I am happy to say that Californian's are in fact concerned about THEIR environment! http://www.calepa.ca.gov/
Rank Parent Company Total toxic discharges reported by facilities (pounds) 1 IMC-Agrico Co. 266,510,704 2 Arcadian Fertilizer L.P. 90,597,345 3 Freeport Mcmoran Resource Partners 83,615,400 4 BASF Corp. 35,599,918 5 Armco Inc. 29,267,418 6 Louisiana-Pacific Corp. 21,392,456 7 PCS Nitrogen Fertilizer L.P. 20,937,298 8 Bayer Corp. 20,459,365 9 IBP Inc. 19,835,643 10 Mobil Corp. 16,193,885 11 E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. Inc 15,517,773 12 Vicksburg Chemical Co. 13,485,326 13 Rayonier Inc. 10,466,871 14 Elkem Metals Co. 9,318,368 15 3M 8,222,700 16 Exxon Corp. 8,164,401 17 Allegheny Ludlum Corp. 7,912,270 18 Pfizer Inc. 7,711,085 19 Finch Pruyn & Co. Inc. 7,297,500 20 Engelhard Corp. 6,494,685 21 Georgia-Pacific Corp. 6,145,918 22 Champion Intl. Corp. 5,575,098 23 Temple-Inland Inc. 5,510,821 24 Monsanto Co. 5,492,258 25 DSM Chemicals Holding Co. Inc. 5,438,713 26 Carpenter Tech. Corp. 5,274,175 27 Dyno Nobel Inc. 5,194,513 28 International Paper Co. 4,916,012 29 Simpson Investment Co. 4,682,549 30 J & L Specialty Steel Inc. 4,503,294 31 Kimberly-Clark Corp. 4,457,964 32 Eastman Kodak Co. 4,321,719 33 Laroche Holdings Inc. 4,212,818 34 Allied-Signal Inc. 3,750,682 35 Chevron Corp. 3,675,274 36 Smithfield Foods Inc. 3,538,187 37 Mississippi Chemical Corp. 3,451,725 38 Fort Howard Corp. 3,353,910 39 CF Ind. Inc. 3,340,775 40 Shell Oil Co. 3,289,599 41 W. R. Grace & Co. 3,152,338 42 Allegheny Teledyne Inc. 3,078,101 43 Dow Chemical Co. 3,023,495 44 Dupont Dow Elastomers LLC 3,001,963 45 Amoco Corp. 2,956,016 46 Weyerhaeuser Co. 2,946,922 47 Farmland Ind. Inc. 2,900,467 48 Eli Lilly & Co. 2,899,158 49 James River Corp. Of VA 2,860,623 50 Cytec Ind. Inc. 2,787,843
Perfect! Now for step 2, don't buy any products from those companies! It's that simple! And if others on this board do the same, they will begin to feel some pressure on their bottom line. You don't need the gov't, you just need to step up and stop supporting these companies. Are you up for the challenge?
So while Suzie Home Maker decides not to buy Smacker Doodles because the parent company is dumps millions of pounds of toxic waste into the sewage system, the offending corporation continues right along unabated because Suzie is in the minority of those who are taking a stand. Meanwhile, the toxins dumped work their way into the ecosystem, into the food that Suzie buys (apart from food that Suzie is not buying out of protest), into the air that she breathes, into the water she bathes her children in. The point I am making is that the Federal Government has a duty to protect the citizens of this country from harm in a situation like this. When a corporation dumps toxins, it is harmful to the citizens. Are you doubting that these chemicals are not dangerous to human beings? You seem to be saying we should abolish the E.P.A. and any environmental legislation intended to protect our environment from harm, and simply protest those offending companies. Do you expect those companies to self-report their amounts of pollution and police themselves? You think those companies will act in the best interest of the consumers? What did the cigarette companies do? How long did it take for them to finally admit they were including chemicals in cigarettes that were known (by their own studies) to be dangerous?
