Another reason to vote Liberal (as if Stephen Harper isn't the best one...)
(...and he looks like he's always wearing lipstick)
Canada can get rich by going green: Dion
This is a CBC.ca news story covering a speech by new Liberal party leader Stephane Dion about his views on how to deal with climate change. First hint: it does not include running away from the problem. Second hint: no hippy tree hugging, pie-in-the-sky Green party nonsense. The solution is to use tax incentives and penalties to force Canada into dealing with environmental problems in house as efficiently as possible. We need to catch up to the likes of Sweden and Germany. If all goes well, we can become a world leader in clean technologies and get rich in the process by selling off the products of our ingenuity.
I first heard this viewpoint expressed at an Earth Day summit, hosted by David Suzuki, that I attended way back in 2000. Since then, I've only had this view reinforced: People are lazy, and the only way people are going to clean up is if it pays to do so. And as the greenhouse gas crisis gets worse, it will only pay off more in the future.
Who gets rich: the leaders or the followers?
Labels: environment, politics
Decreed by King Aardvark @ 3:10 p.m.
3 Comments
3 Comments:
Tax incentives and penalties may very well work, but unless they are complemented by a government which is more responsive to the people and a people that are actually concerned about the environment, then the major polluters will get the loopholes and kickbacks they need in order to keep contributing to potentially disastrous climate change.
And I don't think it's productive to use the term "tree hugging". There are only a few wackos out there who actually think that trees cry when they are cut down, but by using the term you familiarize its everyday use, and that term is what major polluters rely on to slander the entire environmental movement.
I hope you set an example for your brash southern neighbors.
Delta, I do agree with your comment about the "tree hugger" terminology. I am refering to those few wackos, and, though I have no proof, I do get that vibe from some Green party people. It somewhat bothers me. I want my environmental policies to be governed by sound science rather than kooks who claim they feel the pain of the plants, etc.
And as you say, having a government that really buys in to the environment, rather than going through the motions, is truly the key thing.
Anyway, as long as the Conservatives don't feel pressure, no environmental changes will occur. So no examples will be set anytime soon. From some recent studies I'd heard about, Canada is doing a rather shabby job about the environment. In large part, because we have such a big, empty country, we feel we have environment to spare. We've also got relatively cheap energy, so we aren't really pushing that hard to change.
As for setting an example myself, I must admit I could do better. Not paying directly for my own utilities has made me somewhat lazy, and I have been known to enjoy expensive european automobiles with big engines a little too much. But I try. I recycle as much as my community programs will allow, my wife and I have worked out an efficient way to use one car only on the way to work, we don't use the clothes drier, and I'm a cheap bastard, so I don't buy very many useless goods.
Post a Comment
<< Home