For U.S., less is more

For U.S., less is more

There are 10 comments on the Berkshire Eagle story from May 12, 2008, titled For U.S., less is more. In it, Berkshire Eagle reports that:

In an interview on National Public Radio a few weeks ago a reformed American thief told his story.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Berkshire Eagle.

Eric

AOL

#1 May 12, 2008
OK, the Fed has created too much credit since 9/11. I'll concede that. But I fail to see the connection to the environment unless it results in a contraction in the economy, which so far it hasn't. I'm old enough to remember rivers you could almost walk across that even carp couldn't live in, and my eyes burning whenever I was in NYC. The creation of wealth in the last generation has allowed the cleanup of the environment, not the other way around.
The Red State Redneck

Odessa, FL

#2 May 12, 2008
A clean environment is something we all want and need.
It's disingenuous at the VERY least to paint everyone that is not on board with the current Global Warming crowd as wanting to destroy the environment, or being too ignorant to understand the problem.

Prying loose the bony fingers of OPEC et al from the stranglehold they have around our throats is not an attempt or plan to "spend more, drive more".. It's a simple rule of supply and demand. Economics 101.. We can build infrastructure in a far more environmentally friendly way than we could 40-50 years ago..

Keeping those funds here, in this country, rather than exporting them to countries whose friendship is questionable at best, makes FAR more sense economically and environmentally speaking, than empowering foreign countries that do not have our best interests at heart.
Scott

South Glens Falls, NY

#3 May 12, 2008
What a silly and egotistic contention it is that the US "sets the standard to which the world aspires." That has been a proud part of our early history, but it has become more nostalgia than reality. In education, health care, tax policy, campaign finance, immigration, and energy, the example we set to the rest of the world is for what NOT to do.
Bremen

Clockville, NY

#4 May 12, 2008
I will spend MY money the way I want. The last thing I need is the advices from environmental lunatics. What kind of nuts they are - constantly teaching everybody how to live, what to do and shoving into our throats their moronic fraudulent anti-human ideas! Who they think they are? Very disgusting creatures!
David Brinkley

Springfield, MA

#5 May 12, 2008
Bremen wrote:
I will spend MY money the way I want. The last thing I need is the advices from environmental lunatics. What kind of nuts they are - constantly teaching everybody how to live, what to do and shoving into our throats their moronic fraudulent anti-human ideas! Who they think they are? Very disgusting creatures!
Yeah we would not want you to live longer be healthier or pass along the consequences of glut greed and drug abuse.
Common Sense

New York, NY

#8 May 12, 2008
Does everyone really think tying America's overindulgence (which is undeniable) to the environment is really that far of a stretch? I understand there is almost no more annoying an activist than an environmentalist (except perhaps a Bush apologist) but the link really isn't a stretch. Seems pretty obvious.

And to say the creation of wealth helped to clean the environment doesn't make any sense at all. The creation of the slow realization of the degradation of the environment, and the EPA, is what has helped to begin clean the environment. If either of those two had never happened we'd be far worse off than we are now, in my opinion.
Ramdan

United States

#9 May 12, 2008
Common Sense wrote:
Does everyone really think tying America's overindulgence (which is undeniable) to the environment is really that far of a stretch? I understand there is almost no more annoying an activist than an environmentalist (except perhaps a Bush apologist) but the link really isn't a stretch. Seems pretty obvious.
And to say the creation of wealth helped to clean the environment doesn't make any sense at all. The creation of the slow realization of the degradation of the environment, and the EPA, is what has helped to begin clean the environment. If either of those two had never happened we'd be far worse off than we are now, in my opinion.
Overindulgence is a cause of the state of the environment,how could it not be?
Common Sense

New York, NY

#10 May 12, 2008
"Overindulgence is a cause of the state of the environment,how could it not be?"

I was just reminding people of the thrust of the column, as it seemed people had gotten off track. Lauren's idea really isn't that far off. To call it a ridiculous editorial seemed...well...ridiculous. I thought it was actually a pretty clever parallel to make, since everyone already has everything, nobody is willing to pay for stolen goods! Why didn't they think of this in the 80s?
Ramdan

Chesterfield, MA

#11 May 12, 2008
Common Sense wrote:
"Overindulgence is a cause of the state of the environment,how could it not be?"
I was just reminding people of the thrust of the column, as it seemed people had gotten off track. Lauren's idea really isn't that far off. To call it a ridiculous editorial seemed...well...ridiculous. I thought it was actually a pretty clever parallel to make, since everyone already has everything, nobody is willing to pay for stolen goods! Why didn't they think of this in the 80s?
It took a visionary like Lauren to formulate the hypothesis!

GMHeller

Since: Jan 08

United States

#12 May 12, 2008
Common Sense wrote:
"Overindulgence is a cause of the state of the environment,how could it not be?"
I was just reminding people of the thrust of the column, as it seemed people had gotten off track. Lauren's idea really isn't that far off. To call it a ridiculous editorial seemed...well...ridiculous. I thought it was actually a pretty clever parallel to make, since everyone already has everything, nobody is willing to pay for stolen goods! Why didn't they think of this in the 80s?
Common Sense, the reason no one thought to steal this idea in the 1980's is because it was worthless even then.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Stamford Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll What type of town is Bennington (Sep '13) Tue Elmer 331
News Frustrated (Nov '13) May 22 the real Elmer 143
21 Countries May 22 the real Elmer 47
News Route 9 closed after tractor-trailer accident (Nov '08) May 20 Markey Fife 275
Michael Denault should NOT be on the selectmen'... Mar '16 Tom 3
News District Court (Jun '11) Jul '11 Voice of Woodford 26
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Vermont (D... (Oct '10) Jul '11 Marcy Unaitis 21
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Stamford Mortgages