• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

World's largest marine reserve created off Hawaii

Which is more important to you; Environment or Economy?

  • Environment

    Votes: 8 72.7%

  • Economy

    Votes: 3 27.3%
  • Total voters
    11
Q

QuadpolarNutjob

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
1,522
Reaction score
582
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
World's largest marine reserve created off Hawaii - BBC News


"The designation bans commercial fishing and any new mining."

"Greenpeace also hailed what it called a "bold decision" that will ban commercial fishing and mineral extraction in the region."


what a legacy, closing 1,500,000 sq-km of American territory to any and all economic activity.


my question: should the president be allowed to ban economic activity in an area of American territory without congressional approval? if so, does the president have the power to do this anywhere in the nation? what's more important, the environment or the economy?
 
No environment and there will be no economy. Remember, we are care takers only, we do not own the planet.
 
The Economy always comes first for me, because it creates the necessary positive results that can be applied to the environment.

If taken in reverse, I guess mankind can starve and die off, while the environment remains untouched. I don't think that is in the best interests of one of the species living in said environment.
 
Casper said:
No environment and there will be no economy. Remember, we are care takers only, we do not own the planet.
Click to expand...

Cute slogan but that's about it. Remember, with no economy there will be no advanced sewer system and we'll be sinking in ****. Oh, I'm sorry for the bad word. We'll be sinking in solid bodily waste. Brown stuff. Smelly.

Remember with no economy there will be no expensive water treatment plants and we'll be drinking filthy water. Remember, with no economy we won't be able to afford artificially priced energy.

The environment versus the economy is a bogus dichotomy.
 
QuadpolarNutjob said:
World's largest marine reserve created off Hawaii - BBC News


"The designation bans commercial fishing and any new mining."

"Greenpeace also hailed what it called a "bold decision" that will ban commercial fishing and mineral extraction in the region."


what a legacy, closing 1,500,000 sq-km of American territory to any and all economic activity.


my question: should the president be allowed to ban economic activity in an area of American territory without congressional approval? if so, does the president have the power to do this anywhere in the nation? what's more important, the environment or the economy?
Click to expand...

I don't think that the decision is I/O, but more a tradeoff of marginally incremental combination of the two and in many cases it is win win.
 
QuadpolarNutjob said:
World's largest marine reserve created off Hawaii - BBC News


"The designation bans commercial fishing and any new mining."

"Greenpeace also hailed what it called a "bold decision" that will ban commercial fishing and mineral extraction in the region."


what a legacy, closing 1,500,000 sq-km of American territory to any and all economic activity.


my question: should the president be allowed to ban economic activity in an area of American territory without congressional approval? if so, does the president have the power to do this anywhere in the nation? what's more important, the environment or the economy?
Click to expand...

I doubt that these are strictly mutualy exclusive concerns. How noble of those Native Hawaiians to enjoy (commercial charter?) fishing income near their home (but naturally excludng their own waters) and wishing to ban it away from home.

The expanded area, including the archipelago and its adjacent waters, is considered a sacred place for the Native Hawaiian community.
Click to expand...

Noncommercial fishing, such as recreational fishing and the removal of fish and other resources for Native Hawaiian cultural practices, is allowed in the expansion area by permit, as is scientific research.
Click to expand...
 
Patrickt said:
Cute slogan but that's about it. Remember, with no economy there will be no advanced sewer system and we'll be sinking in ****. Oh, I'm sorry for the bad word. We'll be sinking in solid bodily waste. Brown stuff. Smelly.

Remember with no economy there will be no expensive water treatment plants and we'll be drinking filthy water. Remember, with no economy we won't be able to afford artificially priced energy.

The environment versus the economy is a bogus dichotomy.
Click to expand...
In a way I agree. Too many say it is one or the other and the truth is we can preserve the environment and at the same time have a strong economy and businesses can flourish. Thing is many businesses claim that the regulations are too stiff and that if left to monitor themselves they would do the right thing when it comes to the environment. Dubya said the same as Governor of Texas while ignore that right across the border in Mexico American businesses operating there were dumping all sorts of crap into the environment.
 
TheGoverness said:
Without the environment, we'd have no economy.
Click to expand...

No economy and five or more billions of us die.

It's a tough call. Maybe we should work out how much of each we want.
 
Casper said:
In a way I agree. Too many say it is one or the other and the truth is we can preserve the environment and at the same time have a strong economy and businesses can flourish. Thing is many businesses claim that the regulations are too stiff and that if left to monitor themselves they would do the right thing when it comes to the environment. Dubya said the same as Governor of Texas while ignore that right across the border in Mexico American businesses operating there were dumping all sorts of crap into the environment.
Click to expand...

True, and the environmentalists lied to ban DDT and condemned millions to death and economies to ruin. And the animal rights fanatics insist that the last vestige of slavery, what some call pet ownership, has to be abolished. And the global warming hysterics will lie to increase income redistribution as a way to fight global warming.

When you get right down to it, the dairy farmers care more about their cows than the environmentalists care about people.
 
Having large ocean reserves makes extremely good economic sense.

The world's oceans are being vastly over fished. By having some areas where the natural balance of species is preserved we might be able to manage the fish stocks to provide the maximum supply to humanity. Not like the Black sea which has no fish worth fishing especially in the Southern half where the Turks have not had any real restictions on fishing.
 
Patrickt said:
True, and the environmentalists lied to ban DDT and condemned millions to death and economies to ruin. And the animal rights fanatics insist that the last vestige of slavery, what some call pet ownership, has to be abolished. And the global warming hysterics will lie to increase income redistribution as a way to fight global warming.

When you get right down to it, the dairy farmers care more about their cows than the environmentalists care about people.
Click to expand...

Yes, the use of food as fuel is killing many millions of people per year and condeming the poorest billion or two to be locked into absolute poverty.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Yes, the use of food as fuel is killing many millions of people per year and condeming the poorest billion or two to be locked into absolute poverty.
Click to expand...

Wow, you're from the country where people eat petroleum. That must be a rich country. You're regurgitated propaganda is noted as are the millions of deaths from malaria and other mosquito-borne diseases caused by the lies of the environmentalists.

But, then, energy isn't generated just from petroleum products is it. So perhaps in LibWorld people eat coal, fill up on water from reservoirs and gain sustenance from sunlight.
 
Patrickt said:
Wow, you're from the country where people eat petroleum. That must be a rich country. You're regurgitated propaganda is noted as are the millions of deaths from malaria and other mosquito-borne diseases caused by the lies of the environmentalists.

But, then, energy isn't generated just from petroleum products is it. So perhaps in LibWorld people eat coal, fill up on water from reservoirs and gain sustenance from sunlight.
Click to expand...

Try reading what I said.

Yes the environmentalists are responsible for many millions of deaths from th eunnecessary banning of DDT and they are also responsible for the unnecessary deaths of many many millions per year from the use of food as fuel. This Biofuel has raised the price of basic food stuffs hugely and the world's poor are being kept in conditions of hunger and poverty to subsidise the rich farmers of the world.
 
QuadpolarNutjob said:
World's largest marine reserve created off Hawaii - BBC News


"The designation bans commercial fishing and any new mining."

"Greenpeace also hailed what it called a "bold decision" that will ban commercial fishing and mineral extraction in the region."


what a legacy, closing 1,500,000 sq-km of American territory to any and all economic activity.


my question: should the president be allowed to ban economic activity in an area of American territory without congressional approval? if so, does the president have the power to do this anywhere in the nation? what's more important, the environment or the economy?
Click to expand...

I remember when the air along the Southern shores of the lower Great Lakes resembled that of Beijing. There is no question that there were more jobs back then in heavy industry, from steel mills to refineries and tire plants. And those jobs paid well and were very good for the economy. But, people died young back then too. So...all things being equal, I'll take fresh air and clean water over a ****ty job in a smelly huge factory.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Try reading what I said.

Yes the environmentalists are responsible for many millions of deaths from th eunnecessary banning of DDT and they are also responsible for the unnecessary deaths of many many millions per year from the use of food as fuel. This Biofuel has raised the price of basic food stuffs hugely and the world's poor are being kept in conditions of hunger and poverty to subsidise the rich farmers of the world.
Click to expand...

