Global Warming: What do you think? What do you know?

[Ray McCooney]

Most of my E30's have been hybrids. They burn a combination of gas and oil.

[uofom3]

We Americans are wasteful. You know you can't deny it.

I like to stay pretty neutral so I can observe the facts that presented from both sides...

But, the more arguments that I see coming from the "Anti-Global Warming," crowd, the more suspicious I become that their interpretations of the data they find isn't to debunk global warming but instead are used to defend their comfortable American lifestyle.

Am I wrong?

Yeah, you are wrong in my personal case.

In reality, I do recycle paper and plastic bottles, my oils/fluids from the car, don't "rage" on the v8 everyday, buy mostly recycledproducts for school, keep most things off when not home, and try and take care of my stuff so I don't have to buy something else/use more resources.

I also advocate alternative energys such as hydro/wind/solar/wave/tidal power.

My whole issue comes in that these people are basically blowing the entire situation out of proportion, and are attempting to infring upon my liberty as a human being to make certain decisions about how I want to live my life. If I want to drive an SUV, and can afford the insurance/gas/maintenance - why the hell shouldn't I? If I want to drink bottled water because it's less likely to get my sick than drinking out of public drinking fountains - I should be able to do that as well.

We are a rather wasteful society - but just about every first-world society is. The reality is, it's not that we're blatantly wasteful and evil, it's that we're the first society in thei history of civilization that can really afford to be wasteful and thus we do it. The ancient Romans might not have recycled their water bottles if they didn't see any immediate impacts of not doing so, ya know? This isn't so much a justification as it is a truthful observation.

Finally, lets say it IS a justification for the "throw away" American lifestyle. So what? It's a free-fuckin-country. If I want to throw away something, I'm allowed to do it - it's freedom. When the government starts mandating/heavily regulating the stuff that provides us with the power to live our lives (not just oil...), as well as regulates how we use that power; freedom is taken away. Once one freedom is taken away, then what's next? Can't bear fire arms any more? Can't drive e30's on public roads? Pay a bodily carbon emissions fee for farting/breathing heavily? Crude examples, but you see my point.

It's kind of like people who don't understand that a tax on one good commodity is ultimately a tax on every good/commodity. For instance, if you don't smoke and say "YA! Tobacco tax to help fund education - that's a great idea! Stick it to those smokers!", and you generate that revenue, you'd think it's a great cause. Wrong. Now that good has a tax on it, and the government can find something else to tax. maybe this time they started taxing medium priced steaks at your local grocery store and you happen to be a hell of a carnivore. Now you say, "well wtf man? You just taxed cigs - why beef?" The answer? because you let them tax cigs - they now feel that they can tax anything else.

The most wasteful part of american society is government spending.

[Joey Link]

^ Amen

[rwh11385]

We are a rather wasteful society - but just about every first-world society is. The reality is, it's not that we're blatantly wasteful and evil, it's that we're the first society in thei history of civilization that can really afford to be wasteful and thus we do it. The ancient Romans might not have recycled their water bottles if they didn't see any immediate impacts of not doing so, ya know? This isn't so much a justification as it is a truthful observation.

Finally, lets say it IS a justification for the "throw away" American lifestyle. So what? It's a free-fuckin-country. If I want to throw away something, I'm allowed to do it - it's freedom. When the government starts mandating/heavily regulating the stuff that provides us with the power to live our lives (not just oil...), as well as regulates how we use that power; freedom is taken away. Once one freedom is taken away, then what's next? Can't bear fire arms any more? Can't drive e30's on public roads? Pay a bodily carbon emissions fee for farting/breathing heavily? Crude examples, but you see my point.

False. There's a lot of great countries in Europe and they do a lot more to do less wasteful things, and it's not a burden but rather a cultural care for doing such. People make a lot of negative choices out of laziness, not freedom, unless you support the freedom to be lazy. The changes sometimes are very small and could have a great impact overall, but people like to stick to the status quo out of stubbornness.

We do have freedom, but should we not also have responsibility?

[rwh11385]

A grand example is beer. Our beer is often sold in cans. Cans that typically are thrown in a dumpster. Besides the homeless guy who collects these from the dumpster and turns them in, we throw this away. Sure, crushing and recycling the cans would be a little more effort but we can't do this because we're free not to.

