> The writer may believe it when they write "most people ignore trees" but it is at least bi-model right? I grew up relatively poor, and I can tell you that mo

> The writer may believe it when they write "most people ignore trees" but it is at least bi-model right? I grew up relatively poor, and I can tell you that most Americans I have met generally feel deep anxiety about their economic condition, and that trend is accelerating. There are not emotional resources enough in their minds for things that don’t affect their immediate survival and happiness. The problem is not people liking trees, they do. The problem is, if you were to ask most people if they would exchange 1/6 of earth’s tree diversity for a couple thousand dollars, their response would be “where do I sign?” I love nature and mourn for everything that has been lost, but I am convinced there’s no way we will be able to address the problems we face without first addressing the economic tragedy of most of the people around us. Sorry for the rant, but I have also tried/wanted to address problems with collective action and come to the conclusion that it’s not going to be possible until we’ve better addressed the most immediate needs of the people we live with.