zen Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 Tibarn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibarn Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 Nice sentiment, but it's not only "shareholders" who deserve blame... You could send all the shareholders of large oil companies to Siberian gulags and burn their companies to the ground, but it's not going to save the planet. Every individual on the planet has a responsibility, to varying degrees. It's easy to blame faceless stockholders. It's harder to blame people who think it's their birthright to consume anything and everything, nonstop until they die, or people who think the planet was made as a hedonistic playground for them before death. JourneyMan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted August 5, 2017 Author Share Posted August 5, 2017 17 hours ago, Tibarn said: Every individual on the planet has a responsibility, to varying degrees. Absolutely. The message is about how ppl overlook long term, at times irrecoverable, losses to gain short term, at times petty, gains Tibarn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted August 5, 2017 Author Share Posted August 5, 2017 (edited) Applying this to Ind, the annual cost of repairing / reversing the damages caused to the environment is estimated to be 6% of the GDP The govt can be seen as the management, citizens as the shareholders, where: * Short term gains are economic development, poverty reduction, etc. * Long term loses: environmental degradation The country can reframe its problems. Poverty, for e.g. is relative. Poverty reduction drives at the expense of other things could lead to a situation which could be worse than stsying poor, for e.g. if everyone needs to wear gas masks on the roads and use special equipment to drink water The problem can be reframed as "creating acceptable living standards for everyone", and shifting focus to a) protecting and preserving the planet b) seeing healthcare and education as a fundamental right c) building a system where other living beings are respected and seen to have rights too d) controling population growth e) etc Being poor is not necessarily bad. Not everyone has to have a car. Today's rich could be tomorrow's poor. We can afford to have economic ups and downs. But neglecting environment is criminal. A healthy environment should be considered as the legacy that is passed from one generation to the next With the population burden, Ind cannot afford to simply ape the west to develop itself. It would need to innovate green and sustainable models Edited August 5, 2017 by zen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted December 25, 2018 Author Share Posted December 25, 2018 a nice thought for 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts