Unable to finish Bourbon for Breakfast due to Tucker's hatred of the environment

You must be logged in to create new topics.

Unable to finish Bourbon for Breakfast due to Tucker's hatred of the environment

  • Rebecca Lau

    I didn’t know much about Jeffrey Tucker before this site. I read a few articles he wrote on lewrockwell.com but I didn’t know much about him. After donating to this site I started reading his book, which I downloaded for free off mises.org. I couldn’t get past the first few chapters because it’s all about how much he loves wasting water and hates separating his garbage. I just wanted to scream, “Stop whining!” Even though I am a libertarian I still feel like an environmentalist at heart.

    You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    • Jeffrey Tucker

      This message sort of makes me smile. I’m a bit tone deaf on this issue for sure. There is more to say about this though. What defines waste? It’s an interesting question. I am involved in a reading group right now going through Rose Wilder Lane. She points out that central planning never wastes resources. It wastes time and human energy.

      Plus domestic water use only constitutes 1% of national water use. The focus on this to the exclusion of corporate farming is disproportonate.

      In any case, I do see your point. I’m not so great at talking to greens, though I should be.

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        Redmond Weissenberger

        I disagree – central panning absolutely destroys resources.

        Just look at the entire history of the Soviet mismanagement of natural resources

        <span style=”color: #000000; font-family: ‘Times New Roman’; font-size: medium; line-height: normal;”>The Aral Sea represents one of the Soviet Union’s worst environmental catastrophes. With the Sea having shrunk to one- fifth of its former size, the fishing industry once supported by the Aral has been destroyed over the past 20 years. Much of the once-fertile land around the Sea has turned into desert and salt flats. Due to chemical pollution and erosion, the health of local people has deteriorated drastically and agricultural productivity in the region has plummeted. The birth rate is falling while infant mortality is rising. Only 38 of the 178 animal species of the region are still extant.</span>

        As for greens, should we really indulge their prejudices??? I call for Environmental BRUTALISM! ūüėČ

        You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Anonymous

      I wouldn’t consider Tucker’s view hatred of the environment, I think it would it be more appropriate to say that he loves humans and respecting property rights more than he loves the environment.

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        Redmond Weissenberger

        define “the environment”

        You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Seth MacLeod

      When I think of Jeffrey Tucker, the first word that comes to mind is ‘hatred’.

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        Jeffrey Tucker

        ha ha

        You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Steven Horton

      You can be an environmentalist and not recycle. The recycling industry is not all its cracked up to be. The process of manufacturing new plastics out of recycled materials is not pretty or profitable at this point in the game. And, in my thoughts, is anti-environmental. The recycling process and the finished recycled products cause more leeching of hazardous materials into the environment than creation of new plastics. This is a waste management issue and I think that the landscape for innovation in this field would completely change if the control of municipal waste industries was privatized.

      Imagine being charged for how much you toss out instead of just tossing out… it would change entire manufacturing industries.

      On the flip side, recycling metals has been profitable for decades and is a practice I highly encourage for young entrepreneurs. At the age of 7 I remember collecting ~150lbs of aluminum cans at a time and crushing them to take to the scrap metal yard with my dad. I’d get at least $50 for my labor.

      As for the water issue, he is right about agricultural practices being the main culprit. But, the water industry isn’t exactly privatized and I think our “drinkable” water suffers because of that… mainly in quality and supply management. Again, the market for innovation is sitting there just waiting to burst.

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Kwashiorkor

      Do you save your hair clippings for those who don’t have hair?

      Do you set your thermostat lower to conserve energy?

      Do you eat less because others have no food?

      Do you hold your breath to conserve atmospheric oxygen?

      I don’t mean to be facetious, but my point is that need and waste are subjective terms, and you don’t have the obligation to accept the definition created by others, even when they are in the majority.¬† Further, you don’t have the obligation to meet their needs.¬† You many choose to do so out of benevolence, but the efficacy of that should be left to each person’s judgment.

      Do we really have shortages of water, food, clean air, places to dispose of garbage, energy, etc., or has the government mismanaged these resources, and found it’s cheaper to try to modify our behavior through guilt than fixing what they’ve broken?

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Redmond Weissenberger

      Define “Environment” and define “environmentalist”

      Environmentalism as it currently operates is essentially malthusian misanthropy, which is largely focused on humans controlling other humans. the environmental movement is currently one of the biggest dangers to human liberty.

      Many of the things that Jeffrey complains about are entirely valid complaints, for instance recycling AKA expensive garbage, is an incredibly wasteful exercise, which creates far more damage to the “environment” due to inefficiency than it reduces.
      Entrepreneurs operating in a free market seek to reduce waste and inneficiency, not create it.

