Exxon pipeline leaks thousands of barrels of Canadian oil in Arkansas

[Accountability Now]

The environment was there before the economy. So yes, the environment does not need an economy to exist.What you stated is no equivalent.

How much more simplistic do you need this? We are not debating what the environment needs. Its fairly obvious the earth exisited for millions of years without humans and it was fine. Its not a matter of what the environment needs, its what we as humans need. So yes....health care, education, economy is equivalent as they are all things we need. Of course....environment is on that list too. They all play into the equation that balances out what we need. The problem is that Reefer and yourself are trying to say that ecomony does not matter. Take ecomony away and anarchy will prevail. Just as if you took the environment away.

The proper thing to say is the economy could not exist without the environment. The economy was essentially built on natural resources aka the environment. Take the environment away, and what do you have?

That has never been the argument. The arguement was that ecomony does not matter.

[RNG]

The environment was there before the economy. So yes, the environment does not need an economy to exist.What you stated is no equivalent.

The proper thing to say is the economy could not exist without the environment. The economy was essentially built on natural resources aka the environment. Take the environment away, and what do you have?

That very much depends on definitions. For example, without the very intensive farming methods being used which many extreme environmentalists complain about many in the world would starve. Like most things there is a cost and there is a benefit. That is true of egg farms, oil pipelines, cars and planes.

I personally think all irrigation should be banned for a period of 20 years to see if the drop in steady state concentrations of water vapor in the atmosphere would help control global warming and to see how much the environment and biodiversity of various river and lake systems would improve. That would be a great benefit. The cost would be many people starving to death.

[GostHacked]

How much more simplistic do you need this? We are not debating what the environment needs. Its fairly obvious the earth exisited for millions of years without humans and it was fine. Its not a matter of what the environment needs, its what we as humans need. So yes....health care, education, economy is equivalent as they are all things we need. Of course....environment is on that list too. They all play into the equation that balances out what we need. The problem is that Reefer and yourself are trying to say that ecomony does not matter. Take ecomony away and anarchy will prevail. Just as if you took the environment away.

Then you are not reading or quite understanding what ReeferMadness has been posting. Neither him or I am saying the economy does not matter. Reefer was indicating the GDP is not a true reflection of the economy.This is where that other thread of the GDP not being a good indicator of the economy comes into play here.

That has never been the argument. The arguement was that ecomony does not matter.

The economy does matter, but what are we basing the economy on? That is the real question here I think.

[Accountability Now]

Then you are not reading or quite understanding what ReeferMadness has been posting. Neither him or I am saying the economy does not matter. Reefer was indicating the GDP is not a true reflection of the economy.This is where that other thread of the GDP not being a good indicator of the economy comes into play here.

The economy does matter, but what are we basing the economy on? That is the real question here I think.

I did read and did understand what Reefer posted. He commented saying "Environmentalists are the realists in this equation. Economy boosters are the fuzzy-headed ones." I posted back saying that both sides are important to the equation as it creates a necessary balance between the two. This is where he said he didn't agree and said money is an abstration and not real. If money is not real then apparently neither is economy. Is there something that I misconstrued in that?

Perhaps Reefer exaggerates his side to get his point across? I don't think exaggerations are needed to prove a point here. I think its a very good arguement that we need to modify our ecomonic philisophies to be more in line with our environmental practices. AKA...tweak the formula a little. I also think that it doesn't need to be all or none. You don't need to be all for the environment or all for ecomony....which is why I'm glad there are fuzzy heads on either side because they cancel each other out.

Many tree huggers seem to miss the point of the importance of economy whcih is what bothers me. It bothers me as much as economists who miss the importance of the environment.

[eyeball]

That has never been the argument. The arguement was that ecomony does not matter.

No it wasn't, that's only what concern for the environment is interpreted as meaning by people who care more about their wallets than the environment.

[eyeball]

Many tree huggers seem to miss the point of the importance of economy whcih is what bothers me. It bothers me as much as economists who miss the importance of the environment.

What bothers me most is how people can't make the connection between the sustainability of an ecosystem and the economy of a dependant community with accountable governance and management.

It all comes down to accountability, not just now and then, but always. That's what we need to sustain the most. Personally I just don't see any other way than something similar to the system of camera's, black-boxes, auditors and validators etc that monitor me when I fish.

[Accountability Now]

No it wasn't, that's only what concern for the environment is interpreted as meaning by people who care more about their wallets than the environment.

Eyeball...I'm just basing this on what comments were said to me. It wasn't until I challenged Reefer that anyone acknowledged the importance of economy. Up to that point I was hearing that money wasn't real.

[Accountability Now]

What bothers me most is how people can't make the connection between the sustainability of an ecosystem and the economy of a dependant community with accountable governance and management.

I agree with that. Not too many people or businesses look at the big picture. Is that the job of our goverment to do so? If so, then we are screwed!

[eyeball]

Eyeball...I'm just basing this on what comments were said to me. It wasn't until I challenged Reefer that anyone acknowledged the importance of economy. Up to that point I was hearing that money wasn't real.

It's what money is based on that seems unreal. It's been unrooted from the real world of fish and trees and transplanted into a world of financial instruments and who knows what else.

[Accountability Now]

It's what money is based on that seems unreal. It's been unrooted from the real world of fish and trees and transplanted into a world of financial instruments and who knows what else.

This is where I disagree with you. Money is a symbol for the interaction and agreements we make with other people to provide services or goods for each other. In ancient times, we traded goods or services directly but it was changed to money along the way. Money is in fact fish or trees or whatever you want it to be.

[eyeball]

I agree with that. Not too many people or businesses look at the big picture. Is that the job of our goverment to do so? If so, then we are screwed!

No, it's our jobs in our regions. Our government's job should be to facilitate the processes people develop to manage and utilize resources at a regional level. Instead they've been focused on globalization and facilitating it's management by and for the benefit of a 'community' of multi-national corporations.

We have been screwed by this in my region for years now and as I've said before small fishing communities are like canaries in a big economic coal-mine. Canadians have not paid attention to the death of all the canaries on both coasts of Canada and especially why and how they died. Simply put, it's because Ottawa is thousands of kms from the nearest ocean.

When you zoom out and only focus on the big picture you miss the kaleidoscope of pixels that tell the real story.

[eyeball]

This is where I disagree with you. Money is a symbol for the interaction and agreements we make with other people to provide services or goods for each other. In ancient times, we traded goods or services directly but it was changed to money along the way. Money is in fact fish or trees or whatever you want it to be.

Well, there's no more fish or trees where I live...well there is but they're almost all off limits to local use.

[Accountability Now]

Well, there's no more fish or trees where I live...well there is but they're almost all off limits to local use.

Sure there is...you just need to import them like the rest of us! Lol.

[eyeball]

Yep. And the few fish and trees that do come from our region are taken and processed by people imported from hundreds of miles away to be shipped to people even thousands of miles farther. It's retarded and people and communities everywhere are just as unrooted and adrift as the commodities and jobs they need.

My wife just landed in Alberta today. Not much call for old sea-dogs yet but I suspect I'll be joining the diaspora in the fall. I'm pretty sure I can drive a HIAB truck or run an excavator or anything else that comes with an engine room and hydraulics. If my kid's empire keeps growing I can be the old tire guy who changes his truck's oil and filters.

I'll probably live in his basement. That'll be a little weird.