Convinced him that the citizens of the world and this country do not want to destroy their home. Although we know that he won't be around, ourselves forever, we don't focus on our own imminent mortality on a daily basis. Often our thoughts emanate from the paradigm that we will go on forever. And collectively, we wish to leave the earth better than how we found it.
However, our participation in Western civilization has turned us into consumers. We buy things, we use services, we throw things out. And in the end, we are left with the pile of compost. Much attention has been turned lately to how much we are consuming, and how much we are throwing away. The amount of energy that we use in order to carry out any task such as eating, recreating, or even going to work is producing a pile of exhaust, known as a carbon footprint. And this carbon footprint that we have, is deemed to culpable to other living things. So we are somehow being shamed into believing that we should not be leaving a carbon footprint at all when we leave this world.
The consumerism attitude that began in the 1900s with disposable diapers, kleenexes, and plastic pop bottles has innocently led to this. We no longer why things up with cloth towels, or rags as they were once known, we use paper towels. We don't use old shirts to do our best thing anymore, we pull a grab it out of the plastic package and when were done we throw everything away. We don't drink out of the faucet anymore, we buy bottles of water, drink them, and throw the bottle just about anywhere. This is called consumerism. And now that times are bad, we want to do even more of that according to our government.
Have you taken a drive past the rolling hills of Germantown? I don't have to tell you that those hills are not filled with loam placed here from the glaciers. Yet when the global warming liberals want us to do something about reducing garbage in our lives, it is approached like a Machiavellian mind control experiment. It is about what others can do and what is being forced upon us in the name of environmentalism. Fossil fuels have long been to blame for air pollution and high levels of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. And even though they are to blame, the solution that has been forced upon us is worse than burning straight gasoline. The ethanol mandate uses a high level of water, which is now being deemed as a scarce resource also. We get less mileage, and pollutes more than regular gasoline. So the only groups that are benefiting from this, are the ethanol lobby, and the government because they will increase their revenue. I.e. having us by more gas, because we are getting less mileage. But we are not reducing greenhouse gases by burning ethanol. So the solution is making the problem worse. The same as with diesel biofuels. It is a good idea to use things such as used grease as a fuel, but it is also polluting more than using diesel. And if you've ever stood behind a city bus, you can see and smell how much diesel pollutes. Cutting the routes is reducing pollution, more than using biofuels.
Yes, we should be concerned about our air quality. Common sense would lead us to know that we should not pollute as much as we have in the past. But we should not force ourselves into doing things that do not make sense or are outright stupid just because we think that we are doing something better. We thought we were helping shut down drug houses by forcing people to register with the pharmacist when they want to buy cold medicine. We sometimes behave as if secondhand smoke were the only pollutant in the air. Some of these regulations are being favored by the same group, who believes that our civil liberties are being violated in the interest of national security. Well, our society is based on sets of laws, but we cannot allow regulations to supersede common sense. We will not be doing good, if we are not doing better.