[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Brashears on Hanson



In article <58eo2p$6u8_002@pm5-33.hal-pc.org> on  Sun, 08 Dec 96 
15:49:45 GMT charliew@hal-pc.org (charliew) wrote:

> I could probably cite other examples, but I am trying to make the
> point that there is probably a very good reason that some of these
> things exist. 
> It may be impossible for some of these operations to comply with 
> environmental demands and remain in business.

Not necessarily so - depends on how level is the playing field with 
competitive organisations.

Perhaps also the way they are staying in business is by <cheating>, 
i.e. throwing some of their true costs off into the environment for 
someone else to pick up later.

Isn't that what environmental legislation should be trying to achieve? 
Ensuring that businesses of whatever nature do not cheat in such ways? 
And making sure for instance, that the farmer who farms in a truly 
sustainable way is not underpriced by the one who destroys, however 
slowly, the environment, of which he is but a temporary steward and a 
part user?

William |WRC Solutions: Computer Consultants|Tel (+44)(0)1695  50470
   Hite |MS-Office, Visual Basic, FTR, Text |Fax (+44)(0)1695 720889
        |wrhite@cix.compulink.co.uk, http://www.u-net.com/~wrcs/home




References: