Comments on: Poll: Environmental support dips vs. economy

By: Donna in ID

Donna in ID — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:59:26 +0000

Just what is going on that youre not posting anything here. You have places there are over 1000 and then cut a bunch off at 10 or 30 and now nothing here. People take their time to put their thoughts and feelings down and send to you and you really have a strange way of treating your fans. You don't seem to really want anything anti Obama among ot things.

By: DENISE

DENISE — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:56:05 +0000

We need to focus more on creating "green" solutions. Drilling for oil will only temporary help us, but once that is gone, or destroyed by a natural disaster (hurricane/earth quakes) Then we will be right back to square one, high oil prices and no/outdated "green" technology

By: The Blind Lady of Justice

The Blind Lady of Justice — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:53:38 +0000

To phrase the question this way is a false choice ... this is not a PICK either / or situation.

We must fix both together.

By: margo

margo — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:52:49 +0000

In which way saving the environment is risking the economic growth?
and in which way the economic growth is hurting the environment?

your reserch poll don't give us much to support one or the other?

Also, in which way "fixing of the economy " what are the "fixing" ? drilling for oil? banking? emigration? tell me what government focus on economic growth your poll said>?

By: Canuck

Canuck — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:33:06 +0000

everyone says this until it effects them. talk is cheap.

By: Sylvia

Sylvia — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:13:05 +0000

It doesn't have to be either/or. Environmentalism can be good for the economy. This pitting of economy versus environment seems to feed into the President's push to drill domestically to improve the economy. I'm unclear if he has any other ideas for improving the economy that don't involve oil.

By: NickNas

NickNas — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:12:17 +0000

SO we are successfully being STARVED into letting Bush have his way with the Oil Drilling? Who didn't call this one when these ENRON style Oil Traders started this artificial speculation ( That Bush has allowed to go on unregulated I might add)

By: Chuck

Chuck — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:55:02 +0000

It's been said we're addicted to oil, and the willingness of so many people to drill in our remaining Wilderness areas really does appear as if the addicts are desperate to get one last fix. We simply don't have the oil reserves to change the fact that we need to switch to alternative energy sources and emphasize conservation. The USA needs to find a cure for it's addiction, and we need to protect our environment.

By: Willow, from Iowa

Willow, from Iowa — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:42:10 +0000

Through good times and bad, the environment will always be with us. If we start screwing up the environment, drilling in the Gulf, etc. we will be stuck with the problems even if the economy improves. Our environment is like money in the bank. It is important even if we have to go through difficulties. We need to keep it safe.

By: Job went bye-bye

Job went bye-bye — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:35:49 +0000

My, my, my, so it's the economy. Then why is everything that used to be made here is now made overseas? We are no longer anindustrial nation, we are more like a third world country and I don't see it getting any better in the near future. We cannot sustain ourselves any longer.

By: John Anthony Castro

John Anthony Castro — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:32:45 +0000

Its the Environment Stupid!

When are politicians going to wake up and realize that we are humans BEFORE Americans.

Has anyone noticed that the price of copper has increased 400% during the Bush Administration and it just so happens that copper is the primary component of solar panels?

Has anyone noticed that acetone as a gasoline additive increases engine efficiency and decreases carbon emmissions and that American Auto Manufacturers are now making engine parts more susceptible to damage by acetone when they were before resistant?

Has anyone noticed that the WTO ruled that a municipality providing clean forms of natural energy to help decrease the electric bills of their citizenry was ruled an illegal trade barrier and is now prohibited?

Has anyone realized anything?

By: Justin, Somerset, Ohio

Justin, Somerset, Ohio — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:32:35 +0000

I don't believe this for a minute. If helping my pocketbook helps the environment, fine...but I am not going to put myself out for something that I don't believe is in peril to start with. Climate change? How about weather patterns, everybody!

By: Randy - Denver

Randy - Denver — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:32:35 +0000

Again the headline is misleading it should say "Americans STILL support the environment even with failing economy". While it is expected for those who think instant relief from any uncomfortable condition is somehow their right to say that we should further destroy our ecology in order to save them a few cents in oil/gas prices the remarkable thing about this article is the fact that more Americans still understand that being good to our environment is better for us than saving those few cents. maybe the 30something years of environmental education is beginning to sink in to Americans. We CAn have a better environment and NOT put ourselves in the poor house to do so. Fuel prices are high (I buy gas just like everyone else) but are still significantly lower than elsewhwere in the world, we, as Americans, have to learn to reset our priorities, if we still want to drive large gas sucking cars by ourselves we might just have to give up having a new one every two years and maybe not eating out as often or maybe just getting by with less, we really do not need a cell phone for every person in a family, each child in their own bedroom or 4 TVs per household (US average!)

By: some guy in New Hampshire

some guy in New Hampshire — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:29:51 +0000

Sacrificing long-term environment stability for short-term economic stability is the equivalent of eating our seed corn. We'll feel good for the future but have even greater problems later. The structure of the economy is shifting, "green jobs" are where growth is (pure-play solar companies were the largest growth sector of the global stock market in 2006), and we need to get aboard the new economic train instead of trying to push the old one down the track. The tired old argument of "economy vs. the environment" is the wrong frame to cast the discussion in. The right question is, "how do we leverage environmental values and opportunities to grow our way into the 21st century instead of trying to cling to the 20th?"

By: irritated moderate

irritated moderate — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:26:56 +0000

It is time our country pays its bills like we did in the 1990s.

We would be paying about 80 dollars a barrell for oil if the dollar was as strong as it was in 2001. Instead, since we overspend, cut taxes on the extremely wealthy, and give money back to americans we are hugely in debt.

It is time we have a president who pays the federal deficit off. Remember how the economy functioned in the 90s?

By: Janey/Michigan

Janey/Michigan — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:22:54 +0000

If we don't drill here for oil soon, we will be freezing in the dark–let the democrats live off the land–the rest of us like to stay warm. They can all go and live at the North Pole where they say the ice is melting–(another political Hoax). They will have to be nice to Canada, though as they claim to own the Artic. Better keep nafta for a while!

By: South Park Conservative

South Park Conservative — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:22:32 +0000

Yay!

Down with human civilization!

Up with spotted owls!

By: Leon, Atlanta GA

Leon, Atlanta GA — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:19:00 +0000

We will ignore the warning signs that mother Nature is giving us. It will be to our peril. If we want our children to have a decent Earth left to live in, let us all pitch in now, a bit of pain now for us, and our children will be able to live healthier and wealthier lives.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:16:29 +0000

Whaaat!? Whose poll was that? No Thank you. Fix the economy now before we go into a depression and starve.

By: Sarah

Sarah — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:13:47 +0000

These survey are not really helpful for the planet. These two issues are directly related and should not be pitted against each other. The economists need to do a better job illustrating to "Joe American" that there are economic benefits to behaving environmentally and protecting what resources we have left.

By: Arden

Arden — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:11:30 +0000

If we don't get our economy working there won't be any financial resources to take care of our environment problem.

By: tom

tom — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:00:31 +0000

why not do both. there is alot of money in saving the panet . it just the 1% @ the top has all there money in distroying the planet. and they dont like to lose money.

By: Anita from Arizona

Anita from Arizona — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:56:01 +0000

If we don't stop messing with the air we breath and the ground we walk on, Planet Earth will shake the human race and off like a tick.

By: luke

luke — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:44:00 +0000

cool.
the earth will be here for future generations.
the economy isn't real – it's a name for something that doesn't really exist – and certainly has less of an impact on future generations than the ground we walk (or drive) on.

By: Independent

Independent — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:35:36 +0000

I knew it was a matter of time before we started burning environmentalists for heat and fuel.

By: oil rules

oil rules — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:34:03 +0000

One of the main problems is that saving the environment is often confused with overburdensome bureaucracy and paperwork. The environmental regulations in place now already are stifiling our economy and keeping us from building new refining capacity, drilling, etc. It seems every year the EPA is coming up with new standards and regulations with a small basis in science and a large basis in hype and confusion. Just because you relax some regulation does not mean the environment is going to be harmed. Even the evil corp execs live in the same communities you do and breathe the same air, drink the same water, etc. They want it clean too! Look at CO2, it is NOT a pollutant, but starting to be regulated as one by the EPA. Maybe we could stop breathing for a while.....

By: ErikS.

ErikS. — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:32:49 +0000

Ok, I am all for the envrironment, but we have to stop living in this dream where we think that we can do without tapping our own resources. Drilling is not what it was 30 years ago, it's cleaner and more effecient. And we are also going to need more nuclear reactors, it's either that or keep burning the coal which is polluting our air, water, etc. gotta make a choice folks...

By: proud army and navy mom

proud army and navy mom — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:26:17 +0000

it' simple why americans are more concerned with the environment, because we won't really need money, if we destroy the planet in the process of fixing the economy.

