overcrowded, late, and not frequent enough. Skytrain is good, but if where you`re going has no station, its the slubmobiles for ya.
Alas, I have yet been able to convince my bank to let me take my work home. :p
# posted by 
: 11:25 am
: 11:25 am
Simply put, the gov't (taxes), oil companies, and car companies don't want us to switch. If somebody invents a cleaner technology, and many have, the cartel buys it up and locks it in a vault.
'Cartels' can't buy anything without a willing seller.
Emerging technology innovators (sellers) often sell because the barriers to starting & growing their own business are getting harder by the minute (in what used to be capitalist countries like the US and Canada).
Existing companies (auto, oil, or any other industry) can't do a damn thing about any emerging technology unless they can purchase the power of force that only government provides. The laws & regulations that favor big established firms (and their already-amortized wasteful technologies) in supressing newcomers doesn't happen under true capitalism. It happens under mixed economies that the public-school-educated often mistake for capitalist economies. When government influence and favors can be purchased, don't be shocked when rich white male CEOs line up to purchase them.
If you want emerging technologies to emerge, you should advocate true capitalism: a government that does nothing but (a) police to protect you from your neighbor, (b) military to protect you from foreign agression, and (c) the law courts to settle peaceful disputes. Everything else is done by persuassion & voluntary trade/contract.
No, you should be worried about humanity. Eventually, our species will help make the planet so unlivable that we'll eventually go extinct. The planet will simply watch as new life forms evolve, and probably be happy that it won't have to deal with being fucked around with all the time.
Since you appear to view humanity as a sloppy, miserable, incorrigibly corrupt species, isn't it in the planets' best interest to see us wipe ourselves out as soon as possible, so the planet can begin its' renewal -- presumably nourishing more planet-friendly life forms? i.e., we should pollute more, faster.
'Cartels' can't buy anything without a willing seller.
Emerging technology innovators (sellers) often sell because the barriers to starting & growing their own business are getting harder by the minute (in what used to be capitalist countries like the US and Canada).
Existing companies (auto, oil, or any other industry) can't do a damn thing about any emerging technology unless they can purchase the power of force that only government provides. The laws & regulations that favor big established firms (and their already-amortized wasteful technologies) in supressing newcomers doesn't happen under true capitalism. It happens under mixed economies that the public-school-educated often mistake for capitalist economies. When government influence and favors can be purchased, don't be shocked when rich white male CEOs line up to purchase them.
If you want emerging technologies to emerge, you should advocate true capitalism: a government that does nothing but (a) police to protect you from your neighbor, (b) military to protect you from foreign agression, and (c) the law courts to settle peaceful disputes. Everything else is done by persuassion & voluntary trade/contract.
No, you should be worried about humanity. Eventually, our species will help make the planet so unlivable that we'll eventually go extinct. The planet will simply watch as new life forms evolve, and probably be happy that it won't have to deal with being fucked around with all the time.
Since you appear to view humanity as a sloppy, miserable, incorrigibly corrupt species, isn't it in the planets' best interest to see us wipe ourselves out as soon as possible, so the planet can begin its' renewal -- presumably nourishing more planet-friendly life forms? i.e., we should pollute more, faster.
# posted by : 10:59 pm
: 10:59 pm
1) One would be sadly mistaken to believe this is a scientific issue. It is a political one. Probably best left on a political blog. (We created one on this very subject) http://fauxreligion416.blogspot.com/
2) It is untrue that only the oil companies have a monetary stake in this. Ask Mr. Gore how rich (richer) he became with his science fiction movie that is being pawned off as fact. All the money pouring in from left wing groups to bolster the anti-capitalism undertones of this issue
3) Fact is, its total hubris to believe that we can change the climate to any great degree. The Earth has been and continues to change its climate. We understand so very little about how this process works that any proclamation that we are the cause is inane. The same people can't forecast accurately the weather 3 days from now! Let alone a decade, century or more!
