# "Screw the planet, I'm an American!" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 29, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634 "2004-05-29T03:31:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/1 "2004-05-29T03:31:34Z")
So I read this column today and I thought it hit the nail square on the head. You may, of course, disagree. We consumers, by the product and disposal choices we choose, share a large role in the responsibility for either trashing or enhancing the environment we live in and that we will bequeath to future generations. But don’t our corporations have some degree of social responsibility also? In this day and age, knowing what we know, is it proper for companies to develop and produce new products (like those mentioned in the column below) that will have clear adverse affects on the environment, when other less ruinous products are already available? Is this an example of the “innovation” that everyone seems to think will keep America the number one country in the world? Really, there wasn’t any need for most, if not all of the products mentioned in the column. Yet companies went forward anyway, developing or copying each other, while surely counting on the usual slick marketing and free samples to be able to convince American consumers that regular throw-away products make more sense than reusable ones. IMO, I hope consumers will not buy these products and they will fail miserably in the market. Is there any practicable way to temper our corporations quest for profit AT ANY ENVIRONMENTAL COST? What if new products that were judged to be unduly stressful to the environment were denied favorable tax status? What if all research, development and marketing costs for such products could not be deducted on a corporate tax return? Would that help to encourage environmentally responsible development? Your thoughts? > [@](#): > > \*\*As Satan Scrubbed My Toilet > It’s a slew of new, disposable products that really scream “Screw the planet, I’m an American!” \*\* > > Life is good > > By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist > Friday, May 28, 2004 > > * * * > > Pity the poor beleaguered housewife, still struggling like a haggard dog through her array of thankless daily chores. > > Just look at her, hair pulled tight and life a-shambles, saddled with all manner of horrible bristly toilet brushes and horrible sponges and horrible cloth towels to wipe down the horrible countertops and then topping it all off with being forced to use one of those horrible old-fashioned bristle brooms to sweep the floor. Horrible! > > Thank God, then, for modern ultraconvenience. Thank God for the corporate household-product industry, so thoroughly glutted on excess merchandise and overinvention they can’t possibly think of things we actually need anymore. And thank God for our concomitant complete lack of any real environmental conscience. Yay America! > > See, now, the happily narcotized, entirely sexless, vaguely bulbous modern housewife in the recent TV commercial as she finally tosses away her angry, growling, animated (!) toilet brush (see how it snaps and snarls at her like a drunken deadbeat dad! See her toss it into the trash can and then plop her butt down on it in satisfied glee!) in favor of – say it with me – disposable toilet scrubbers you use once and throw away! > > Like the ScotchBrite! Or the Clorox ToiletWand™! Or the Scrub N’ Flush! Or the Scrubbing Bubbles™ Fresh Brush™ Toilet Cleaning System! Yes, Virginia, the world is certainly headed in the right direction. > > [Full column](http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2004/05/28/notes052804.DTL&nl=fix) ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/2 "2004-05-29T03:51:15Z")
Hey we’ve got disposable VCR’s, disposable TV’s and it looks like disposable automobiles are not that far down the road. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/3 "2004-05-29T03:54:21Z")
What are you, some kind of hippie who uses linen diapers and doesn’t use plastic bags for their purchase of Tylenol? More importantly, this leads to more spending. Normally, you would buy one cheaply manufactured POS plastic brush with some bristles every few years, at best. Now, you get to buy special super duper chemical-laden disposable brushes every few WEEKS. They’re turning a rare and cheap purchase into a constant purchase. The magic of consumables. (I’d lump in Swiffer with all these, but Swiffer is actually useful). It is this kind of “disposable” trend that leads us into trouble. Well, will lead us into trouble. Disposable cameras, disposable toilet brushes, disposable everything. Use it once, throw it away, buy more. Let the trash pile up. Put more money into the companies’ pockets. Continuing the week-long trend of bashing Libertaria, this is it - companies are not responsible, they can not self-regulate, and they do not act in the best interests of consumers. ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/4 "2004-05-29T04:24:27Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > It is this kind of “disposable” trend that leads us into trouble. Well, will lead us into trouble. Disposable cameras, disposable toilet brushes, disposable everything. Use it once, throw it away, buy more. Let the trash pile up. Put more money into the companies’ pockets. I just KNEW China, India, Indonesia, et al, were behind this in some way! You see, if they couldn’t make products so cheap with their cheap labor costs and availability, then we wouldn’t be so inclined to throw stuff away. So yet another reason why outsourcing/offshoring is bad for us (and the world). So there! All you free traders can put that in your pipe and smoke it. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/5 "2004-05-29T05:50:12Z")
Language that further anthropomorhizes corporations disturbs me a little. The prevalence of such idioms is prob’ly due to how our language is built I suppose. I don’t think that ‘our corporations have some degree of social responsibility.’ Corporations are, after all, just some ideas held in agreement and recorded on paper. There’s no entity besides the people, the natural persons, of the corporations. Corporations each have their own mission statements. This is what corporations are responsible for- the pursuit of their missions. The people who are party to the corporation have responsibilities for the corp’s conduct. > [@iamme99](#): > > What if new products that were judged to be unduly stressful to the environment were denied favorable tax status? What if all research, development and marketing costs for such products could not be deducted on a corporate tax return? Would that help to encourage environmentally responsible development? Why not go the other route and offer incentives for green items rather than punishments for the notably less green ones? Can we say tax cuts? The less government involvement the better. With punishments, the gov has the job of enforcement. The onus of showing that the taxee owes extra is added to the gov’s already overwhelming burdens. This costs more money and manpower than the use of incentives. With incentives, the burden of proof is incumbent upon the taxee. The taxee has to show that it complied with the criteria for the tax break. The taxee conducts the tests and investigations, fills out the forms, and saves the reciepts on their own time on their own tab. The people who benefit directly from the tax break are the ones who provide the bulk of the manpower and money. The most common problem I have with many sorts gov regulation of fyog measures is that if individuals cannot be trusted to regulate themselves, how can they be trusted to regulate someone else? Everybody involved is people. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/6 "2004-05-29T05:56:31Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > (I’d lump in Swiffer with all these, but Swiffer is actually useful). Plus the commercials feature a serious MILF. ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/7 "2004-05-29T08:16:50Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > I don’t think that ‘our corporations have some degree of social responsibility.’ Corporations are, after all, just some ideas held in agreement and recorded on paper. There’s no entity besides the people, the natural persons, of the corporations. Corporations each have their own mission statements. This is what corporations are responsible for- the pursuit of their missions. The people who are party to the corporation have responsibilities for the corp’s conduct. Well of course it is the people who run the corporations that I was referring to. I thought that would be a given and not necessary to define separately. > [@SimonX](#): > > Why not go the other route and offer incentives for green items rather than punishments for the notably less green ones? > Can we say tax cuts? The less government involvement the better. > > With punishments, the gov has the job of enforcement. The onus of showing that the taxee owes extra is added to the gov’s already overwhelming burdens. This costs more money and manpower than the use of incentives. > With incentives, the burden of proof is incumbent upon the taxee. The taxee has to show that it complied with the criteria for the tax break. The taxee conducts the tests and investigations, fills out the forms, and saves the reciepts on their own time on their own tab. The people who benefit directly from the tax break are the ones who provide the bulk of the manpower and money. I’m not sure what other incentives we could give corporations. They are already paying near the the lowest taxes, both in amount and effective rate since 1930. All research and development expenses are already deductible. Somebody has to pay the fare for the services the country expects and demands. While I like your incentive idea, I wouldn’t be happy with this unless and until corporations paid more taxes. In other words, this incentive needs to be net zero in cost to the government and individual taxpayers. Let the companies earn the incentive or pay a social penalty through higher taxes. > [@SimonX](#): > > The most common problem I have with many sorts gov regulation of fyog measures is that if individuals cannot be trusted to regulate themselves, how can they be trusted to regulate someone else? Everybody involved is people. Nothing we can do about that until HAL takes over… 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/8 "2004-05-29T10:41:19Z")
Reusing cloths and brushes and sponges is filthy. That’s why most kitchen sinks are thick with bacteria, and why bacteria are smeared all over kitchen countertops. Throw-away wipes are far more hygenic. ---
