|
Let's keep it on the MySpace topic guys.
Hmmm, 38 million subscribers vs. 600 complainers? I'm sure they'll change their policies real quick... NOT!
Originally Posted by slboettcher
Personally, I could care less about MySpace.
|
Originally Posted by HeathenBrewing
Originally Posted by djct_watt
Considering that over the past 10 years, we've seen pollution decrease in this country, I'd say that it is some pretty good progress. In fact, in almost every country with high GDP/capita, you see low rates of pollution. Usually the big polluters are barren third world countries with corrupt governments and no foreign investment or corporations.
Here it is, direct from the EPA: Each year EPA looks at emissions that impact the ambient concentrations of these pollutants. These annual emissions estimates are used as one indicator of the effectiveness of our programs. The graph below shows that between 1970 and 2004, gross domestic product increased 187 percent, vehicle miles traveled increased 171 percent, energy consumption increased 47 percent, and U.S. population grew by 40 percent. During the same time period, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants dropped by 54 percent. http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/2005/econ-emissions.html Now unless the EPA lies to other sources is beyond me, but this is the information the EPA ITSELF put up for the public. This whole topic is completely tangent of Myspace, and if you want to continue the argument, let's start a new thread. But hopefully this evidence will suffice to end this debate (regarding governments, corporations, and pollution). As you can see by the data, we became richer as a whole AND polluted less. Your local Macro Economics professor would be more than happy to explain to you how that works. I'll give you one point; this data does not include CO2. . . which is what you originally stated, but CO2 is one of the lesser pollutants, and hardly relevant (IMO) relative to the other pollutants I just quoted. But the original point was about pollution in general. So to revise my initial point, if pollution decreased (SIGNIFICANTLY) over the past 10 years in the six most important categories, I'd consider that a success, especially if the economy made more money as a whole. But yes, I'm done talking about pollution (sorry for this very tangent post; it's my last, I swear). |
its not so much myspace as the movement of the web into a new era of social interaction... myspace just happened to be in the right place right time, and whether it will have lasting power is really a question a lot of people are still asking
|
Originally Posted by djct_watt
It's very common for "other" media, particularly biased newspapers and newsmedia to incorrectly quote the EPA. Here it is, direct from the EPA: Sorry, the EPA has been caught too many times...I just cannot rely on most of their data. |
Originally Posted by xSTANDxSTRONGx
That sounds pretty f*cked up. I knew there was some reason I didn't like Murdoch.
|
Originally Posted by TheScionicMan
Let's keep it on the MySpace topic guys.
Hmmm, 38 million subscribers vs. 600 complainers? I'm sure they'll change their policies real quick... NOT!
Originally Posted by slboettcher
Personally, I could care less about MySpace.
|
I just say NO to myspace all together! regardless of that article...I used to have it but its just DRAMA! and it was overtaking my life! haha
|
"MySpace Ruined My Life" Shirt/sticker in Hot Topic
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:12 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands