» Site Navigation |
|
|
03-01-2007, 08:08 PM
|
#11
|
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,203
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
That had to be one of the more asinine position pieces I've read in a while.
On 1, it's the antithesis of true conservatism. It's why a lot of catholics are democrat--because they believe there's some obligation to the community that conservatives don't wish to impose. Unless, of course, conservatives now are becoming communitarians.
On 2, all that is is providing incentives for people to engage in conduct they otherwise wouldn't. BP and Shell pursue alternative energy because there are subsidies to do so, or because they see a market. If the latter, what needs to be done? If the former, well, other than massive pork, when were R's in favor of subsidies?
On 3, see 2.
So, he talks all nice, but what it comes down to is this: If the free market provides incentives to protect the environment, then people will. If the market does not, then they should do it out of the goodness of their heart. Well, it's pretty clear only Al Gore does things out of the goodness of his heart, so that's not a very viable solution.
|
There's triangulation... That gibberish was hexagonalization. Crap - incoherent semantic noodling with no conclusion.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:36 PM.