4) Who is to say that the climate of the 1900's/today is the ideal climate? Perhaps a degree or two warmer will suit us better? Also, weren't the same scientists/environmental whackos calling for an ice age a mere 30 years ago?? Yes, even scientists who aren't paid by the evil oil companies have a dissenting opinion on this subject.
5) Not all scientists are in agreement that there is global warming and if there is some minor fluctuations going on recently that man is the root cause. Yet these folks are shouted down by the zealots of the new religion, the environmental religion
5) Today, anyone who speaks out of turn on this issue is shunned. Not unlike one would treat an infidel who doesn't have the same beliefs/religeon of the majority.
Note: No money was recieved from Exxon for this post! LOL
2) It is untrue that only the oil companies have a monetary stake in this. Ask Mr. Gore how rich (richer) he became with his science fiction movie that is being pawned off as fact. All the money pouring in from left wing groups to bolster the anti-capitalism undertones of this issue
3) Fact is, its total hubris to believe that we can change the climate to any great degree. The Earth has been and continues to change its climate. We understand so very little about how this process works that any proclamation that we are the cause is inane. The same people can't forecast accurately the weather 3 days from now! Let alone a decade, century or more!
4) Who is to say that the climate of the 1900's/today is the ideal climate? Perhaps a degree or two warmer will suit us better? Also, weren't the same scientists/environmental whackos calling for an ice age a mere 30 years ago?? Yes, even scientists who aren't paid by the evil oil companies have a dissenting opinion on this subject.
5) Not all scientists are in agreement that there is global warming and if there is some minor fluctuations going on recently that man is the root cause. Yet these folks are shouted down by the zealots of the new religion, the environmental religion
5) Today, anyone who speaks out of turn on this issue is shunned. Not unlike one would treat an infidel who doesn't have the same beliefs/religeon of the majority.
Note: No money was recieved from Exxon for this post! LOL
1. Yes, the government does have a bigger role in this than most people think. They allow lobbyists and corporations to have their way and damage the environment to make the almighty buck. Unfortunately, people are unconcerned about this topic, and prefer to talk about other things. Corporates make money, which makes people better off, yada yada yada
2. I prefer to talk less about the temperature/climate and more about the overall environmental impact. There are so many damaging activities that do not, or may not, actually make the planet warmer. As I mentioned above, fish farms, oil spills... then there are things like pig farms in South Carolina poisoning the water supply, the massive hole in the ozone, rapidly increasing cancer rates, etc... that we should be worrying about
3. People sell their new technology b/c they get little support from governments, the high capital costs involved, and the fact that they can make a huge mint. I theorize that car companies have produced much of their own new tech, but will hold it back until absolutely necessary.
4. Fact is, its total hubris to believe that we can change the climate to any great degree.
I would say the opposite. Look at the atomic bomb (made many years ago), strip mines, clear-cut logging, fish farming, and other activities that can drastically change the local environment. Man-made viruses, terminator seeds, genetically modified foods. oh, Humans can definitely fux0r up the environment just fine.
I really am not a big fan of Al Gore (hypocrite) or his bandwagon, nor have I seen his movie, but I am glad that he opened up people's eyes to the fact that humans DO damage the environment and people ought to make some lifestyle changes. Now, if only Gore could stop flying private jets around everywhere and tone down the energy use on his mansion, I might respect him a little more.
2. I prefer to talk less about the temperature/climate and more about the overall environmental impact. There are so many damaging activities that do not, or may not, actually make the planet warmer. As I mentioned above, fish farms, oil spills... then there are things like pig farms in South Carolina poisoning the water supply, the massive hole in the ozone, rapidly increasing cancer rates, etc... that we should be worrying about
3. People sell their new technology b/c they get little support from governments, the high capital costs involved, and the fact that they can make a huge mint. I theorize that car companies have produced much of their own new tech, but will hold it back until absolutely necessary.
