This is a good site for Reclaiming
Individual Rights and the Constitution
. . . just to keep it real for those
of us accustomed to the American way of life, here is what Maurice Strong,
Secretary-General of the UN Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, said in his opening
speech to the attendees: “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the
affluent middle class — involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels,
electrical appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban
housing — are not sustainable.” (Emphasis added.)
Based on Strong’s remarks, it
doesn’t take much of an imagination to predict just how much downward pressure
on our standard of living would be exerted by a sustainability oriented
EPA.
It also doesn’t take too much talent
at connecting the dots to understand that an EPA based on sustainability, an EPA
that wants to pursue wellness, not treat disease, an EPA that wants to use
“sustainability impact assessments” to analyze the probable effects of a
particular project or proposal on the social, environmental, and economic
dimensions of sustainability — that would be an EPA that would aspire to
regulate in detail virtually every aspect of our lives, thus completely
destroying our freedom and prosperity.
The point of all of the above is
that even though the EPA is already guilty of vastly over-regulating us, an EPA
based on an operational framework of sustainability would be much
worse.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment