A comment on a Morning Edition story about the difficulty of finding food in Yemen
also posted to the NPR ombudsman's Open Forum:
Economists know that natural resources are valuable.
Most people, with a moment's reflection, recognize that natural resources belong to all people equally.
The NPR ombudsman, if he is reading his 'Open Forum' page, knows that persistence of economic externalities means that the least well off are less well off than they would be if we were charging fees to industries that cause environmental degradation, and sharing the fee proceeds equally with all people.
Why is there no mention of the fact that natural resource wealth is shared extremely unevenly in the world we live in when reporting a story about poverty and lack of access to markets?
What if natural resources were really owned equally by all?...
http://gaiabrain.blogspot.com
We would end extreme poverty throughout the world. That's what.
And overall rates of using up resources and rates of putting pollution into the air and water would be kept within limits that most people find acceptable.
Why is there never a public policy survey that asks the question whether we are using up resources too rapidly, or whether current emissions are within acceptable limits?
Why are these facts not noted in reporting about poverty and environmental challenges / sustainability?
Tue Jun 26 2012 08:45:31 GMT-0500 (Central Daylight Time)
Equal sharing of natural wealth would promote justice and sustainability
No comments:
Post a Comment