4. Fact is, its total hubris to believe that we can change the climate to any great degree.
I would say the opposite. Look at the atomic bomb (made many years ago), strip mines, clear-cut logging, fish farming, and other activities that can drastically change the local environment. Man-made viruses, terminator seeds, genetically modified foods. oh, Humans can definitely fux0r up the environment just fine.
I really am not a big fan of Al Gore (hypocrite) or his bandwagon, nor have I seen his movie, but I am glad that he opened up people's eyes to the fact that humans DO damage the environment and people ought to make some lifestyle changes. Now, if only Gore could stop flying private jets around everywhere and tone down the energy use on his mansion, I might respect him a little more.
I have my own doubts about whether or not global warming is significantly impacted by humans, as the globe was warming up from the last ice age for awhile (like a few hundred thousand years) and we only just have very accurate measurements to record changes with.
However, it is clear that humans are putting a big fat footprint on the Earth what with clear cutting, dumping trash everywhere, polluting, producing acid rain, driving a variety of species extinct due to habitat loss, poisoning the environment and even just hunting em down.
Global warming or no, I think most can agree that humans need lessen their impact. The only problem is that while using energy-smart lightbulbs and lowering the heat on your house might help a bit, its a drop in the ocean compared to what capitalistic businesses and governments can do.
However, it is clear that humans are putting a big fat footprint on the Earth what with clear cutting, dumping trash everywhere, polluting, producing acid rain, driving a variety of species extinct due to habitat loss, poisoning the environment and even just hunting em down.
Global warming or no, I think most can agree that humans need lessen their impact. The only problem is that while using energy-smart lightbulbs and lowering the heat on your house might help a bit, its a drop in the ocean compared to what capitalistic businesses and governments can do.
# posted by : 8:58 am
: 8:58 am
People sell their new technology b/c they get little support from governments, ...
The only support they need from government is to eliminate unfair tax and regulatory laws that favor big businesses over small start-ups.
... I theorize that car companies have produced much of their own new tech, but will hold it back until absolutely necessary.
If Ford has a better widget that can help them crush GM/Toyota/Honda, they introduce it in a heartbeat.
In one breath people will claim the 'big companies' are witholding technology they could use to beat the competition, then in the next breath they accuse those companies of being greedy bastards. The two assertions are contradictory. Which is it?
The only support they need from government is to eliminate unfair tax and regulatory laws that favor big businesses over small start-ups.
... I theorize that car companies have produced much of their own new tech, but will hold it back until absolutely necessary.
If Ford has a better widget that can help them crush GM/Toyota/Honda, they introduce it in a heartbeat.
In one breath people will claim the 'big companies' are witholding technology they could use to beat the competition, then in the next breath they accuse those companies of being greedy bastards. The two assertions are contradictory. Which is it?
# posted by : 11:00 am
: 11:00 am
"... I theorize that car companies have produced much of their own new tech, but will hold it back until absolutely necessary.
If Ford has a better widget that can help them crush GM/Toyota/Honda, they introduce it in a heartbeat."
LOL, if you guys can remember in the 1990's, ford had comercials on TV anouncing cars and pick up trucks running on a clean burning fuel and having clean water as the emissions coming out of the vehicule... What ever happened to it ? they ran that commercial for over 2 years and then nothing. Were they politely ask to wait ? or were they silenced somehow by the gas companies. Who knows, all i know is that those vehicules never made it out to the public light.
If Ford has a better widget that can help them crush GM/Toyota/Honda, they introduce it in a heartbeat."
LOL, if you guys can remember in the 1990's, ford had comercials on TV anouncing cars and pick up trucks running on a clean burning fuel and having clean water as the emissions coming out of the vehicule... What ever happened to it ? they ran that commercial for over 2 years and then nothing. Were they politely ask to wait ? or were they silenced somehow by the gas companies. Who knows, all i know is that those vehicules never made it out to the public light.
