Why you will someday buy the air you breathe

When something is available in great abundance you don't have to buy it. Take for instance oceanwater, nobody is buying or selling it because it makes up 3/4 of the Earth. Land, however, only makes up 1/4 so due its limited availability it must be bought and sold. This obviously has everything to due with supply and demand, as they get nearer to one another on the curve it becomes PROFITABLE, a market emerges, and Bob's your uncle.

As of right now, the supply of oxygen is still too abundant with respect to the demand for it for there to be a market. However, every single day the ISS takes pictures of the Earth and every single day there are fires burning in the rainforests that you can see from space slowly depleting the amount oxygen bearing plants. With a growing population steadily moving the demand side upward, it does not take a genius to predict what will inevitably happen.

One day you will see the "leaders" of this world make the observation that we need to stop depleting the amount of oxygen and instead replenish it. Of course, that will take an investment by all people and most likely will become a tax, in my opinion.

The conservation of the natural environment should be every human beings 1st priority because there will not be any second chances and obviously it is absolutely vital to the survival and happiness of the human (all) species.

It is my opinion that capitalism directly opposes conservation by its very nature. Capitalism requires the market mechanisms described previously to create PROFIT. PROFIT maximization directly requires massive CONSUMPTION without any requirement of CONSUMPTION minimization. Although, this may not be all that clear to you I will try to explain it another way. PROFIT has absolutely no connection whatsoever with humanity, justice, equality, sustainability, or happiness.

Humanity- You've heard everyone has a price, right? History is full of examples and one does not need much imagination to create an analogy where it is clear that PROFIT is often valued more than human life.
Justice- If we have a criminal justice system where the goal of that system is to provide justice, why then are lawyers required to win cases in order to put food on the table? Can anyone think of a case where a lawyer knowingly helped bring about injustice in order to win, for PROFIT? (O.J.)
Equality- The wealthiest 1% in America has more money than the bottom 90%. Does anyone realize that this fundamental requirement/consequence of capitalism stands directly opposed to the idea of democracy, where everyone has equal power? Do you have equal power to a multi-billion dollar man or corporation?
Sustainability- Every day we see the flaws destroying markets, but its really a question of environmental sustainability. How can PROFIT and CONSUMPTION constantly grow when natural resources are constantly depleted?
Happiness- "Money can't buy you love", "more money, more problems", "money is the root of all evil", I did not make up these sayings. Money=PROFIT=debt. Debt is a form of slavery, end of discussion.

I hope it is clear now why we need to focus on some new idea of commerce that is directly tied to conservation, justice, equality, humanity, and happiness; otherwise somewhere in the future everyone will be forced to buy the air that they breathe. I do not have the answer, but if this were made a priority with say children in their education then I do have faith that a solution would emerge.

does anyone here agree with any of this?

The major flaw in your argument is that air is different from things like water and land, because there is no one providing it as a service. Water needs to be purified, land cannot be communal. There are intermediaries providing these things as a service to us.

Air cannot be purified as a service, and thus will not be sold.

But hey, they could always privatise the rainforests and charge a photosynthesis fee... but then again the sun cannot be privatised so that wouldn't work either.

I would simply refuse if however such an absurd thing ever came to be. From a philosophical perspective you can't really charge someone for the right to life.

The major flaw in your reply is that you totally missed the point of the post, I never said anyone is or will be privatizing air. Furthermore, I did not ever mention purifying air. Do you simply refuse to pay for water, food, shelter, or childbirth? Why not, those are things needed for survival or as you say the right to life? What I am saying is that due to the consuming nature of capitalism there must be an eventual depletion of the oxygen bearing plants, therefore, eventually creating a shortage, which in turn, will create a market for creating more oxygen at cost. We will never begin an honest effort at conservation until it becomes PROFITABLE!!! That, in my opinion, is wrong and the very reason we should abandon it for a better more useful system. However, I do appreciate your opinion and thank you for reading and responding.

I would also like to add that the Ionic breeze, among many other devices, purifies air now, and Native American society was based upon communal land. I say was because, of course, the Native American genocide along with capitalism pretty well got rid of them and their way of life.

oxygen bars are popular in big cities. yes people pay to breathe oxygen! remember when we said we would never pay for bottled water?

Really I don't see this happening in our lifetime but then again see the post above (about the bottled water).

On a side note, being the true entrepeneur I am, I will start stocking up on trees and other oxygen producing plants just to cash out. Can't wait.

We are going to get taxed for breathing pretty soon. Not because oxygen is a commodity but because they want you to pay to dump your filthy carbon dioxide exhaling. You see according to the totally wacked out enviro movement carbon dioxide is a poison, and is poisoning the Earth.

Never mind the fact that most if not all plants breath in Co2 and exhale oxygen.

We have to draw the line on taxation somewhere.

Originally posted by The_Modulus
From a philosophical perspective you can't really charge someone for the right to life.

Sorry for the double post but I only saw this now. Really you can charge someone for the right to life... For example, the UN recently tried to get all members to sign on to a document (for lack of a better word) stating that water is the basis of life and so everyone has a right to it. Only four countries in the world disagreed with it (Canada, America, and the other 2 escape me). This is because these four countries profit off of the natural resource of fresh water and hold a certain amount of power with it and to say that everyone has a right to it would mean that they may be obliged to supply nations in need with water because it is a right.

The moral of the story: If it isn't profitable or 'economically sound' countries will not be ready to sound off and give it to the people as their right. If the day ever did come when oxygen (not air because really isn't air just the space and molecules of oxgen, carbon,etc. occupy the air) was as scarce a resource as fresh water than nations would be more than happy to charge you for it or at least hold off and not declare it as your right. Really you can live without water for what a week but air no more than 8 minutes (brain damage comes prior to this point). Therefore if they put a premium on what is basically the second most important thing for humanity (water) which is scarce right now, why not put one on the most important thing (oxygen), which is not scarce yet but may be (not saying it will but may be) one day.

Therefore I wouldn't say never when it comes to charging for the right to life because history has proven that the almighty dollar is more important than one person (or even 1 million people) out of 6 billion.

Thank you

[edit on 27-10-2008 by Portugoal]

Originally posted by budaruskie
Equality- The wealthiest 1% in America has more money than the bottom 90%. Does anyone realize that this fundamental requirement/consequence of capitalism stands directly opposed to the idea of democracy, where everyone has equal power? Do you have equal power to a multi-billion dollar man or corporation?

Just need to point out your error here. Democracy is not about equal power. Simply, equal voice/say.

Im fairly certain although they probably wont pop up there evil ugly heads just yet.
There would be many greedy evil pigs on here right now who would support charging the peasants to breathe.
As long as it didn't mean they had to increase there wages that is.

My solution -

Bulldoze Utah and make it a biodome - of cannabis plants, they produce massive amounts of oxygen, can be used for clothes, and for medicine, ointments, food, a bunch of great stuff.


Yeah...... and that wouldn't take anybodies money.

Wolf, this is straight off of Wikipedia "In political theory, democracy describes a small number of related forms of government and also a political philosophy. Even though there is no universally accepted definition of 'democracy',[4] there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes.The first principle is that all members of the society have equal access to power and the second that all members enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties".

To expand this discussion has anyone ever thought about this? What is the goal of the public education system in America? It should be to educate, correct? If you live in America then you have most likely seen a school that announces, usually via signage, that it is either a recognized or exemplary by its state's standards. This means that a particular amount of students met a certain threshold on standardized tests, that constantly get easier and less effective every few years. Everyone agrees that these tests are ridiculous, except of course, the politicians who come up with this crap. More importantly, many if not most teachers complain that the curriculum is limited to basically what is on the tests. The point I'm trying to make here is that in all actuality the goal of these schools is not to educate their students, just to get them past the tests. And why, for money! They get more money for reaching these thresholds, and if that in turn gets them more students because people want their children to go to a recognized school, that will get them more money too. So, in my opinion, profit is the real motivation in the public school system.

Here is another one to think about. What is the goal of television. When I ask most people this question usually the answer is "to entertain". I disagree, and here is why. All television programs, personalities, and storylines are evaluated on thier ability to keep the most viewers possible watching between commercials because advertising space is where the channel gets the lion's share of its profit. Everyone can agree that the goal of an advertisement is to get you to buy something. So, if the goal of the program is to get you to watch the commercial and the goal of the commercial is to get you to buy something, then overall you have to say the television's principle goal is to SELL YOU SH*T!

I would also argue that profit is the goal in the healthcare system as well, instead of helping to take care of people's health. How many people become doctors to get paid as opposed to those who genuinely want to help sick people. Parallels can be made to the penal, political, and as mentioned earlier criminal justice systems as well.

Why do parents tell their children to grow up and get good jobs that make a lot of money, intead of doing what makes them happy? Why in 12 years will the average student get 1 class on the Federal Gov't? Is that a mistake, or is it on purpose? It is literally appalling what we tolerate on a daily basis! Why can't we change this mess, why is money and profit so important to us. Humans are simple creatures to appease. Food, water, shelter, security, LOVE! That is all you need, and absent some form of outdated economic system, you can do all of that without MONEY OR PROFIT!
Thank you, I will check back later, hopefully someone else will either add to the discussion or prove me wrong.

I could have sworn I was alreay paying taxes on air..lol Nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to someone making a buck of us

Thats one biodome I wouldnt mind being locked up in!!reply to post by AlienGhandi

Honestly, I believe it is highly irrational to say that oxygen will be "taxed" in the near future. Maybe, just maybe, that is a possibility in the far off future, however, I don't think a direct "tax" or "payment" would be the method of use to control such an issue. If we are going to use the water bottle example, then I will too. Sure, you can go out and buy "pure" water from a bottle for a price, but you can just as easy go and drink rain water or from a lake. No one is going to stop you from doing that, in the same way, no one can stop you from going outside to breathe air. However, maybe the oxygen will get dirty, and you'll have to pay for some machine to purify it, heck, most of us already do, but it's nothing disproportionate or irrational.

This will not happen in our lifetime.

you just wait until they start charging early termination fees when you die!

"i'm sorry mrs. johnson, your husband wasn't supposed to die for another 20 years. you owe us $150,000, now!"

I wouldn't put it past humans.

They're just frickin'' clueless dumb animals. Dumber than crap on a dog's foot.

"sure... an air tax is a great idea because it will help save the environment because the bangable milf on the teevee news with the kickin' ass rock guitar intro says so."

That is what will happen. It'll be like a carbon tax, most likely, and disguised as environmental protection. These corporations are not doing ANYTHING ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT BUT MAKING MORE PROFIT, AND IT'S THE STUPIDEST #ING IDEA IMAGINABLE, AND THE PEOPLE WHO JUST BACK AND THINK ALL THIS CRAP IS GREAT>>> TAKE STUPID AND TIMES IT BY 1000!!!!

Humans..... # you.