10-07-2010, 02:12 PM
Dakota-
Yugoslavia was never a 'communist' country. Ok, well, the whole Soviet Union stopped being 'communist' as soon as Stalin took over. Sure, rG is being sarcastic. Fine. Whatever. But the international impact of environmental disasters that could have been averted are significant.
What SHOULD be expressed here is the negative effect that central government planning has on local environmental conditions. China, for example, has succeeded in desertifying and polluting chunks of their country through unchecked industrial expansion and a significant lack of environmental sensitivity. And back in the corpse of the USSR, the poisonous corpses of centrally planned enterprises continue to cause problems. In the west, we're most familiar with Chernobyl, but if you look at places like Baku (among others) you'll find environmental disaster zones that make the worst US "Superfund Site" look like a little oil slick in a swimming pool.
In the US, state laws and local laws helped keep some abuses at bay, and of course the national level problems are being addressed by the national environmental laws put in place starting in the 1970's with the emergence of the environmental movement. Prior to those laws, some areas of the US had a better environmental safety record than others, usually due to local sensitivity by farmers and ranchers. You see, conservation is considered a conservative ethos in many areas of this nation.
In summary.... the local population and government needs to be sensitive to the safety and health of their environment. Trusting a central government to do it for you is foolish in the extreme.
Yugoslavia was never a 'communist' country. Ok, well, the whole Soviet Union stopped being 'communist' as soon as Stalin took over. Sure, rG is being sarcastic. Fine. Whatever. But the international impact of environmental disasters that could have been averted are significant.
What SHOULD be expressed here is the negative effect that central government planning has on local environmental conditions. China, for example, has succeeded in desertifying and polluting chunks of their country through unchecked industrial expansion and a significant lack of environmental sensitivity. And back in the corpse of the USSR, the poisonous corpses of centrally planned enterprises continue to cause problems. In the west, we're most familiar with Chernobyl, but if you look at places like Baku (among others) you'll find environmental disaster zones that make the worst US "Superfund Site" look like a little oil slick in a swimming pool.
In the US, state laws and local laws helped keep some abuses at bay, and of course the national level problems are being addressed by the national environmental laws put in place starting in the 1970's with the emergence of the environmental movement. Prior to those laws, some areas of the US had a better environmental safety record than others, usually due to local sensitivity by farmers and ranchers. You see, conservation is considered a conservative ethos in many areas of this nation.
In summary.... the local population and government needs to be sensitive to the safety and health of their environment. Trusting a central government to do it for you is foolish in the extreme.