Accuse The Present

Become Somebody’s Problem

Become Someone Else’s Problem

Cost More Than They Create

Punish Repetition

pollution

Moses

trivia

sanitation

water

water pollution

anthropomorphism

survival

air pollution

climate change

conservation

environment

environmentalism

driving

balloon

achieving failure

trash

raccoon

plastic

is a set of beliefs that divide the moral from the immoral and so sustain the vision of the good society.

Pollution beliefs 'divide the moral from the immoral and so sustain the vision of the good society' (37).

is either technical, with clear non-morally loaded origins, or catagious, harmful, caused by outside intervention, and mysterious in its origins.

1. technical, not morally loaded but depends upon measures of change' (Douglass Risk 36). 2. 'the other sense of pollution is a contagious state, harmful, caused by outside intervention, but mysterious in its origins (36).

is largely a result of the fact that nature has been taken out of the free market. Because it is owned by the government, no one has any economic incentive to preserve the purity and value of nature.

First, the rivers. The rivers, and the oceans too, are generally owned by the government... private property, certainly complete private property, has not been permitted in the water. In essence, then, government owns the rivers. But government ownership is not true ownership, because the government officials, while able to control the resource cannot themselves reap their capital value on the market. Government officials cannot sell the rivers or sell stock in them. Hence, they have no economic incentive to preserve the purity and value of the rivers. Rivers are, then, in the economic sense, 'unowned'... therefore government officials have permitted their corruption and pollution. Anyone has been able to dump polluting garbage and wastes in the waters. But consider what would happen if private firms were able to own the rivers and the lakes. If a private firm owned Lake Erie, for example, then anyone dumping garbage in the lake would be promptly sued in the courts for their aggression against private property and would be forced by the courts to pay damages and to cease and desist from any further aggression. Thus, only private property rights will insure an end to pollution invasion of resources. Only because the rivers are unowned is there no owner to rise up and defend his precious resource from attack. If, in contrast, anyone should dump garbage or pollutants into a lake which is privately owned (as are many smaller lakes), he would not be permitted to do so for very long the owner would come roaring to its defense.

is not harming the environment, it the impurities in our air and water that are doing it.

It isn't pollution that's harming the environment... it's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it Dan Quayle

is primarily a scientific, not a political, problem because the law can and does hold polluters responsible.

As far as the issue of actual pollution is concerned, it is primarily a scientific, not a political, problem. In regard to the political principle involved: if a man creates a physical danger or harm to others, which extends beyond the line of his own property, such as unsanitary conditions or even loud noise, and if this is proved, the law can and does hold him responsible. If the condition is collective, such as in an overcrowded city, appropriate and objective laws can be defined, protecting the rights of all those involved as was done in the case of oil rights, air-space rights, etc. But such laws cannot demand the impossible, must not be aimed at a single scapegoat, i.e., the industrialist, and must take into consideration the whole context of the problem, i.e., the absolute necessity of the continued existence of industry if the preservation of human life is the standard. . . . .

is best combatted with capitalism. If rivers were turned into private property, there would then be incentive to keep the water clean enough to maximize revenues from leases granted to firms seeking rights to drinking water, recreation, and commercial fishing.

With a General Motors owning the Mississippi River, you can be sure that stiff effluent charges would be assessed on industries and municipalities along its banks, and that the water would be kept clean enough to maximize revenues from leases granted to firms seeking rights to drinking water, recreation, and commercial fishing.

is, ultimately, inescapable. In order for something to become clean, something else must become dirty.

is, for the libertarian, a problem best solved not with government programs but simply for the courts to return to their function of defending person and property rights against invasion, and therefore to enjoin anyone from injecting pollutants into the air.

The remedy against air pollution is therefore crystal clear, and it has nothing to do with multibillion-dollar palliative government programs at the expense of the taxpayers which do not even meet the real issue. The remedy is simply for the courts to return to their function of defending person and property rights against invasion, and therefore to enjoin anyone from injecting pollutants into the air. But what of the propollution defenders of industrial progress' And what of the increased costs that would have to be borne by the consumer' And what of our present polluting technology'

pollution, n.Memes

Keep exploring pollution→

pollution