So while Suzie Home Maker decides not to buy Smacker Doodles because the parent company is dumps millions of pounds of toxic waste into the sewage system, the offending corporation continues right along unabated because Suzie is in the minority of those who are taking a stand. Well then you need to get busy and educate us and more people will take a stand. I hate to break this to you but this is how democracy works and has worked for 227 years in this country. And if people decide you are not providing enough evidence that something is wrong here, then the people have spoken and will vote with their pocketbook. Meanwhile, the toxins dumped work their way into the ecosystem, into the food that Suzie buys (apart from food that Suzie is not buying out of protest), into the air that she breathes, into the water she bathes her children in. Oh my god. I cannot believe you are now trying scare tactics. Yeah OK, I'm scared shitless, please help me mr. government. Please stick to the facts and not scare tactics ok, you were doing really fine with this argument until you sunk to that level. The point I am making is that the Federal Government has a duty to protect the citizens of this country from harm in a situation like this. When a corporation dumps toxins, it is harmful to the citizens. Are you doubting that these chemicals are not dangerous to human beings? Nope, not doubting at all they are dangerous. Just give the american people substantial proof that their lives are in danger and this will be the easiest boycott in history. You seem to be saying we should abolish the E.P.A. and any environmental legislation intended to protect our environment from harm, and simply protest those offending companies. Nope, no need to abolish anything. I just don't want further regulations that will force prices higher and force this country into an economic downturn that will make the 1930's look like the golden years. Do you expect those companies to self-report their amounts of pollution and police themselves? Nope, I expect consumer watch dog groups like Ralph Nader to bring the facts to the table and let the american tax paying voter decide. You think those companies will act in the best interest of the consumers? No I do not. I expect them to do what's best in their pocket books. If only 10% of americans boycott their products to the tune of $10 a year, that's right only $10 per company, each of these companies will get hit to the tune of 300 million dollars!!!!!! That's a lot of money and I assure, they will react quite swiftly. But if you can't get a lousy 10% of the population to believe in what you are saying and step up and take action, well then I'm sorry, you must have done a horrible job of presenting your case. What did the cigarette companies do? Cigarette companies continue to peddle their drug and 30% to 40% of Americans continue to buy them and over 50% of Europeans. Needless to say the rapid increase of lung cancer cases has not slown down cigarette sales. How long did it take for them to finally admit they were including chemicals in cigarettes that were known (by their own studies) to be dangerous? You could tell smokers that they make cigarettes to reduce our population by a third and smokers will keep smoking them. Why? For the same reason people continue to smoke their crack, shoot up their heroin and pop their pills. It all comes down to personal choice and being accountable for your actions in life. You can't regulate that.
You must be a non-smoker who never faced withdrawal from nicotine addiction. Ask Rush Limbaugh how simple it is to just quit taking a drug that is addictive in nature.
Yup, you are right. I am a non-smoker that has never faced withdrawal from nicotine addiction. You know what else? I never had to worry about the withdrawals from crack, heroine, ecstasy, acid, and anything else you can come up with. You know why? Because I never was stupid enough to abuse those drugs in the first place! I'm sorry man but as a trader I have lived my whole under the same creed. You reap what you sow. I will be 100% accountable for all my actions in life both good and bad. I also don't feel sorry for rapists, murderers, thieves, adulterers, child molesters and many other things. I never got a free pass in life, not for anything. I am far from perfect and have made thousands of mistakes in my life and I mean thousands. I have paid for each and every one of them. And I paid full price for them, no liberal discounts. But let's get back to the topic here, my common sense approach to the environment must be driving you crazy but the fact is it really is that simple. I completely support all your efforts to bring facts to the table to the american people about the dangers of our environment. Ralph Nader will do the same. At some point the weight of all the facts will make this boycott very easy and you will see the change you yearn for. But until this day, I'm sorry, I cannot support a government that is going to go after the hands that feed this country with jobs, all for the sake of higher environmental standards. I'm simply telling you the truth. Even you can appreciate that.
Interesting discussion here. I've learned some things from both Maverick and RogueTrader. I think one of the important things to recognize is the kids in school today are being acquainted with the problems of industrialization and economic growth. They are being educated to the realities of the world in which they will be raising families. When I was in college, environmental impact statements began to be part of the curriculum for anybody interested in policy or decision making. So, the ideas being discussed right here are percolating through society, at least in this country. This country pretty much leads when it comes to moral suasion on the world stage. I'm not saying this country is always right, I'm saying this country leads. My thought is, as more and more children are educated to the terrible truths that will face them as adults, they will be heard and public policy will change to insure the well-being of future generations. It won't be easy for them or for those of my generation who survive the next 40 years. I think today's generation of school kids are smart enough and have enough information to make wise decisions about how the world can continue to serve as a viable home for the human race. Thus far, every society from the Babylonians through the Greeks and Romans has toppled and fallen because they outgrew their resource base, read your history. Post-industrial society is at the brink of just such a precipice. It is incumbent upon all thinking men and women to do what each can, as social conscious guides us; give back, husband, or otherwise contribute to the social weal. For two centuries Western civilization has benefited from a foundation of progress through growth at the expense of resource depletion and pollution. Probably just a relatively small percentage of the population recognizes we are riding a runaway train heading for the precipice, but as more and more things go wrong with the world, a growing number of people will understand. Those who begin to act, in their own lives and for the greater good, are the people between whom cooperation and goal-sharing can be discussed. The people who live out of society's pocket, who take and don't give back, the most blatant of corporate offenders, will all eventually see that they cannot escape the planet, that they have to live here along with every other surviving individual. So, cooperation will succeed or the race will not, it is that cut and dried.