Driving my parents SUV today, a thought occurred to me. How am I really making a difference towards improving the environment? You see, this is an important question to me as I now consider myself an environmentalist. This is the "career" that I have finally prepared to commit to. A big change for a boy raised amongst the glitz of a big city, where money, fame and toys define your status. As such, I'm wondering now if I really am making a difference and what I can do to make the biggest impact while being able to live my life in the urban realm. Is it possible to be an environmentalist in a big city, where we are so dependent on "consumption", or am I just a big hypocrite? Or, will I have to move to Montana and live off the land and "suffer" through an existence. This is a question/perspective I believe that MOST people, who may be even remotely environmentally conscious (or want to be), contemplate as they live out their urban existence. Just how can one be an environmentalist while working at a high-tech job, while commuting to work in a gas-guzzling vehicle and while working horrid hours simply to pay an enormous rent? I know that this thought process has stumped me in the past. Maybe being an environmentalist is too daunting of a task - perhaps I should just give up.
Recently, I began working part-time with a small environmental media company called EcoWorld. EcoWorld's long-term mission is to accelerate the success of environmental projects by matching environmental heroes with heroes of philanthropy. It is vital to EcoWorld's mission to appeal to *all* people, not just other environmentalists. People like you and me, who yearn to live an urban life as ecologically responsible as possible. And, without having to give up *all* of the luxuries we enjoy today.
Education is the first step and most effective way to alter perception. The media still has the largest impact upon the masses. Several successful media campaigns were launched in the 70's. One commercial showed an American Indian crying after he witnessed someone throw litter out of a passing car, in another, Smokey the Bear advised to not play with matches. In my circle of friends, we used to make fun of environmentalists. People that chained themselves to trees or those that waited outside fancy hotels to douse fur-wearing women with blood, used to alienate us, and we made fun of them.
After reading the case study Welcome to the new town manager, by Mary Jane Kuffner Hirt, I established three major problems the community of Opportunity needed to correct. These problems involved the water & sewer system, the balancing budget, & the pay-as-you-go method. The city manager, Jennifer Holbrook, must implement strategies that would correct these problems quickly.
The history of welfare systems dates back to ancient China and Rome, some of the first institutions known to have established some form of a welfare system. In both of these nations, their governments created projects to provide food and aid to poor, unemployed, or unable families and individuals, however these were based on “moral responsibility.” Later in history, in 1500’s England, parliament passed laws that held the monarchy responsible for providing assistance to needy families by providing jobs and financial aid. These became known as “poor laws” (Issitt).
With forward movement in society, it is important to consider not just what will propel most toward success, but also what will help to sustain the environment along the way. What may have been considered appropriate decades ago, may no longer be socially acceptable due to the changes observed in both the business world and the environment (Fiske, 2010). Therefore, it is important for organizations thriving in today?s economy to consider how they may capitalize most effectively from their product or service of choice while minimizing or eliminating any damages along the way (Knoke, 2012).
The want for acceptance and the need to be liked are natural desires within human nature, especially within political context. Politicians are often criticized for bending their beliefs and making different promises to different groups, often even contrasting in their ultimate goal, but is there really another option? In order to win an election and maintain power, one must win the support of the majority of the constituent. In order to do so, he must sacrifice some of his own goals and thoughts to become what the people want, what the median voter wants; he must become who they want to represent them, who they want in office, and, most immediately, for whom they want to vote. Only by taking on this median voter approach on some scale, can a candidate even hope to become more than a candidate.
This essay will attempt to assess the impact of the 1942 Beveridge Report on the post 1945 UK welfare state. A welfare state is essentially ‘policy intervention through the state [to provide] forms of support and protection’ for all its citizens. (Alcock: 1998: 4) This means that the state will fund or provide provisions for services which are of need to its citizens. This is funded through citizens who pay taxes or National Insurance when they have active work, which in turn helps out the vulnerable members within a society. This concept is in essence designed to maintain the welfare of citizens from birth to the grave.
Getting involved in political affiliations, or voting for candidates that support sustainability is another solution. We can also support companies that prac...
The idea behind the welfare state was to relieve poverty, reduce inequality, and achieve greater
The arguments based on legalizing active euthanasia include that people in the world should be leaving a life that is worthwhile. By legalizing it, there will be increment in the death rate and life will be cheap. When the number of people in the country is low, the economy will grow and this will raise the living standard. In most of the court rulings, there are principles that have been put forward for supporting legalization. One of them owns the right to determining oneself. According to this principle, people make their own decision about their lives. They own the right of how they should use their bodies (Wennberg 261). They also have the right to judge the treatment they prefer. Surprisingly, they also have the right to decide what time they prefer to die. Most people prefer this because they own the right to what they should do with their own body. People should be living a life that ha...
As with most group projects, I started out with a basic understanding of the issue; essentially pollution and environmental changes humans make impact the environment in very bad ways. I grew up with a family who believes in intelligent design, young earth theory, and they all vehemently deny that anything humans do cause damage to the planet- everything reported in the news or by scientists are part of a larger “Liberal Democrat conspiracy.” Thus, my views had become largely hazy and even though I pride myself on being a Liberal, educated, intelligent young person, sometimes I was unsure what was actually true or what had been dramatized or exaggerated by scientists or the media to actually get people to pay attention. In addition, I also
From last few years there are plenty of good companies telling their environmental stories to the world and even some who are not but should be. Some do it well; others do not know where to begin or how to go about it. There are a few tips on what to look for by a customer who does not get greenwashed.
Euthanasia should not be legalized because the effects will cause much turmoil on both religious and moral standards, and the government should not be given control over the deaths of their citizens, especially when there are different steps that can be taken to prevent this hastened life-ending process. Euthanasia is not solely about a person’s ‘right to die’, but the consequences, evidence, and history described to show how grim euthanasia has and will become.
Surely there exist cities that are determined to transform into more eco-friendly representatives of urban civilization, yet these efforts are typically focused on minimizing the harmful output of cities rather than rew...
Socrates is widely considered to be the first male feminist in history. In book five of Republic, Socrates proposes the idea of having guardians for the city. He believes these guardians can be both men and women alike. Socrates believed men and women to be equal in this regard. C.W. Taylor points out, “Socrates suggests that the distinction between male and female is as relevant as the distinction between having long hair and having short hair for the purposes of deciding who should be active guardians.” Socrates also states that females need to be put through the same school as males. Socrates says, “The if we are to use the women for the same things as the men, we must teach them the same things.” Socrates is arguing that women cannot perform the same tasks as men do without being taught how to do them. This was a very radical statement in Socrates’ time. No one before him had ever thought women to be equal to men. Clearly, feminism is a major theme in Plato’s
The way I live compared to a few classmates of mine, I have the most impact on the earth. As well as compared to my whole class I would say that I change the environment more than an average person would. For example my total footprint according to the ecological footprint quiz I took is about 28 acres. With the results that it had given me I suspect that my actions of using a lot of services and the way I use my transportation, are the most impactful way I affect the earth. The reason my mobility on the quiz is one of the highest percentages from the categories is because I drive a good amount, and on top of that I have truck that does not get good gas mileage which in results give off more emissions to pollute the air. I was not surprised with my ecological footprint because I knew I impacted my environment greatly, but did not know the exact or estimated amount. In comparison to my classmates I also was not surprised that we all affected the earth greater than an average person because I knew that I did, so it led me to think that there were people who in similar amount affect the
This essay will discuss the arguments both for and against euthanasia, with careful consideration given to all aspects related to the debate. Perhaps the most well known arguments in the euthanasia debate are that of the sanctity of life, of which holds palpable religious connotations which will be further discussed; the ending of suffering or 'low quality of life'; and the respect for patient autonomy (Huxtable & Campbell, 2003). In terms of extremities of the euthanasia debate spectrum, the Church of England (2000) have published a document greatly opposing euthanasia, whilst on the other hand, Otlowski (1997) has thoroughly researched and published an analysis of the law with the ultimate aim of ensuring euthanasia as a legal option.