It goes on and on. If policy makers decided to save for 10 years and then invest in Program B, the number of fatalities in the 50th year would be reduced by I take this to be nearly a self-evident truth. If an economic activity produces directly one million dollars in product but also results in one million dollars of costs in health impacts and destruction of essential assets, common sense might lead you to think nothing has been gained.
This process may be a model of democracy at work, but it does not encourage thoughtful responses to complex issues or regulatory improvement by "fine tuning" in the light of new information and greater experience. My point is only to suggest how moral arguments might be applied to determine not only which future costs and benefits should be discounted but also what discount rate should be applied.
Yet it is perhaps equally likely that people do not take their moral values sufficiently into account when they shop or invest.
No one can enjoy his or her rights if he or she lacks what is essential for a healthy life: Isolation, assurance and the social rate of discount. Whereas no one could fault a philosopher concluding with an argument in favor of one perspective e. Constitution protects many values, even those that are socially unpopular.
Both the suggestion about how philosophical issues can be most usefully addressed and the list of philosophical perspectives or theories are common in the policy analysis literature see, e. From power plants to cars, consuming energy can produce emissions that harm our environment.
And this reality should not blind us to the fact that -- given today's business capital investments, land holdings, market position, product mix, etc. Libertarianism or "rights libertarianism"for example, usually appears in political theories that claim that individual rights are fundamental to determining political or moral obligations or claims.
They involve not only the question of how to weigh different benefits but also the more general question of how to compare different values.
Every moral doctrine, for example, must imply that gratuitous torture is bad; otherwise, people would immediately reject the doctrine. Investing in cities, children, and education will improve the quality of our workforce.
Sprawl and imbalanced land use burdens the economy at the same time it produces air pollution, greenhouse gases, acid rain, water pollution, energy and water waste, and more.
The issue is important for many other EPA concerns as well—for example, waste disposal regulations, an area in which much of the cost of regulating is borne initially but the possible costs of not regulating occur well into the future, and uranium mill tailing regulations, in which the yearly benefits of regulating are small but spread over a century or more.
Energy policy and the further future: Although some issues are simply matters of preference, there is a further argument for citizen or consumer sovereignty, based on the character of democracy, that applies to public policies. A few weeks ago a group of leading economists advised the President not to introduce a middle-class tax cut to stimulate our way out of recession, but rather to craft a program based on increasing investment.
What will happen to our industrial civilization if the supply of natural resources is constantly diminished relative to demand?
The Opportunity From Different Perspectives Let me comment on these matters for a few minutes from several different perspectives. The average individual risks involved may be identical, but they seem to involve different values.
Even those who do not accept the market failure concept of government, however, ought to favor policies that make some economic sense, and this rationale is a sufficient reason to apply discount rates to some aspects of public investments. Some would argue that procedures, like distributional effects, should also be regarded as part of the consequences of environmental policies Keeney, Shipping and work based trip costs go up as congestion gets worse.Waste Management Essay Examples.
16 total results. An Argument in Favor of Waste Management. words. 1 page. 2, words. 6 pages. An Argument in Favor of the Personal Effort in Saving the Environment. words. 1 page. How Waste Management Can Garner Participation Through Rewards.
words. 2 pages. The isolation argument assumes that individual savings decisions are based in part on an individual's altruistic preferences for future generations, perhaps especially for his or her own descendants.
Yet individuals have limited control over the benefits these later generations will receive bemuse they cannot control the investment decisions of others. Aug 06, · Expert Reviewed.
How to Help Save the Environment. Six Methods: Saving Energy and Electricity Conserving Water Reducing, Reusing, Recycling Changing Your Eating Habits Travelling Wisely Engaging in Activism Community Q&A Taking steps to conserve and reuse is one of the best things you can do to help save the 80%(59).
I think that saving the environment is worth it because Earth is a beautiful place and we shouldn't kill the place that has given us a home. I don't want to live in a world full of disease, filth, and radiation. Saving billions: Overall, energy efficiency is saving the American government, its citizens and businesses more than $ billion a year in avoided energy costs.
Creating jobs: In addition to saving money, energy efficiency projects (like building improvements and infrastructure repairs) create jobs.
An Argument in Favor of the Personal Effort in Saving the Environment PAGES 1. WORDS View Full Essay. More essays like this: waste management.
Not sure what I'd do without @Kibin - Alfredo Alvarez, student @ Miami University. Exactly what I needed. - Jenna Kraig, student @ UCLA.Download