Mirror of Justice - All about Law and More
*Home>>>Environmental Law

Environmental laws and regulations are too costly and can not be justified by their benefits.?


Do you agree or disagree? Explain using specific examples where possible.

It depends on which laws your talking about. A cost, benefit analysis needs to be done in each case. Environmental laws have their place. People want to live in a clean environment. If we didn't have any environmental laws we'd be have some of the horrific environmental problems that China is having right now, except they'd be a lot worse because we've been industrialized much longer.

Some environmental laws defiantly have helped. The smog prevention laws in L.A. are just one example--it used to be as unhealthy as smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day by just living in L.A.

That is Bush's excuse for not signing the Kyoto protocol, which would reduce greenhouse gases. "It would hurt the economy". That's his logic

Sure, let's have a profitable economy on a planet that may not last over a few more decades then!

agree
in calif we have to have every car smog tested every year at a average cost of $300
thats fine if you are rich or live in a big city
where you can ride a bus.
but what about people with less money
living in rural areas ( most of people in the state )
and we have to pay more for "special" gas
it's a load of #2

We can't continue to screw up the planet forever, so something must be done. It is more a matter of the cost of NOT doing anything outweighing the cost of implementing some regulations.

Some are good, like cleaning up our rivers, etc. But you're right, most cannot be justified on a cost/benefit basis. And all of the people who are falling all over themselves to vote for "Green" candidates will go to the wall to prevent a nuclear power plant in their locale. The real threat to the environment comes from the 3rd world countries that burn wood for heat, and use animals for transportation. And their leaders fought successfully to have them exempted in the Kyoto protocol. By and large, proponents of environmental regulations have an ulterior motive.

Tags
  Immigration Law   Health Care Law   General Civil Litigation   Family Law   Estates Law   Environmental Law   Entertainment Law   Employment Law   Elder Law   Education Law   DUI Law
Related information
  • Environmental Law Question (Superfund)?

    States and lower jurisdictions can do just that. In fact, that's the whole point about federal standards; states, counties and such cannot have lower standards because it violates federal law...

  • Environmental Court: To be or not to be and why?

    What we don't need is more courts and lawyers! you would have to explain two things first - why this would be needed (or why our current civil and criminal system is insufficient to supply ...

  • Irish Environmental Law and indivisable environmental diseases?

    SEE THE WEBSITES!!!! www.iela.info/about.htm www.sustainable.ie/resources/environme...

    ...
  • Do you know any environmental issues with distorted information that is intended to mislead people?

    The study on second hand smoke. It was proven to be scientifically bogus, and ruled as false report by the U.S. Supreme court, yet many states are using the report for banning smoking in public bu...

  • Are we following the environmental laws?

    Who exactly are "We" ? If its the USA, no, the Kyoto Protocol is still not signed by "we"..

    ...
  • What negative effects do environmental laws have on the nation's workforce?

    I guess you could make the argument that certain environmental regulations increase the cost of doing business for some employers thereby decreasing funds available to increase wages and expand wor...

  • How much do environmental lawyers make in nyc?

    very good money. considering the lucrative way they have been able to sue and litigate the Federal Government with frivolous lawsuits. They have been able to sue and when they lose, they lose no mo...

  • Who are the environmental lawyers in Erin Brockovich?

    Can you believe they got $132 million for as little as they contributed to that case? Life just ain't fair! (Sorry; don't know their names.)

    ...
  •  

    Categories--Copyright/IP Policy--Contact Webmaster