3 ms·

"Things that are 'best' for society also tend to make the most money." You can make an awful lot of money in the short term doing things that are horrible for

"Things that are 'best' for society also tend to make the most money." You can make an awful lot of money in the short term doing things that are horrible for society. Look at natural gas extraction by fracking - are we saying that polluting the water table, the air and ground in an is best? Or look at the defense industry. The make a lot of money too. Is taking our great intelligence and devoting it to weapons and destruction best for society? Best might be best for a small group, but is rarely best for society.

jpadkins 13y ago
> Look at natural gas extraction by fracking - are we saying that polluting the water table, the air and ground in an is best? Yes, it's better than the alternatives. Cleaner and less CO2 than coal, cheaper than solar/wind/nuclear. It has never polluted the water table. For North American energy, what's better? > Or look at the defense industry. Since the power WWII superpower era, death and destruction has gone way down. Overwhelming force and vastly superior weapons are making large scale wars a thing of the past. We are actually living in the most peaceful time of human history, from a bodycount perspective. I agree too much money is spent on defense, but thats a political problem not a banking/investment problem.
- dkuntz2 13y ago
  Your argument is that it's cheaper than solar, wind, and nuclear, and that makes it better? Isn't that the opposite of things that are best for society making the most money, which was your original point? Wouldn't society be benefited almost infinitely more if it could harness an almost infinite supply of energy?
- bitcrusher 13y ago
  It has never polluted the water table? Oh really? http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/01/05/some-states-confirm-water-pollution-from-drilling/4328859/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/01/05/some... That's the first hit on a google search.
  - jpadkins 13y ago
    I live in western PA. I follow this issue closely. I care about my and my families health. Your article simple says there are reports of pollution. Pollution != polluting the water table. All fossil fuel extraction creates pollution. Hundreds of studies of been done, both public and private about fracking's risk of getting close to the water table. It's never proven to be true. The only study that suggests its possible is the Duke study, but it doesn't prove that it has happened. This is a hot button issue around here. The water is monitored closely, there are no fracking chemicals showing up in the water tables.
collyw 13y ago
Or hoarding assets such as housing. That's why the baby boomers are all rich in the UK, while anyone under 30 hasn't a hope in hell of buying a house by themselves. The restrictive planning policies exaggerate the situation.

jpadkins 13y ago

> Look at natural gas extraction by fracking - are we saying that polluting the water table, the air and ground in an is best? Yes, it's better than the alternatives. Cleaner and less CO2 than coal, cheaper than solar/wind/nuclear. It has never polluted the water table. For North American energy, what's better? > Or look at the defense industry. Since the power WWII superpower era, death and destruction has gone way down. Overwhelming force and vastly superior weapons are making large scale wars a thing of the past. We are actually living in the most peaceful time of human history, from a bodycount perspective. I agree too much money is spent on defense, but thats a political problem not a banking/investment problem.

dkuntz2 13y ago
Your argument is that it's cheaper than solar, wind, and nuclear, and that makes it better? Isn't that the opposite of things that are best for society making the most money, which was your original point? Wouldn't society be benefited almost infinitely more if it could harness an almost infinite supply of energy?
bitcrusher 13y ago
It has never polluted the water table? Oh really? http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/01/05/some-states-confirm-water-pollution-from-drilling/4328859/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/01/05/some... That's the first hit on a google search.
- jpadkins 13y ago
  I live in western PA. I follow this issue closely. I care about my and my families health. Your article simple says there are reports of pollution. Pollution != polluting the water table. All fossil fuel extraction creates pollution. Hundreds of studies of been done, both public and private about fracking's risk of getting close to the water table. It's never proven to be true. The only study that suggests its possible is the Duke study, but it doesn't prove that it has happened. This is a hot button issue around here. The water is monitored closely, there are no fracking chemicals showing up in the water tables.

collyw 13y ago

Or hoarding assets such as housing. That's why the baby boomers are all rich in the UK, while anyone under 30 hasn't a hope in hell of buying a house by themselves. The restrictive planning policies exaggerate the situation.