10-04-2009, 04:03 PM
Wouldn't it be nice, yes, if people would start seeing the problem as it is, namely their own.
Why talk about incentives for consumers to trick them into doing the right things, when we ourselves are those consumers? Do we really need to deceive ourselves? And why would ecological damageing industries be punished, if we can simply decide not to use the products those make?
Here is where the principles of 'free market' might actually work better as more socialist approaches (which I usually prefer). Consumers have the power to decide which producers are succesful. All they need to do is think about what they buy. Seems a small effort to me, if you really want to 'save' the earth.
The implications of population growth and urbanization for climate change
"This paper considers the implications of population growth and urbanization for climate change. It emphasizes that it is not the growth in (urban or rural) populations that drives the growth in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but rather, the growth in consumers and in their levels of consumption."
Why talk about incentives for consumers to trick them into doing the right things, when we ourselves are those consumers? Do we really need to deceive ourselves? And why would ecological damageing industries be punished, if we can simply decide not to use the products those make?
Here is where the principles of 'free market' might actually work better as more socialist approaches (which I usually prefer). Consumers have the power to decide which producers are succesful. All they need to do is think about what they buy. Seems a small effort to me, if you really want to 'save' the earth.
The implications of population growth and urbanization for climate change
"This paper considers the implications of population growth and urbanization for climate change. It emphasizes that it is not the growth in (urban or rural) populations that drives the growth in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but rather, the growth in consumers and in their levels of consumption."