Environment or Economics

[Shai Gar]

in legal studies we are doing environmental protection, and this is interesting because when the constitution was written there was nothing in there about giving the commonwealth powers to write laws on behalf of the environment, this is able to be gotten around by the fact that the government can make foreign treaties and then force the states to live by them.... anyway this got me thinking, and i thought:

Should economic reasons be able to overrule environmental protection?
Are economics and the environment able to come to an equilibrium? if so, how?


i will be back tommorow, or late tonight after my math assignment is done to see if anyone has an answer

[coffeezombie]

Should economic reasons be able to overrule environmental protection?
Are economics and the environment able to come to an equilibrium? if so, how?


Well, at the point when too many environmental resources are used to protect the environment, it should probably be stopped.

[Architectonic]

First you need to start questioning to find out the reasons for enviromnentalism and economics.

A rational reason for environmentalism may be that because we do not yet understand it (especially in regards to human ecology) we should try to avoid damaging it. By doing acts that damage the enviroment without understanding the consequences may cause more problems in the future. We may find we have damaged an economically benificial resouce, or cause damage to something vital that requires a large economic cost to fix.
The environment is very much a part of economics and cannot be ignored for 'economic reasons'.

[DevRock]

Should economic reasons be able to overrule environmental protection?
Are economics and the environment able to come to an equilibrium? if so, how?


Well, I guess that depends on what kind of society you're talking about. In a Capitalist society, I don't think we can establish an equilibrium. This is incredibly distressing to me, as I feel our #1 duty should be to preserve everything we can on this planet (besides people, as I equate humans with a virus). But our economy, our LIVES, for the most part is based on what most people like to call "growth." In referring to growth the way we do in modern society, that = consumption and using resources.

It would take an incredible amount of will power and a MAJOR overhaul of our social beliefs in the US and elsewhere to ever come close to establishing an equilibrium. But, last time I checked, that isn't happening. Developers and power brokers (for now) rule the world.

Even in a Communist country (China is the best example), economics is clearly the deciding factor in just about every decision. It appears that country is being raped up and down for economic reasons.

As for the US, it also depends on what party is in control (kinda). A Republican/consevative government will favor economics over environmentand vice cersa. What's ironic is that conservatives are just now figuring out that if they want to please "God" they should be taking care of his creation....

Finally, take into consideration population growth. That alone will drive more economically-based decisions than environmental. But,t hat's a whole other can of worms.