posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 09:32 AM
reply to post by Mike.Ockizard
I have no arguement with what you are saying, but this type of law is not the way to go about it.
What this is saying is that rampant pollution carried out by corporations is the fault of the consumers. If we didn't purchase thier goods they
wouldn't have to destroy the environment to produce them.
Look at this another way... there is an immense push on to pass carbon taxes on the world's population.
I don't drive a car.
I don't buy products with excessive packaging.
I use my own cloth grocery bags instead of paper or plastic ones
I buy most of my groceries/meat from local sources (reducing transportation emissions)
I do everything I can already to minimze my personal impact. Does this mean I will get a rebate or responsible citizen bonus?
No, It just means that I won't pay additional taxes (other than the 'you're alive and breathing' tax)
This is not the NWO we need, it's just the NWO.
As always, the worst laws are worded in such a way that to argue against them means you are for something else.
Protect the enviroment? sure. Lets stop draining wetlands for shopping malls. Lets stop clear cutting old growth forests to make toothpicks. Lets stop
oil drilling in fragile ecosystems...
THere are numerous ways to accomplish these goals, but none of them are in the interests of corporations.
It is easier to force us to change then risk a bad quarterly statement to the shareholders.
edit on 16-4-2011 by [davinci] because: (no reason