This Thread is closed...
We read this story a few days ago and lost in the grey space and the hype was the fact that the family involved in "No Impact Living" were headed by two writers, and the male element of this arrangement lived this program so he could write a book. You can kiss several trees goodbye once the book gets published. Helluva compromise iffin you ask us, but like all leftist ideals, the entire program is a lie.
Far be it for us to criticize a choice, except all in all this was a dishonest choice. The couple described in the story didn't so much live a "no impact" life as compromise their own parameters and principles to make the story happen. As Scott Burgess notes, "No Impact Living" when applied to the rest of the population is more a recipe for dystopia than a positive change for the better.
It is worth noting that much of what Greens want to save in terms of resources, are in fact renewable resources, such as paper. In all candor "No Impact Living" as practiced appeared to be a con game, much like "Global Warming", much like nearly every element of modern environmentlism.
And it's a shame, really. The answer for the most efficient allocation of resources in any society, capitalism, is the one solution Green folks refuse to consider. And that's what makes them dishonst brokers of any solution to problems in the environment.
It has been 6263 days since this story was posted.
Discussion threads close after five days.
Sorry...
Return to the Free Fire Zone
See the full, archived discussion
