dwagner at mail.coos.or.us
Tue Nov 26 15:56:50 EST 1996
Greg Rose wrote:
> : >I'll agree there is a lot of hot air on both sides of the issue, but in
> : >my honest opinion, 75% is anti-environmental loonies and only 25% is by
> : >pro-environmental loonies. That's just my perception, FWIW.
> : That sounds about right. The anti-environmental loonies are also usually
> : anti-governmental loonies, so you hear a lot of their blather on talk
> : shows. Both sides show an appalling amount of hypocracy and ignorance.
> Yup. I call 'em Rush Limbaugh environmentalists. You know, the sort that
> actually try to convince us all that we'd be better off if we just let
> industry run rampant with no regulation and no control. I don't buy it.
> The dynamics of corporations demand short term profit at the expense of
> long term well being. That's why we need government controls.
> greg rose.
I think you are giving them to much credit. I've been on both side of
the battle( to fit the times and the need) and I feel that less than 10%
know anything. This battle between who getts to manage what and in what
way is going to destroy what they are fighting over. This started out as
a battle for funding between govt groups and has escalated to the most
ridcrdulous mess. The tree farmer has been caught in the middle and he
is the least likly to survive and he is doing the best job overall. The
Wall Street greed for short term profit can't be controled if those who
are in charge of long range planning are fighting.
More information about the Ag-forst