**Author:** ![Planet\_of\_the\_Shapes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b77776/32.png) [@Planet\_of\_the\_Shapes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Planet_of_the_Shapes)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 10:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/9 "2004-05-29T10:52:01Z")
This is a good example of market failure. There are significant enviromental costs associated with these sorts of products, but the enviromental costs are borne by everyone, not the producer or consumer. Effectively this means that enviromentally damaging products are subsidised, leading to overproduction of them. The best solution IMO would be some kind of eco-tax, which varies depending on how enviromentally damaging the product is. Ideally the eco tax would add enough to the cost of the good to exactly reflect the external enviromental costs of its production and consumption. In practice of course this would be impossible, but i’m sure some sort of figure could be estimated and that could be used as the basis for the tax. This would have to be some sort of global effort though, at the very least world trade rules would have to be amended to allow the eco tax to be applied to imported goods. There are problems with this approach of course. The difficulty of setting the right level of eco tax. Problems of enforcement. Potential for abuse of eco-tax on imported goods to circumvent trade rules on protectionism. The cost of administering the scheme. However in my view these problems and cost would be massively outweighed by the benefit of price incentives that more accurately reflect the total (private + social/external) costs of production. ---
**Author:** ![iamme99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/57b2e6/32.png) [@iamme99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamme99)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/10 "2004-05-29T11:19:44Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Reusing cloths and brushes and sponges is filthy. That’s why most kitchen sinks are thick with bacteria, and why bacteria are smeared all over kitchen countertops. Throw-away wipes are far more hygenic. I don’t know if you are really serious or not but your whole world is covered by bacteria. YOU are covered by bacteria. There are mites crawling in you in your hair follicles. Everything you touch is covered by bacteria. Disposal wipes make absolutely no difference in the big picture. Believing otherwise means you are a victim of corporate marketing. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/11 "2004-05-29T11:36:39Z")
I know that bacteria are everywhere, but most of them are harmless. But the _concentration_ of bacteria in the kitchen is sometimes thousands of times greater than even the toilet, and much of them are harmful. > [@](#): > > As Professor Gerba’s research would later determine, however, the bathroom was hardly the most dangerous part of the house, microbe-wise. The real pesthole: the kitchen sponge or dishcloth, where fecal coliform bacteria from raw meat and such could fester in a damp, nurturing (for a germ) environment. Next came the kitchen sink, the bathroom sink, and the kitchen faucet handle. The toilet seat was the least contaminated of 15 household locales studied. “If an alien came from space and studied the bacterial counts,” the professor says, “he probably would conclude he should wash his hands in your toilet and crap in your sink.” > > … > > Perhaps you think this talk of contamination is just paranoid squeamishness. You wish. Fifty to eighty percent of all food-borne illnesses originate in the home. Food-borne pathogens cause 6.5 million cases of gastroenteritis and 9,000 deaths per year. Home contamination is blamed for 20 percent of food-poisoning cases, more than any other source." — Cecil Adams, 16 April, 1999 You can Google for more info. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/12 "2004-05-29T14:04:57Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > It is this kind of “disposable” trend that leads us into trouble. Well, will lead us into trouble. Disposable cameras, disposable toilet brushes, disposable everything. Use it once, throw it away, buy more. Let the trash pile up. Put more money into the companies’ pockets. It’s not so bad if it’s disposable if the products were made to be recyclable. Say, 75% as a ballpark figure. [Kodak](http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=1032&pq-locale=en_US), for example, claims that 60% of all disposable cameras are recycled and apparently their recycling center will take any brand of disposable camera, just not Kodak. Unfortunately, I cannot find a cite with the amount of recyclable material in a disposable camera, and I do not currently have one with me. