On Thu, 29 May 2003 17:49:39 +0100, "Jim Webster"
wrote:


"Tim Tyler" wrote in message ...
In uk.rec.gardening Jim Webster wrote:
: "Tim Tyler" wrote in message ...
: In uk.rec.gardening Jim Webster wrote:
: : "Tim Tyler" wrote in message
...
: : In uk.rec.gardening Michael Saunby wrote:

: : I'm not sure how best to deal with pollution. Probably the world
: : should tax the pollutors - and use the proceeds to undo the damage
: : they cause.
:
: : so if you are rich you are allowed to pollute? [...]
:
: Basically you would only be permitted to make a mess if
: reasonable steps to clean it up afterwards followed.
:
: More realistic than attempts to curb pollution entirely -
: and more environmentally friendly than permitting it to
: go on unchecked.

: just stop the pollution in the first place. ban the flying of fruit. If
it
: cannot survive by sea then tough

I don't think that is a realistic goal, though.

so you would happily let the destruction of the environment continue


: lot easier than trying to undo the damage the plane did in the first
place

Indeed - but you can't ground the world's planes without a pretty
convincing case.

we aren't, we are saying no flying luxury freight, send it by sea.

OK so supermarket margins might suffer
but on the bright side, the third world, rather than cash cropping to pander
to wealthy europeans (often in european or US owned plantations sending
profits back to EU or US) could grow food crops for themselves

Since when have you shown any concern for anyone but yourself and a
few other subsidy goats?

Don't try and kid us now, do you really think we came in on the last
free trade banana boat?
--








So, you dont like reasoned,
well thought out, civil debate?

I understand.

/´¯/)
/¯../
/..../
/´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
/'/.../..../......./¨¯\
('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
\.................'...../
''...\.......... _.·´
\..............(
\.............\..