The environment

[Lunar]

It seems almost everyone agrees. 

The true balancing point between liberals and conservatives is to what extent we need those environmental regulations, especially compared with economic development.

[Cashcow]

who cares...

^GOP slogan '08

No, just kidding. Heh. I agree to an extent - corporations are not the evil entities many believe them to be, but the fact is, nobody can be trusted to voluntarily respect the environment.

[angus]

I voted agree, but like the Finn, I say it's unfortunate that I have to agree.  Simpson's-style hyperbole aside, I don't think big corporate fatcats get off on draining swamps, fouling the air, decimating wildlife populations, and polluting the streams, but if profit equals revenue minus costs, and you want to increase profits, then you minimize costs, thus there's no real economic motivation to install, for example, scrubbers in a smokestack.  So the Federal government steps in.  That's one thing.  But this cradle-to-grave legislation actually inhibits many would-be ecologically friendly investments, such as using the waste of one industry as a fuel in another.  I have sounded off on this before, so I'll not bore you again with the details, but our current approach to sound environment management sucks.  We need to step back from the knee-jerking politically correct cradle-to-grave waste management scheme, for instance.  Simply put, we need to consider economic motivations when writing laws aimed at protecting the environment.

[English]

Strongly agree.

[George W. Bush]

 Strongly agree