# posted by : 6:11 pm
: 6:11 pm
I'm sorry, but if Al Gore opened up anyone's eyes at any time in his career, it happened when he ran for president in 2000. He is a callow, vain, self serving charlatan and nothing more. Ever heard of the Green Party...that same Green Party that Gore and his supporters (Michael Moore) tried to muscle out of the 2000 elections? Remember how he and his slobbering band of Democrat sycophants blamed Ralph Nader for handing the election to Bush? And he gets a Nobel prize for his movie? Bullshit, indeed.
Spend some time reading up on the ecology movement of the 70's and you'll see that the environmental movement been riding in the back of the Democrat bus for a very long time.
And while you're at it, think about India and China? Who is going to tell them to stop growing their polluting economies. Canada? Denmark? Some other group of white, wealthy (in comparison) European elitists?
Climate science is more art than science, and more conjecture than fact. The conservatives have as much right to be skeptical about this "awakening" as the old school environmentalists who've been quietly effecting change for decades...
Spend some time reading up on the ecology movement of the 70's and you'll see that the environmental movement been riding in the back of the Democrat bus for a very long time.
And while you're at it, think about India and China? Who is going to tell them to stop growing their polluting economies. Canada? Denmark? Some other group of white, wealthy (in comparison) European elitists?
Climate science is more art than science, and more conjecture than fact. The conservatives have as much right to be skeptical about this "awakening" as the old school environmentalists who've been quietly effecting change for decades...
# posted by : 8:30 pm
: 8:30 pm
HR,
Al Gore - the guy who actually SHOULD have won the 2000 election, if not for massive fraud in Florida. Yeah ... what he did in the US political arena is not relevant.
India, China - How about the Western world refuse to buy stuff from China until they get their act together? We can certainly live without lead-tainted toys, and perhaps manufacture it ourselves.
Aww, too expensive? Well, the Western world is infamous for buying way too much crap that it doesn't need and can't truly afford (hello, credit crunch)
the 'awakening' ... yes, how dare we awake the masses to the fact that there is widespead ecological damage to this planet thanks to us humans.
The one thing that I just don't get, or maybe I do, is how you can sit there and just trying to deny that Humans do not have a massive effect on the Earth.
Instead, people bring up Al Bore, biased studies, etc ... to 'prove' that climate change 'doesn't exist', yet, do not acknowledge that, yeah, the people here fux0r up the place pretty good.
So, I guess living a comfortble white picket fence lifestyle is just too important for you that it doesn't matter how much you poison the Earth to do so. The 'conservatives' certainly don't want to conserve the environment as much as they do their own consumerism.
Al Gore - the guy who actually SHOULD have won the 2000 election, if not for massive fraud in Florida. Yeah ... what he did in the US political arena is not relevant.
India, China - How about the Western world refuse to buy stuff from China until they get their act together? We can certainly live without lead-tainted toys, and perhaps manufacture it ourselves.
Aww, too expensive? Well, the Western world is infamous for buying way too much crap that it doesn't need and can't truly afford (hello, credit crunch)
the 'awakening' ... yes, how dare we awake the masses to the fact that there is widespead ecological damage to this planet thanks to us humans.
The one thing that I just don't get, or maybe I do, is how you can sit there and just trying to deny that Humans do not have a massive effect on the Earth.
Instead, people bring up Al Bore, biased studies, etc ... to 'prove' that climate change 'doesn't exist', yet, do not acknowledge that, yeah, the people here fux0r up the place pretty good.
So, I guess living a comfortble white picket fence lifestyle is just too important for you that it doesn't matter how much you poison the Earth to do so. The 'conservatives' certainly don't want to conserve the environment as much as they do their own consumerism.
I had a better reply to you at the Sin Bin, which is where you referenced this blog.
