On 9 Dec 99, at 7:12, Greg Brown wrote:
> >Just a historical note. Let's keep in mind that the industrial process
> >has existed way before our understanding of environmental impact - it
> >simply wasnt' taken into account. So, to remediate a historical
> >perspective would require so much retooling that a large number of
> >companies could, quite simply, no longer function economically.
>
> Is this the 'I know we are headed toward the tree, but it costs too much
> to bribe the driver to turn the wheel' argument?
I don't think so. To use your analogy, it's like - I know this is heading
into the tree eventually, but if we pay the driver to turn the wheel,
TODAY there will be no bus, no driver and no passengers (and no jobs,
either).
[Host's Note: Hmm... I think our analogies are getting a bit far removed
from our topic here. ..Rick]
> >...and one thing, by the way, I always get a kick out of. We talk about
> >"those" companies doing nasty things for the profit motive, but I
> >guarantee you that if you have a pension plan, "those" companies are
> >helping to earn YOU the money to provide a pension.
>
> Let me see... because we are not independently wealthy and quite literally
> are stuck in a system which keeps the basic means of sustaining life under
> 'lock and key' to be released only at a profit to someone else, we have no
> right to or are somehow wrong to question the wisdom of continuing to
> maintain that system?
I think you are reading much more in my post than I intended, but since I
can't determine what you are hearing, I can't really respond further.
Visit the work911.com supersite at http://www.work911.com for work related articles, or to find almost anything including lists
--Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>