2 ms·
I think "environment" really means the larger eco-systems that "belong" to the planet or at least to many countries. Oceans, rivers etc.
by DodgyEggplant 12y ago
I think "environment" really means the larger eco-systems that "belong" to the planet or at least to many countries. Oceans, rivers etc.
- zo1 12y agoSo how does that figure into all the individual pieces of land that people own? Is my land not part of the larger eco-system of the planet? I'd argue it is, and I take pretty darn good care of it. Are we somehow saying that we can't extrapolate this to a larger scale? For further reading, you might find this interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox
- DodgyEggplant 12y agoBut if you have land near the ocean, you may sail a few miles and throw it there. Your land is clean - the eco-system is not. Or, say, you have a river, and take most of it's water: your land is better off, then next lands were the river would have flow to not so much, and so on.
- zo1 12y agoSure could, and I'm guessing the current law framework would semi-allow it. Do you think it would be different if people were allowed to own pieces of ocean/sea?