Al Gore IS the issue with me. I've been an environmentalist long before that opportunist took center stage. I'll reiterate what I said before about him...he blamed Nader supporters for losing the 2000 election. These are people rooted in the old ecology movement who long ago gave up on the Democrat party for their piss poor record on the environment. Let that sink in.
But Gore makes a movie heavy on hysteria and hyperbole and light on the facts, and his slashing power grab is rewarded with the Nobel Peace Prize. Chilling. Nauseating.
As I said in my post to you at the Sin Bin, there are lots of us who consider ourselves environmentalists as well as skeptics. Save me the rhetoric about rampant consumerism. While we agree it's a problem, it isn't the reason why China and India are throwing filth into the environment. Short of a military takeover, that dynamic won't change significantly until their people value a clean environment as much people in Western nations do. The USA may be the world's biggest polluter, but it also has some of the most stringent anti-pollution laws on the planet. It also has some of the world's poorest people...the beneficiaries of cheap, imported consumer goods from India & China...and the people most likely to vote for a Democrat.
Al Gore IS the issue with me. I've been an environmentalist long before that opportunist took center stage. I'll reiterate what I said before about him...he blamed Nader supporters for losing the 2000 election. These are people rooted in the old ecology movement who long ago gave up on the Democrat party for their piss poor record on the environment. Let that sink in.
But Gore makes a movie heavy on hysteria and hyperbole and light on the facts, and his slashing power grab is rewarded with the Nobel Peace Prize. Chilling. Nauseating.
As I said in my post to you at the Sin Bin, there are lots of us who consider ourselves environmentalists as well as skeptics. Save me the rhetoric about rampant consumerism. While we agree it's a problem, it isn't the reason why China and India are throwing filth into the environment. Short of a military takeover, that dynamic won't change significantly until their people value a clean environment as much people in Western nations do. The USA may be the world's biggest polluter, but it also has some of the most stringent anti-pollution laws on the planet. It also has some of the world's poorest people...the beneficiaries of cheap, imported consumer goods from India & China...and the people most likely to vote for a Democrat.
# posted by : 8:49 am
: 8:49 am
What beingbobbyorr said (in both posts) and fauxrumours. They've got a firm grasp of things.
If there's profit in something, it will be invented, marketed, and sold.
When an ostensible magic bullet fails to succeed, look to government as the culprit, not the saviour.
Established industries lobby lawmakers to game the system in favor of the established monopoly, duopoly, oligopoly, cartel, etc.
Needing to finance multi-million-dollar re-election campaigns, these lawmakers are more than happy to bend consumers and even the planet over the metaphorical barrel if it helps keep themselves at the trough.
Lawmaker pass oppressive copyright and trademark legislation that mitigates against the introduction of revolutionary new products.
Governments erect trade barriers in the name of protecting a particular constituency even if it prevents helpful or cheaper products into the marketplace.
And on it goes.
Looking to a lifetime leech like Al Gore (Canada's version is Stephen Lewis) to solve anything is like letting your dog mediate a fight between your two cats. Things are only going to get worse. Much worse.
Post a Comment
If there's profit in something, it will be invented, marketed, and sold.
When an ostensible magic bullet fails to succeed, look to government as the culprit, not the saviour.
Established industries lobby lawmakers to game the system in favor of the established monopoly, duopoly, oligopoly, cartel, etc.
Needing to finance multi-million-dollar re-election campaigns, these lawmakers are more than happy to bend consumers and even the planet over the metaphorical barrel if it helps keep themselves at the trough.
Lawmaker pass oppressive copyright and trademark legislation that mitigates against the introduction of revolutionary new products.
Governments erect trade barriers in the name of protecting a particular constituency even if it prevents helpful or cheaper products into the marketplace.
And on it goes.
Looking to a lifetime leech like Al Gore (Canada's version is Stephen Lewis) to solve anything is like letting your dog mediate a fight between your two cats. Things are only going to get worse. Much worse.
<< Home