Even when it's glass, the bottles are tossed in the trash, or occasionally thrown at something.

In Germany, arguably a more social country and more concerned with the environment, even Pepsi bottles are given a deposit back when returned and waste is not created. Beer bottles are returned, cleaned, and refilled. Sure we'd have to develop "back-shipping" but it would not have to have as much creation of new bottles. Kegs are much more efficient at reducing waste, but create trouble for some. Beer is just one example I've seen in America that others in first-world countries have done better.

If we can live easy lives and throw things away after one use, we tend to do it. Maybe we can afford to do so, but not trying to make a difference in our lifestyle is somewhat arrogant. Ted, your response sounded like a spoiled brat saying "I don't have to, I don't wanna". And that's the image of Americans to some people in the world.

A few states may have more recycling efforts (Michigan with can deposits) but for many, we create tons of waste everyday that is not necessary.

[CorvallisBMW]

False. There's a lot of great countries in Europe and they do a lot more to do less wasteful things, and it's not a burden but rather a cultural care for doing such. People make a lot of negative choices out of laziness, not freedom, unless you support the freedom to be lazy. The changes sometimes are very small and could have a great impact overall, but people like to stick to the status quo out of stubbornness.

We do have freedom, but should we not also have responsibility?

Agreed. Your freedom to be wasteful ends when it hurts other people. It's like the calssic example: "I may have the freedom to swing my fist through the air, but that freedom stops at your face"

Case in point. About ten years ago when the beginning of the 'Big Dry' drought hit in Australia, the gov't mandated that all toilets be 'dual-flush', which use a smaller amount of water for 'number 1's' and a larger amount for 'number 2's'. To date, they estimate that it has saved over 10 GIGA liters of water. Now, did that regulation infringe upon your ability to take a shit? i think not. It's a perfect example of gov't taking necessary, responsible actions to protect the wellbeing of it's citizens. No liberty was trampled on, no one died from a lack of personal freedom and every single person in the whole country is better off because of it.

It's amazing that the same people who advocate being responsible for your own life (ie health insurance, etc) can't stand the idea of taking responsibility for your actions when it comes to the environment. Is personal responsibility really that selective?

[uofom3]

False. There's a lot of great countries in Europe and they do a lot more to do less wasteful things, and it's not a burden but rather a cultural care for doing such. People make a lot of negative choices out of laziness, not freedom, unless you support the freedom to be lazy. The changes sometimes are very small and could have a great impact overall, but people like to stick to the status quo out of stubbornness.

We do have freedom, but should we not also have responsibility?

I'm not saying that they don't do more, but I'm saying that I don't think you can say that other societies are not as wasteful by-in-large.

And I do support the freedom to be lazy; it's called choice. What, is the government supposed to make it illegal to be lazy an unemployed? Common. I'm not lazy in the least, but that doesn't mean that everyone else has to be as driven as I am.

Responsibility is a whole different matter. I recycle because it's the logical thing to do. That's why my parents recycle, my neighbors recycle, etc. I think by putting it into this societal "responsibility" is you imposing your beliefs on other people. Don't make it a right or wrong thing, make it a smart or stupid thing I guess is what I'm saying.

It's not smart to be wasteful from an eco/economic/etc. perspective. there are a LOT of reasons to NOT be wasteful - but who am I to impose my feelings about that on others? no one. And neither are you, or the government. by that logic, I'd tell people buying new Kia's to go buy e30's for 1/3 the price and get reasonable gas mileage and cheap transportation. I'd encourage families to not use disposable diapers for their children, but rather a cloth diaper from a diaper service. I'd suggest that people do more to care for their lawn so that it doesn't take as much water to keep healthy and green, etc.

Gasoline in cars is the least of our worries - lets get serious about alternative engergies for homes, more recycling, and better management of peoples "waste". The funny thing is, if you put it in dollars that people are wasting by being wasteful, I think you'd have a much better impact than talking about the environment. That would make it more tangible for the average joe, and would ultimately achieve the end of the helping the environment.

I don't want to destroy anything, but I'm not willing to impose my beliefs on others or get more government regulation to solve these problems.