I have checked the fuel question and did not find the fuel production was responsible for the fluctuations in food prices. There were a lot of articles claiming it, but research didn't seem to support it.
 
QuadpolarNutjob said:
World's largest marine reserve created off Hawaii - BBC News


"The designation bans commercial fishing and any new mining."

"Greenpeace also hailed what it called a "bold decision" that will ban commercial fishing and mineral extraction in the region."


what a legacy, closing 1,500,000 sq-km of American territory to any and all economic activity.


my question: should the president be allowed to ban economic activity in an area of American territory without congressional approval? if so, does the president have the power to do this anywhere in the nation? what's more important, the environment or the economy?
Click to expand...

This is a great thing, mostly because of the coral life that is being protected. Corals from NW Hawaii will grow freely, blooming and spreading across the ocean into the Hawaiian islands. It is also breeding grounds for the endangered monk seal. I'd love to visit the NW Hawaiian islands, but they are off limits for a good reason.
 
I support the move. But I don't think it is something a President should be able to do unilaterally.
 
QuadpolarNutjob said:
my question: should the president be allowed to ban economic activity in an area of American territory without congressional approval? if so, does the president have the power to do this anywhere in the nation? what's more important, the environment or the economy?
Click to expand...

The answer to your first two questions is yes and it has been a power of the President for 100 years. The environment is more important.
 
joG said:
I have checked the fuel question and did not find the fuel production was responsible for the fluctuations in food prices. There were a lot of articles claiming it, but research didn't seem to support it.
Click to expand...

What the hell do you think happens to food prices when you take loads of it off the market to make biofuel???????

The poor starve slowly off camera.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Try reading what I said.

Yes the environmentalists are responsible for many millions of deaths from th eunnecessary banning of DDT and they are also responsible for the unnecessary deaths of many many millions per year from the use of food as fuel. This Biofuel has raised the price of basic food stuffs hugely and the world's poor are being kept in conditions of hunger and poverty to subsidise the rich farmers of the world.
Click to expand...

So, tell me what this biofuel is that starving people are being denied. Are people driving cars on rice and corn? Are countries building power plants that run on Brussels Sprouts and turnips? Explain the massive use of biofuels that are causing people to starve.
 
QuadpolarNutjob said:
World's largest marine reserve created off Hawaii - BBC News


"The designation bans commercial fishing and any new mining."

"Greenpeace also hailed what it called a "bold decision" that will ban commercial fishing and mineral extraction in the region."


what a legacy, closing 1,500,000 sq-km of American territory to any and all economic activity.


my question: should the president be allowed to ban economic activity in an area of American territory without congressional approval? if so, does the president have the power to do this anywhere in the nation? what's more important, the environment or the economy?
Click to expand...
Very poor poll. Its not one or the other. Both are very important. Reducing pollution and conserving our natural resources are very important. The economy usually finds a way to cope. Just look at alternative energy. Solar roofs, hybrid and electric cars all over the place. Taking the place of coal which is a good thing. Not so much for those depending on coal mining but there is ample opportunity besides coal. You just need to be willing to relocate and or reeducate. Acid rain was once a problem. So was smog which still is to some extent but much better than it used to be. THere were those that said dealing with those issues would cause irreparable harm to the economy. Wasn't it Teddy Roosevelt who created the first national parks?
 
Patrickt said:
Cute slogan but that's about it. Remember, with no economy there will be no advanced sewer system and we'll be sinking in ****. Oh, I'm sorry for the bad word. We'll be sinking in solid bodily waste. Brown stuff. Smelly.

Remember with no economy there will be no expensive water treatment plants and we'll be drinking filthy water. Remember, with no economy we won't be able to afford artificially priced energy.

The environment versus the economy is a bogus dichotomy.
Click to expand...

When the economy requires resources to be extracted from the environment, the health of the economy is dependent on the health of the environment.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Do you really think that this congress will sign of on this?
Click to expand...

Of course not. But just because I happen to agree with this President more than I agree with this Congress doesn't mean I think the office of President should have that much power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom