And he can also have a very small carbon footprint.

A lazy man is a man of the future in some potentially important ways.

On Apr 24, 10:51 am, Pflurggeee blaftX.com> wrote:

This mind set leads towards the conclusion that the planet (and life
itself) would somehow be better off if humans had no "footprint" on
planet earth. The only possible way to accomplish said goal would be
to drastically reduce the population.

Yet somehow this is perceived as a noble goal.

The obvious planetary history (including dramatic climate changes that
occurred in the past - prior to mankind's interference) are somehow
overlooked and considered to be natural and desired.

Yes, mankind affects his environment (whether we are responsible for
global warming in another issue, but ...). Without our ability to
affect our environment we would not be able to survive.

So next time you decide to reverse mankind's impact on planet Earth
please also inform us which people groups you are choosing for
elimination to accomplish your goal.

We already know a highly productive person who lives by intellectual
property can have a green lifestyle -- no motor vehicle, a tiny amount
of land occupied by a high rise apt.

A workaholic, however, might have the only sustainable lifestyle --
plowing his fields with oxen, etc.

But it may be energy inventors and innovators who are the greenest of
all because their work may lead to breakthroughs so all the rest of us
can become sustainable. Keeping an open mind is the hardest work of
all.

On the other hand look at Al Gore. Gore never did a day's work in his
entire life and Gore has a carbon footprint bigger than any of the
above.

Bret Cahill

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:39:14 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
aol.com> wrote:

A workaholic can't work forever, so how can he sustain that workaholic
lifestyle? Being a workaholic is his lifestyle and he will die
someday.

He may have wealth to achieve a lavish lifestyle after being a
workaholic.

Can he accept the transition from work to affluence? Some can't.

Perhaps he can achieve a longer life because he can buy a longer life.
But because he withholds well-being from a younger stronger man, the
younger stronger man is limited in his productivity.

"Pflurggeee" blaftX.com> wrote in message
news:1f71149d05bbr76m249e4tcqg2s6ac6sju@4ax.com...

More to do with efficiencey, than lazyness.

BOfL

On Apr 24, 6:39 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:

Since every high rise apartment that I have ever seen stands in an
ocean of concrete surrounded by what is essentially a very non-green
environment I question how green a life style this actually is (not
that I give a hoot owl's hind quarters for whether you are trying to
live green or not).

This is what I was referring to. Farming methods that require oxen
doom a significant portion of the population to starvation. Are
willing to choose which portion gets to eat the oxen cultivated crops
and which portion does not get to eat?

The Sierra Club has been fighting suburban sprawl for decades,
advocating the "Manhattenization" of America.

How so?

He adds no net CO2 to the atmosphere.

Bret Cahill

Typically a lazy person won't do the real work of changing the bad
habits acquired back when oil was cheap and CO2 wasn't an issue.

The sanctimonious Al Gore is a case in point. The misanthrope has no
interest in solutions, political or technological. He only wants to
priss around attacking other humans for their comparatively miniscule
output of CO2. That's Gore's only interest in AGW -- just another
vehicle to be an obnoxious jerk. And he's too lazy to admit his
hypocrisy unless it becomes a media event like his 20 MW-hr/mo
electric bill.

Everyone in Congress thinks Gore is an idiot.

Bret Cahill

On Apr 25, 1:30 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:

That does not surprise me, but so what. I give as much credence to
the Sierra Club as I do to a pack of hippie communist ... hummm what a
coincidence.

On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 00:28:51 +1000, "brian fletcher"
gmail.com> wrote:

All men are lazy in that they don't want to work more than necessary.

A very productive man can be extremely inefficient.

Pride as with passion is expensive.

Why would a productive man not be prideful, thus wasteful?