In our opinion: Earth Day reminds that environmental stewardship starts with us

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    April 23, 2019 9:31 a.m.

    To "A Scientist" but the problems with the market are brought about by the state. Why would you want the source of the problems to propose solutions? Do we let criminals determine how law enforcement will be performed? Why let the people who screwed up the economy decide how to "fix" it?

  • UtahBlueDevil Alpine, UT
    April 23, 2019 7:20 a.m.

    I could care less about what ever the latest and greatest political agenda item is. I am a firm believer as a Christian that we own a responsibility to use this planet that was granted to us with the absolutely most care and diligence as we can. That we have a responsibility to generations following to leave them a planet as good or better than we received.

    This isn't a liberal/progressive thing, a conservative thing, or a tree hugger thing. This is a religious stewardship thing. If you believe God created this planet, you should feel the compulsion to treat it with respect, Just as we strive to leave our meeting houses clean for the next unit that will use it, we should do likewise for this planet for the following generations that are to come to raise their families.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    April 23, 2019 12:43 a.m.

    I have to agree with Marxist. The same universalist and absolutist thinking that characterizes approaches inspired by Hayek and/or Keynes is overly simplistic and inadequate, as the Great Recession of 2008 demonstrated.

    In "The Great Transformation", Polanyi recognizes that the nation state and the market economy are not separate, "natural" entities but are BOTH artifacts of human invention.

    As such, both market and state must be part of the solution to our economic problems: neo-liberalism and state socialism in a thoughtfully "mixed" economy.

  • water rocket , 00
    April 22, 2019 8:32 p.m.

    For several days now I have seen plumes of black smoke coming from the Salt Lake County land fill. My question is this: Is government saying "do as I say, not as I do"? The same goes to water conservation.

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    April 22, 2019 12:59 p.m.

    To "marxist" but outside of Somalia you don't have unregulated markets. So, what is your point? It doesn't apply to nearly all of the earth.

  • RiDal Sandy, UT
    April 22, 2019 12:58 p.m.

    @marxist: "...an unregulated market will destroy man's habitation and his society."

    Maybe.
    But there is no such thing as an unregulated market.
    All markets are bounded by laws. Capitalism is bounded by laws, and there is no guarantee that socialism would result in any "better" laws. In fact, the historical evidence is directly to the contrary. Socialist markets are just as "greedy" to feed and clothe their people as Capitalist markets are. China clearly believes it is "socialist", yet is by far the worst polluter.

    So I don't know what markets you are referring to. Maybe Tajikistan ? :)

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    April 22, 2019 11:37 a.m.

    To "Joshua Stewart" but studies show that an inland port will improve the quality of life here.

    The University of Texas found that an inland port decreased delivery times, lowered transportation costs, and reduced CO2 emission through greater efficiency in transportation. On top of all of that they found that outside the immediate are of the inland port you had fewer trucks on the road.

    In addition to all of that, you have the benefit of MORE jobs in the area for people to work. Where you have more open jobs in a market with very low unemployment you automatically drive up wages without government intervention.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    April 22, 2019 11:26 a.m.

    Karl Polanyi in his "The Great Transformation" asserts an unregulated market will destroy man's habitation and his society. I agree. Polanyi needs to be read.

  • Liberal Mormon Salt Lake City, UT
    April 22, 2019 11:19 a.m.

    A Des news editorial quoting Wendell Berry?? **heart eyes emoji*

    And referring to climate change as a reality and not a political debate? Even better.

    This point is especially poignant: "The real issue is how much human suffering the world is willing to accept."

    Unfortunately, it seems, human suffering is something many in politics have an appetite for, and not just a willingness to accept.

    I applaud this paper's (and it's owner's) sincere expression on stewardship as a part of the broader conversation of our role, governmental-ly and individually, to addressing the environmental challenges we now face.

  • Joshua Stewart Salt Lake City, UT
    April 22, 2019 11:02 a.m.

    The majority of Utahns want industrial and population growth rates stabilized and quality of life improved. Utah’s leaders continue to focus on the “Silicon Slopes” and “Inland Port” instead of projects that will more directly improve the quality of life on the Wasatch Front for most Utahns. Developing on our rapidly diminishing open space at the Point of the Mountain and Salt Lake County’s west side will only exacerbate sprawl, air pollution, and add traffic to existing roads. Utahn’s want to spend less time in their cars and dropping another 150,000 jobs at the Point of the Mountain is like throwing gasoline on the fire. The massive inland port area focuses on adding more trucks and shipping to our already busy highways and adding an equivalent amount of diesel fumes to our already polluted valley air. The infrastructure just isn’t currently there to make these locations environmentally and fiscally prudent. Help families reduce the amount of income spent on transportation and housing and improve our schools and environment. Redevelop existing places into smarter, more beautiful, more walkable communities.

  • Count Rushmore Salt Lake City, UT
    April 22, 2019 9:05 a.m.

    Uh, was Lenin even mentioned in the article?

  • Astoria Jim Mamaroneck, NY
    April 22, 2019 7:50 a.m.

    I have always thought that protecting the environment was something that both devoutly religious people and staunch athiests could agree on:
    To religious people, the earth is God's great gift to His people, and should be protected and cherished.
    To athiests, the earth is the result of millions of years of heating and cooling and natural evolution, culminating in a world that even non-believers might term...miraculous.
    Regardless of how we think the earth got here, those of us who breathe its air, drink its water, and walk its land have an obligation to care for it. Because both the devoutly religious and confirmed athiests usually have children, and grandchildren, and this earth will be the only home they will ever know.