Everything we are told should bear some resemblance to what we see going on in reality!
What could be bad about 'sustainability'?
To ordinary people, the word sustainable is an adjective that means the activity the word describes can continue forever. For example, since biblical days, farmers practiced sustainable agriculture by leaving their fields fallow every seventh year. In early America, farmers knew that for agriculture to be sustainable, the same crop could not be planted in the same field year after year. Sustainable agriculture has always been practiced by successful farmers. Farmers who didn't practice sustainable agriculture inevitably failed.
The United Nations has given the word sustainable a new definition. Introduced to the world in "Our Common Future," the report of the 1987 U.N. Commission on Environment and Development, and further defined in the U.N.'s "Agenda 21" at the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, the term "sustainable" was married to the term "development," and a brand new concept entered the world. The term "sustainable development" means any activity that has economic impact, and is equitable, and has no negative environmental impact. All three elements are required to qualify as "sustainable development." ……... Proponents of sustainable development, inside and outside the government, downplay this fundamental element of sustainable development. Instead, they tout the benefits to the environment of sustainable programs that promote recycling, renewable energy, conservation and the like. And an unknowing public drinks the progressive Kool-Aid.
My Take - I don't know who originated these five sentences, but I would like to thank Gerry for sending this to me, and after you have read the above article please take these five sentences into consideration. This is what green is really about....imposed socialism.
"These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.Can you think of a reason for not sharing this? Neither could I......"
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation
Bill would let federal health researchers ban certain chemicals
A new bill could alter the landscape of chemical regulation in the United States by empowering researchers to take swift action against the most potentially harmful chemicals in use today. The bill, to be introduced later this month, would give the director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and a panel of experts selected by the director, the power to ban up to 10 chemicals from commerce each year by categorizing them as being of high concern. Those chemicals would become unlawful to use 24 months after receiving that designation.
..Grizzly bear kills Yellowstone hiker
A female grizzly bear attacked and killed a man who encountered the bruin and her cubs while he was hiking with his wife on Wednesday in Yellowstone National Park, park officials said. The fatal mauling occurred about a mile and a half from the start of the Wapiti Lake trail, and another group of hikers nearby heard the victim's wife crying out for help and used a cell phone to call park rangers for assistance. A National Park Service statement said the couple had inadvertently surprised the mother grizzly and her cubs, and in "an attempt to defend a perceived threat to her cubs, the bear attacked and fatally wounded the man.
Despite all the talk about energy independence emanating from Washington DC, this government and its allies in the environmental movement do whatever they can to thwart this goal. Based on reliable discoveries in Utah, Arizona and Colorado there may be enough fossil fuel from shale and natural gas to avoid any reliance on foreign oil. Why then is nothing happening to mine these resources and bring them to market?
The answer very simply is that extremist elements in the environmental movement have supplied sufficient pressure to make any drilling and mining impossible in these areas. Using an array of tactics to challenge companies and impose their agenda,......
Activists realize that if you can get government agencies and corporate leaders on your side using propaganda and intimidation as tactics, an effective alliance for environmental positions can be created.
For those who are scientific realists, this propaganda effort is discouraging. Not only does it place the United States in a disadvantageous economic position, not only does it force our government to expend blood and treasure defending foreign oil fields, but it challenges scientific verities and destroys corporate integrity.
Obama plan: 'Spike' energy costs, kill 1.4 million jobs
Industry group blasts White House decision to raise electricity bills now - Even before he was elected president, Barack Obama warned he would "bankrupt" the coal industry if necessary and purposefully spike Americans' utility bills in order to force the nation into using less and cleaner forms of energy. Now, industry partners warn, the White House is making good on that promise by issuing a new rule that will raise some Midwesterners' electricity bills over 23 percent by 2016 and cost an estimated 1.44 million jobs by 2020.