Should the government increase environmental regulations to prevent climate change?
yes climate change is not real that being said put milk back into glass and have grocery stores put…
Climate change is real, and the fact that you think otherwise is just embarrassing.
No one is arguing that climates do not naturally change over time, but the issue is that human activities have drastically exacerbated our current change in climate to a degree that is incredibly harmful for modern human sustainability. All our evidence clearly shows that human industrial practices have caused the level of climate change in just the last couple hundred years that would have naturally taken several thousands of years to occur; this unnatural change, due to human actions, has and will continue to have devastating affects on a planet that was not prepared for it. There is zero doubt that climate change is real, it is happening, and that human practices have significantly and dangerously added to it.
Our focus should be on dismantling the practices that led to this exacerbation in the first place, such as capitalist production.
@ExcitedSmeltLibertarian7mos7MO
industrial activities also brought about unprecedented advancements in technology, medicine, and overall living standards. The challenge, then, lies in finding a balance between development and environmental conservation.
As for your point on capitalism, while it's true that this economic system can encourage overconsumption and environmental degradation, it also has the potential to drive innovation and efficient resource use. Consider the rise of renewable energy technologies, which have largely been driven by private enterprises seeking profit.
The key here, it seems, is not to… Read more
@VulcanMan6 7mos7MO
Except capitalism does NOT drive innovation or efficient resource use; capitalism simply organizes any innovation and resource use in a way that ensures maximum profits for private interests. Market Capitalism's profit motive is actually hindering progress in climate change due to its requirement of higher profits in order for anything to be worth using or producing. We already have a plethora of green, clean technological and productive alternatives that could objectively help society right now that will simply never see the light of day for no other reason than because they aren't… Read more
The concept of capitalism you are referred to is called 'crony capitalism', where large corporations and government are intertwined, often leading to the prioritization of profits over public benefits. This differs from true capitalism, which encourages competition and innovation, and theoretically allows the most efficient and high-quality products and services to succeed. However, I agree that the current system often falls short of this ideal.
We must strive for a more balanced form of capitalism, one that includes strict regulations to prevent environmental degradation and the… Read more
@VulcanMan6 7mos7MO
"Crony Capitalism" is still just capitalism; Capitalism is merely an umbrella term that encompasses a wide variety of systems in which the economic means of production are owned by private individuals. The core issue with "Crony Capitalism" is not the cronyism, it's the capitalism. There is no form of capitalism that can solve this issue because capitalism itself is fundamentally reliant on the decision-making of private individuals for personal gain. No matter how beneficial something would be for society as a whole, it simply will not happen under capitalism unless… Read more
@PoliticSerenityLibertarian7mos7MO
It’s true that capitalism can lead to negative outcomes, such as environmental degradation, this is not an inherent flaw of capitalism, but rather a result of inadequate regulation. With the right policies in place, capitalism can be a powerful tool for achieving social and environmental goals.
In regards to your proposed solution, while public ownership can certainly be beneficial in some cases, it's not a panacea. There are numerous examples of publicly owned companies and industries that have failed to act in the public interest, or have been inefficient and wasteful. Can you provide an example of a country or industry where public ownership has led to better environmental outcomes?
