Comments (251)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
this_mortal_coil 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think you are right on the mark with all of that. Not to mention the wars and conflicts that go on incidentally over control of those resources. That's why Trump didn't have a war for four years: we didn't care about their resources.

Living sustainable is very simple. I set up enough hydroponic equipment to feed my entire family fresh fruits and vegetables for about $200 and some basic plumbing and general tool skills. I was able to build a 10 x 10 greenhouse with a rocket heater for next to nothing. I was gifted four chickens and built a coop with scrap lumber and wire. I catch rainwater and am in the process of building a filtration system that runs through a solar heating system that supplements my daily needs. The point is, you are right...sustainable alternatives exist. But these alternatives require ppl make to make their own choices about what they value, where they want to live, etc. If people value ecology, sustainability, and the broader environment they will get off of their collective asses and do something about it.

Armchair environmentalism is the worst because it's like checkers or one-dimensional chess, as if a govt mandate happens in a vacuum. The govt makes an edict and then everyone feels good and they go back to recycled paper lattes, Activist 5ks, and their $500k homes while simultaneously complaining about $7/gallon gas. Mind boggling.

The system can't have people making choices because human desires are endless, but resources are finite. They must control those resources and their allocation. It's really that simple.