Who are you and what have you done with SabanFan? :huh: This is the philosophy I advocate. When people say "we are destroying the planet", they really mean "we are endangering the human environment on the planet". Not planetary destruction.
you are? wonderful! that is smart. if you understand why the incentives for oil are bad you should be able to understand why the incentives for whatever you favor are also bad. cheers for prudence and pragmatism! jeers for words that have specific meaning. the post office exists because they have a government mandated monopoly (the only kind of monopoly). when abolitionists were "extreme", were they any less right?
in the future, because of economic development, the planet will be more friendly to humans than ever before. economic development is far more important than the environment. the amoutn of people dying because of poverty malnutrition and preventable disease right now is huge. that can be cured with economic and political development. that is a far larger and more immediate issue than your warming, which is basically a pressure valve for first world white guilt.
I'm sorry, I thought you might actually own a dictionary. No wonder you've been so confused. pru⋅dent [prood-nt] –adjective 1. wise or judicious in practical affairs; sagacious; discreet or circumspect. 2. careful in providing for the future; provident: a prudent decision. prag⋅mat⋅ic [prag-mat-ik] –adjective 1. of or pertaining to a practical point of view or practical considerations. 2. dealing or concerned with facts or actual occurrences. 3. relating to or being the study of cause and effect in historical or political events with emphasis on the practical lessons to be learned from them.
Hope cali's wife doesn't find out about this. She'll have him out there dumpster diving, Pacific Ocean Style!
maybe obama should pass a bill insuring prudence and pragmatism. then when we ask what that spefically means, he would get shifty eyed and back out of the room awkwardly. again, endlessly repeating that is like saying you favor "good" policy. we all favor the policy that is right and good and prudent and pragmatic, but we all have different interpretations of what that means. and unless we discuss what that actually means, we havent really said anything, have we?
It's a political issue when the government decides that they are going to decide how to proceed and that we are going to pay for it. This has always been my position. I should clarify, though, that I speak of the specific, literal land that we live on. If the snow melts on Everest's peak or the ocean gains a gallon while an iceberg loses a couple of bags of ice, I really don't need to hear about it and I certainly don't want to pay to find out why or to try and stop it.
red........this guy thinks that GW is a load of hooey. j/k.........but you would get further with a stump than martin.
Not really, some of you favor policy based on what is ideological, doctrinaire, reckless, or dogmatic while paying little attention to what is prudent or pragmatic.
