What is more important for you - economy or ecology?

You frame this as an either-or choice. It's a false dichotomy. economic prosperity and environmental protection are often interconnected.

That said, ecology is more important to me in general. The economy exists within the environment, not the other way around. It's definitely a more nuanced relationship than "either-or" suggests though...

▲

panick21_ 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Trains, walking, bikes, solar or nuclear plants are all good for both.

Smart policies like land value tax are good for both.

Tons and tons of things are good for both.

In general economy is more important because people, but people also live in the environment. But not building a mine because of tailings is a bit silly as it just mean a mine somewhere else is built that handles tailings even worse. These things can be done reasonably.

And if you actually price in the environment destruction in the supply chain cost, we could do a lot of things.

	▲	psd1 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> ...if you actually price in the... Ding ding! We need to internalise the externalities. Put a value for pollution right into the retail price tag. Capture it as tax, and reduce other tax correspondingly. In counties with a sales tax, this move could be approximately neutral to a basket of goods. More realistically, it will generate outrage. Fuck 'em. There's already outrage against megacorps. Take the economic hit in the short term, rebalance shopping habits, profit.

▲

Juliate 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why should any be exclusive of the other?

My take is that it is kind of exclusive today, because the economy is designed and limited against the ecology, but that's not a fundamental given. It comes down from the choice of humanity to extract itself from nature. That's a choice and a story we can identify, criticise, and counter with another choice. Which would take some time, but... that's all we have.