By James Sorenson, Sun=Sentinel, August 17th, 2010, Code Green, Tuesday Forum, Opinion page,
August 17, 2010
I got a kick out of this Code Green cartoon, and can't say that I entirely disagree with the cartoonist's perspective. But she did miss something. What she failed to point out is that this is not a two-sided argument, but a three-sided one. While "evil capitalists" are certainly involved, since they are the only ones willing to take the risk of laying out their own money to manufacture and market products that they hope to sell, and while many who are "green" are so only for the "feel-good" value, it's the virulent "enviro-politicians" who also need to be considered.
Legislation forcing us to "be green," and the threat of things like carbon credits, which do nothing for the environment, has caused both an upsurge in the creativity needed to make "green" products and a drasticly disproportionate increase in the costs for such things. Usually it doesn't cost any more to make a "green" product than it does to make a regular version of whatever it is, but attaching the term "green" to the label means an automatic increase of at least 25 percent.
To that end, it's the "green" legislators who have essentially forced the "evil capitalists" to make the products that the "enviro-snobs" feel so good about.
If you re-draw it with the "green legislator" in the middle, with open palms and crossed arms reaching across, please also draw a bucket beneath him where the additional money extorted can fall. That'd be a third arm pocketing cash, but we are talking about government, aren't we?