![Runes and their Meaning [410x771 - 94KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/8eGI3f.png){kind=link}
Hunting laws and regulations are a huge exception to what you just said. Many habitats and species have been restored specifically because of these laws. Not everything is black and white
They're not a huge exception at all. Just because the government is sometimes effective, does not mean that it didn't use an excessive amount of resources in doing so. If it takes the government $10 million to do something that the private sector could have done with $1 million, then $9 million was wasted. And who gets to determine which habitats and species get saved and which are left to go extinct?
The solution, of course, is obvious.
So your solution is to let corporations protect/restore the environment? Are you even listening to yourself?
Yes the solution is obvious, lobotomies for retards
https://www.mdwfp.com/conservation/who-pays-for-it/pittman-robertson-act.aspx
No, the solution is to privatize the land and the ocean, so that the private owners who have a direct interest in the preservation of their property and the resources to do so, can do so. The government lacks both the resources and the incentive to truly care. It pretends to solve the problem by creating agencies and bureaucrats, but all it does is use the environment as an excuse to extract more taxes from us all while doing next to nothing to solve the problem. And this problem was created by government in the first place -- the court system does not properly enforce property rights, and as a result, we have "public land" which is essentially unowned land that is subject to the tragedy of the commons.
There are basic economic principles at work here and I'm not going to give a whole class on economics to explain why this is the case.
Suffice it to say, when you say something like, "let the corporations restore the environment", you are using the same arguments that a retarded leftist would.
(post is archived)