      As for the “environment” you can’t hate an undefined abstraction – Jeff doesn’t hate the “environment”, he hates the outlandish government rules and regulations that have been put in place purportedly in the name of saving the so-called “environment” but are usually just there to justify some bureaucrats job easier or protect some crony from competition.

      Also, if he happens to have a preference for hot showers that use more water than you think is proper, I suggest you take it up with him, not get the state to arbitrarily decide how much water is the “right” amount of water for a shower.

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Daniel Shafrir

      At the risk of beating a dead horse, since it’s been stated in a number of replies already, I will also add my two cents:

      1) “wasting” is defined as “you using more than what I think you should”.

      Rebecca, I assume you have a shower once a day or every other day. Why do you have a shower more than once a week? Can’t you see how wasteful that is?

      I assume the water in your toilet bowl comes from the same source as the water in your kitchen sink. Why do you pee in drinking-grade water? Don’t you know there are people in the world without access to clean water? What a waste to pee in it!

      2) The municipal overlords that are in charge of our garbage as us (the CUSTOMER) to separate out the garbage much like how the postal workers ask us (the CUSTOMER) to make sure we post our Christmas cards in time. That’s ridiculous. THEY provide the service, they should do what they’re in the business of doing. Shopkeepers in December hire more temp staff to deal with the overload of work. And they do it for a profit. If the garbage collection service was a free market service they wouldn’t dream of selling us a premium service and asking us to get our hands dirty. Imagine you had to wash your own plates at a restaurant. Sure there are fast food chains that you clear your plate into the trash and there will be garbage collection services that are cheaper and would ask you to separate out your trash, but that’s the choice you make. We don’t have a choice with municipal garbage collection. And as Steven Horton said, the recycling industry ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. Until we have a functioning free market garbage collection system, I won’t believe anyone (on either side of the debate) who says that recycling is worth the effort or not. Only the profit motive and ACTUAL private property (including private ownership of dump sites and functioning laws against invasion of pollution of others’ property).

       

      Further reading: Walter Block’s chapter from Defending the Undefendable: Defending the Litterer

      https://mises.org/daily/4563

      and a very good essay on this (especially the part about the garbologist)

      http://mises.org/etexts/Environfreedom.pdf

       

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Dave Burns

      Rebecca I also feel like an environmentalist. I like clean water and air. But I think Jeffrey’s not alone in his attitude toward recycling and water conservation. Can we find more sensible approaches for achieving the goal of a sustainable environment? Have you looked into the ideas of the “free market environmentalists” like PERC?

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Toni Sopocko

      The whole environmental movement is so much a fashion trend.¬† We are involved in the construction industry.¬† Lots of wealthy ‘green’ people building new houses these days.¬† Some of their ideas make sense, many do not.¬† If you really want to be environmentally responsible, why do you build a 5K square foot house?¬† Why use CFLs?¬† Put in geothermal heating on top of¬†glacial moraine? (it doesn’t work!) ¬†Why build your vacation ‘cabin’ on land that must be cleared of trees first, and power brought in to service your needs?¬† None of that is green.

      BUT, it’s YOUR money.¬† You should be able to do as you please with it.¬† Just don’t preach to the rest of that we need to abide by YOUR vision of ‘conservation’.

      P.S.  I loved Bourbon For Breakfast.  It was the first happy book on liberty I had ever come across.

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        Jeffrey Tucker

        This response demonstrates that we need an upvote button the forum

        You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        Dave Burns

        Jeffrey gets kudos for rediscovering optimism.

        You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Richard Masta

      market solution to plastic? behold the edible water bottle! http://www.fastcoexist.com/3028012/this-edible-blob-is-a-water-bottle-without-the-plastic

      and why would I put my recyclables in a govt bin? so they can blow around and pollute my town? walk around your neighborhood on trash day. plastic packages and cardboard everywhere. (trash cans have lids.)

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Hap Werther

      So, we know there are finite natural resources on Earth. ¬†If we don’t have a catastrophic event or pandemic, we surely continue with population growth – more people, more use of resources.¬†Prepare to mine other planets 100 years from now. Today, aluminum is about 50% recycled, steel is about 65% recycled, which means less has to be mined (resource lasts longer). Energy is a place for Entrepreneurs today for sure. The fracking boom found another way to get at natural gas and oil. There is still limited resources. I’m all for more solar, wind, and hydroelectric technologies. I think it is realistic to think about the environment, that keeps people alive. We do ruin and waste. If we want to be taken seriously, we need individuals who will be an example (not government/corporate regulation corruption). Those who will look into the future and see the need, will develop new technology now that can be used hundreds or thousands of years from now.

      You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Viewing 10 reply threads