[rwh11385]

Agreed. Your freedom to be wasteful ends when it hurts other people. It's like the calssic example: "I may have the freedom to swing my fist through the air, but that freedom stops at your face"

Case in point. About ten years ago when the beginning of the 'Big Dry' drought hit in Australia, the gov't mandated that all toilets be 'dual-flush', which use a smaller amount of water for 'number 1's' and a larger amount for 'number 2's'. To date, they estimate that it has saved over 10 GIGA liters of water. Now, did that regulation infringe upon your ability to take a shit? i think not. It's a perfect example of gov't taking necessary, responsible actions to protect the wellbeing of it's citizens. No liberty was trampled on, no one died from a lack of personal freedom and every single person in the whole country is better off because of it.

It's amazing that the same people who advocate being responsible for your own life (ie health insurance, etc) can't stand the idea of taking responsibility for your actions when it comes to the environment. Is personal responsibility really that selective?

Bingo. The 2 mode toilets were very common in Germany as well when I was there.

[rwh11385]

I'm not saying that they don't do more, but I'm saying that I don't think you can say that other societies are not as wasteful by-in-large.

And I do support the freedom to be lazy; it's called choice. What, is the government supposed to make it illegal to be lazy an unemployed? Common. I'm not lazy in the least, but that doesn't mean that everyone else has to be as driven as I am.

I don't want to destroy anything, but I'm not willing to impose my beliefs on others or get more government regulation to solve these problems.

Who said the government in needed to force people to be smarter with their wasteful behavior? I believe we need more programs that encourage positive choices, not punish bad ones. Incentives to make ecological-friendly decisions could help shift our culture, along with personal efforts.

I think that an effective society has people working to influence others to do the right thing. Simply sitting by while people be destruction is accepting it and by that, approving. We should have a fine line between influence and stepping upon people's rights, but asking your neighbor not to dump motor oil down the sewer is infringing on their rights to protect your environment. The same is true of other steps to motivate others to be wiser with their wastefulness.

No one can force others to do something, but we can at least make it clear that we care. The more people perceived to be willing to make a difference leads to more people willing to do so as well. A kin to peer pressure if more and more people are seen as making positive choices, then more people will accept that as standard than use and abuse.

The Bavarian brewers re-use bottles, and also give their waste product from brewing - the mash - to local farmers as it still contains some nutrients and is used for feed. No one forces them to do it, but rather it's a conscious effort to not waste.

[mrsleeve]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

So go live in one those more progressive countries. Enjoy the much higher taxation an govt regs on your life, on what you can and cant do.

[rwh11385]

Today Americans produce 227.1 million tons of waste per year – that’s 4.4 pounds of trash per person, more garbage per capita than any other country in the world.

[rwh11385]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

So go live in one those more progressive countries. Enjoy the much higher taxation an govt regs on your life, on what you can and cant do.

typical.

defense of status quo by saying live with it or leave.

[delfin]

typical.

defense of status quo by saying live with it or leave.

Go back to Soviet Union

[Ral]

Whoa, wait a minute fellas. I'm with heeter on this one to an extent. Trying to encourage the American populous is not a bad thing. There's ways to regulate and encourage more economical and healthier living without being overbearing/socialist. No one's entitled to the right to be wasteful/destructive, and many of these programs, if properly implemented, would be nearly transparent. I would propose a small fine, like a parking ticket, for items in the trash that are recyclable so long as the systems are put into place to accommodate recycling. (Don't be too rough on me, just pulled it out of my ass a second ago- I'm sure you could all poke holes in it, just saying things can be done that don't infringe on your liberty that will encourage people to take care of the environment.)

Also, the problem with "live with it or leave" is that nothing ever gets changed for the better. There's some (well- a lot) of people who will never be satisfied and always find something to complain about. And those people can go to Hell or France, whichever suits them more. But people pointing out what could improve the country don't fit into that category in my mind.

[rwh11385]

Go back to Soviet Union

Would you be one of the people in the day who still wanted slavery or women not to have a vote?

Social change is fundamental in civilizations to advance them. It's not communist to believe people should influence others in order to make a difference. Do you prefer anarchy then?