07-19-2015, 07:42 PM
(07-19-2015, 07:20 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, according to what I'm reading from you. You are comfortable with causing industries to pack up and move, leaving large numbers of people without livelihoods, and having no solution to offer them?
I'm all for change, but if you're going to displace a large number of workers, shouldn't you have a feasible alternative livelihood in place for those folks, first? I mean, that's what a true Statesman would do, right?
That's not at all what I am saying. I'm saying that the fear of that happening is not a valid reason for not doing anything. For ignoring the majority of the scientific community. For allowing these industries to make your decisions for you. There are things that can be done that won't cause these issues, like what I said about incentivizing innovation rather than hyper-regulating.
You're right that a true statesman would have a feasible alternative in place, which is what I advocate for. The problem is that the threat of displacement has been used to lull the people into a state of complacency so they see any movement towards being more environmentally friendly as hostile.