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/13 "2004-05-29T15:24:23Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I know that bacteria are everywhere, but most of them are harmless. But the _concentration_ of bacteria in the kitchen is sometimes thousands of times greater than even the toilet, and much of them are harmful. I’m amazed at the survival of any of my cousins who grew up on farms in the 1920’s and 30’s surrounded by animals and their, ahem, byproducts. You haven’t seen filth until you have seen a 1930’s barnyard in the spring after the thaw starts and before the ground frost leaves. And if you watched cows being milked at that time you would never have touched their milk. The thing most cows did best was, when the pail was about half full of milk, hunch up in preparation for relieving themselves. Your action was to grab the pail and milking stool and try to get away from the splash. And the coefficient of splash of cow excrement is something to behold. Reasonable precautions are one thing. The disposable stuff with all the bacteria is still around unless you put them in a sealed container, but they have to be transported there by you. You really need to wear protective clothing which is burned after each use. Face it. There is no escape other than living in the highest quality clean room and having everything delivered and taken away via disinfecting air locks. Our immune system is the best defense and it needs to be kept up to snuff by living dangerously. Lick that counter top once a day at least once a day. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/14 "2004-05-29T15:40:20Z")
Oh, I agree with you. All I commented on was the notion that reusing sponges and brushes is somehow intrinsically superior to using throw-aways. It isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/15 "2004-05-29T16:33:30Z")
Why do you asssume that Americans are especially bad? In fact, the U.S. is one of the cleanest countries around. China uses twice as much energy per GDP dollar. Canada uses more energy per capita than the U.S. U.S. power plants and factories are cleaner than most in the world. The U.S. spends more money and effort cleaning up the environment, promoting recycling, planting trees, and otherwise caring for the environment than most other countries. It’s true that the U.S. uses a lot of resources and creates a lot of waste, but it also creates a lot of wealth and products that are used around the world. A more fair comparison would be to compare U.S. energy use and waste production as a percentage of GDP, and on those terms the U.S. is actually pretty good. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/16 "2004-05-29T17:34:52Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > Why do you asssume that Americans are especially bad? In fact, the U.S. is one of the cleanest countries around. China uses twice as much energy per GDP dollar. Canada uses more energy per capita than the U.S. U.S. power plants and factories are cleaner than most in the world. The U.S. spends more money and effort cleaning up the environment, promoting recycling, planting trees, and otherwise caring for the environment than most other countries. And here I thought the US was [the world’s biggest polluter](http://www.google.com/search?q=%22United+States+the+world%27s+biggest+polluter%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&start=0&sa=N). Thanks for straightening me out on that **Sam**! ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/17 "2004-05-29T20:53:22Z")
Wow RedFury thats pretty impressive you apparently managed to respond to Sam’s post without even reading it. kudos! ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/18 "2004-05-29T21:47:03Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Wow RedFury thats pretty impressive you apparently managed to respond to Sam’s post without even reading it. kudos! You, apparently, impress easily. No doubt **Sam’s** a master at manipulating stats to serve his cause. A one-stop shop for all that’s good with Bushco’s America if you will. I just don’t shop there: > [@](#): > > **The US pollutes more, absolutely and per head, than any other country (it also produces more wealth). Its greenhouse emissions have risen by more than 11% since 1990: its Kyoto commitment was to reduce them by 6%. It is the only country to have signed the protocol and then to have repudiated it.** [The Politics of Climate Change](http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/sci_tech/2001/climate_change/usa.stm) ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/19 "2004-05-29T22:25:18Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > And here I thought the US was [the world’s biggest polluter](http://www.google.com/search?q=%22United+States+the+world%27s+biggest+polluter%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&start=0&sa=N). > > Thanks for straightening me out on that **Sam**! And some people, like Becky Norton Dunlop, who was for a time Virginia’s Secretary of Natural Resources, say that the biggest polluter in the US is the federal government. She documents her battles with the EPA in her book, “Cleaning the Air”. Unfortunately, we might never know for sure because the Community Right to Know Act exempts government from having to report its emissions. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2004, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634/20 "2004-05-29T22:34:50Z")
My view has alwasy been that earth has limited resources, and will be destroyed one day anyway (colision, He Fusion, whatever - the earth must die). We must use the resources to find ways to leave this planet and explore this solar system, and eventually head out to the stars. To this end we need the most efficient distrubuition of resources - up to this day that has been capitalism. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screw-the-planet-im-an-american/247634.md?page=2)