Depleting Natural Resources In Wendell Berry's Home Economies

Did you know that being immortal isn’t actually as fun as it sounds and could endanger our planet by overpopulating it? Well now you do, overpopulation is an extremely dangerous problem that can affect future generations greatly. One of them obviously being running out of space. Reproducing and death are both the biggest factors of the human cycle, immortality would become a difficult challenge to overcome because it would interfere with the life cycle. We should not live forever because we would crowd our environment and it would be very costly.

Also, even if they tried to renew their resources, the demand rate was increasing so much, they would have never been able to save the ecosystem. “While the hauhau tree did not become extinct in Polynesian times, its numbers declined drastically until there weren’t enough left to make ropes from” as stated in Easter’s End. Another similarity was that most of the species in these environments had depended on these trees and plants for survival and shelter. Since the resources were being used at such an alarming rate the animals would become extinct over time because the loss of all their sources of food and shelter.

People were afraid and concerned since they had a major insufficiency of jobs, supplies and shelter. Many companies began to enforce wage cutbacks and increased workload. Relief was not being offered to all the unfortunate Canadians who did not have a job. Many people were laid off from factories which meant that supplies were scarce as not many people could afford to provide for their family’s, people turned to the government to find a solution. I believe that their expectations were much too high as the government was struggling too.

The memes take away our ability to make our own decisions making it easy for harmful memes to leave the same impression as the harmless memes. “The image came up again and again: barriers separating people from previously public resources” (Klein 195) Corporations have taken it up themselves to limit our resources from the people that need it the most. The harmful memes have been spread more so throughout people than the harmless ones. Thus giving us, the tycoons that run these expensive corporations making natural resources like food and water, a hassle to get.

We have a case of a Catch-22—consumerism traps them in a destitute life, anti-consumerism strips their only means of feeding their family. When weighing the pros and cons of each ideology, ethical consumption seems like the better option. However, is it the best option? Will there be detriments in the global society if consumerism was eradicated? Or should it even be eradicated at all?

In today’s world, we are seeing the sustainable family farm dying off. These farms provide high quality food and produce, challenge and compete between other small farms to create this high quality market, and don’t use up our natural resources. However, with the rise of corporate farms, food quality has been compromised, they kill off smaller farms and lessen the competition, and they are depleting the natural resources we have. On the flip side of each, though, sustainable farms cannot produce in mass quantities, it is much more labor intensive and harder to manage and take care of, and it there is much more to pay attention to.

The people who find the need for ornament are holding the modern world back. It is resulting in hardship for humankind, on their health and economic state. This gives an understandable reason behin the rejection of ornament. Another reason of this rejection would be the fact that it takes up a far longer time when applying to a product than a modern design with no ornament. “omission of ornament results in the reduction in the manufacturing time and an increase in wages” Loos ' pays attention to how ornament does not have a link with mankind in the modern world.

Plant based diets are unable to provide essential nutrients necessary for human growth and reproduction. Growing these crops to sustain the human’s needs leads to tons of life loss through poisoning and fertilisers along with rendering environments completely destroyed. In order to minimise animal cruelty, and provide a healthy,beneficial diet for humans, a omnivore diet is the definite path to follow. With resources ever lessening in the world today, people must work together and protect the resources with their knowledge and technology in order for the future to be able to survive in the most efficient and healthy way

I 'm actually torn on this issue. The current price tag to support the homeless, or possibly even the underemployed, is enormous, and what we 've been doing clearly isn 't working. Changes to how we live, and technology have rendered many jobs obsolete, or soon to be obsolete so can 't expect people to work in unskilled jobs when those jobs don 't exist anymore. There will always be people who cannot support themselves due to mental or physical challenges, and society should ensure that they are provided for. There will also always be those who, due to an event or situation, find themselves without a home or means to provide for themselves; these people need assistance for a relatively short period of time.

They imply that life would be hard to live with the lack of new technologies, however, it becomes ironic because life is already at risk due to technology. Making technological advances and preserving the environment and human health will not be possible because of the pollution resulting of the waste output, the depletion of natural resources and the global warming resulting of the emission of carbon dioxide. To begin with, the waste output of the new technologies pollutes the lands, the water and the air of the earth. An average computer screen contains up to 8 pounds of lead and 2 to 5 percent of the trash in American landfills belong to electronics waste.

This would certainly have a rippling effect throughout the other critical infrastructure sectors, impairing everyone from the federal level of government to the private sector, which all require a form of communication on a daily business. A second critical infrastructure that would have a great impact if attacked by terrorist would be the Food and Agricultural sector. This sector also would have a rippling effect in relation to other sectors in the event of an attack. If we were unable to grow, produce, or manufacture our own food, we would be at a disadvantage, forcing us to rely on imported foods and would face an economic nightmare as we struggle sending funds outside the U.S. to feed it

They also feel unions are crippling our economy and forcing jobs overseas. Collective bargaining also makes it difficult to terminate employees for subordinate behavior. Not to mention, union strikes impact the communities they serve and jeopardize the economy. These are all troubling fact about unions however, without them employees face unfair treatment, lower wages and employment at will termination. Consequently, employers will gain the upper hand!

A border wall between the U.S and Mexico will not protect American jobs and reduce crime. The only thing that the border wall can do is affecting the trade market, affect the economy, and cut thru the bridge of nature. All these things will immensely affect our country. Our economy will rapidly drop, we won 't have a strong trade market, and our ecosystem will start slowly dying. One important reason that a border wall between the U.S and Mexico will not protect American jobs and reduce crime is that building a wall will only affect the trade market.

There will be nomore left on the planet. They all will disappear. This is a extreme conflict that scientist and the world is trying to avoid. The third reason i think Gmos are harmful because it can cause enviromental risks. This could also bother our health too because we eat lots of veggies out of the field.

Without a steady bee population, there will be insufficient supplies of food to feed the exponentially growing global population. In the end, the irony is that the human attempts to current sustainability will ultimately damage future