By: eric

eric — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:19:03 +0000

73% of the 1,000 Americans that took the poll thought we should be drilling more off the coast, huh? Sigh. Why? Oil and the technology that surrounds it is akin to VCRs when DVD players first came out. Our country is addicted to oil, just like any junkie addicted to any drug. If you are addicted to heroin, the answer is not more of it! We should be using this opportunity to get off of oil entirely. The effort will take just as long as it would to see any benefit to the extra drilling. So why should we dump all this money into a dying and inherently limited technology when we could be spending it on energy sources that don't pollute our shores and warm our climate?

By: Nan

Nan — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:13:41 +0000

If our planet and it's environment go to pot, there'll be no need for and economy. We'll all be dead.

By: Walt

Walt — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:09:20 +0000

If you care about the lives of your grandchildren then it's a no brainer. Either we set the environment as a priority now or future generations won't have to worry about the economy at all because there won't be one.

By: Sandy

Sandy — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:09:02 +0000

It starts with the invironment, we need it to produce and function properly. If we can't breath clean air and the toxins fall to the land then how can we grow pure healthy foods? If we stop throwing up gases in the air we will sufficate that in which we caused. If most of these things can be corrected then our economy should feel the difference, this is my opinion.

By: Jenny from IN

Jenny from IN — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:06:39 +0000

Saving the environment is GOOD for our economy. Developing alternative energy sources at home will make us independent of the Middle East and other nations we depend on for oil, create thousands if not millions of new jobs for Americans and fix the environment. Plus it can all be handled by American companies. Why would we NOT pursue these goals?

OBAMA '08!

By: Jim, Burlington NC

Jim, Burlington NC — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:05:28 +0000

Only a fool is going to buy into the "Let's go drill everywhere off the coast and Alaska".

Increase the MPG on cars, build power generating – non polluting windmills off the coast like every other civilized country is doing! Most of our electrical need could be supplied that way, then our oil from the US wells could go into all the other things it's needed for like fertilizer, plastics, pharmaceuticals.

Windmills could be built and online in 3 years, oil drilling off the coasts wouldn't start helping before 10 – 12 years from now.

Are you better off today than 8 years ago? If you are you must be a Republican and rich.

By: JD

JD — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:52:26 +0000

We need energy now! We need nuclear energy and domestic oil natural gas and coal to stay strong and become energy independent. We can't just stop using oil, and we can't save the environment and develop new technologies with a crumbling economy, food and gas riots, and/or spiraling poverty, etc.

By: Carlos from Canada

Carlos from Canada — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:46:47 +0000

Economic downturns happen quite frequently and are usually of relatively short duration. Even during deeper recessionary period people adjust their lifestyles to fit the situation. Tough times spur innovation and eventually standards rise again to pre-recession levels.

Environmental degradation, if not permanent, is extremly long term (generational, in fact) . One should never lose sight of the fact that knee-jerk reactionary tacticts designed to deal with one or two of the symptoms contributing to the problem may contribute to a larger problem that could prove difficult (or impossible to fix).

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:42:29 +0000

As the science behind global warming and general devestation of Earth's ecosystem reaches the general public and has the chance to sink in, the more we are able to realize that money compared to life on Earth has much less weight. Even if people are selfish and ignorant enough to value money more than the sanctity of life, they must realize that the refusal to invest in the environment now bears much harsher financial retributions later than any economic depression we may be experiencing now. Either way you look at it, the environment is our number one priority.

By: Nate

Nate — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:42:11 +0000

Finally, people are getting their prioritys straight.

By: karen-phoenix

karen-phoenix — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:39:01 +0000

If we fix the economy the right way it will fix the environment. If we fix the environment the right way it will fix the economy!!!! Jobs in solar, wind, electric cars, etc. Repair our infrustructure like the old CCC camps. Build high speed trains. See, they fix each other!!!!! It's the economy stupid!!!! Check Obama's website for all the right things to do for our economy under his energy plan. WE CAN DO THIS!!!!

By: Ms. Sims

Ms. Sims — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:38:52 +0000

I don't think its one or the other, i think you need a balance. It's good to have ideas about energy and all these great ideas but at the same time you have to look at all the environmental factors as well. But we have to come to some agreement. Because i could care less about the migration patterns of animals in Alaska, just route them another way for goodness sakes. If you can drill off the coast SAFELY then find a way. It's obvious it can be done China is already drilling mere miles off of OUR coastlines. Of course that won't help the immediate prices but maybe it would curve the speculations and yield benefits in the future. But other alternatives should definately be persuaded as well.

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:33:58 +0000

Its sad that the average person is too ignorant to realize that investing in environmental tech and jobs now will help the economy in the long run. It is funny or sickening that a majority of people think that re-opening off shore drilling will have any effect on the price of a gallon of gas. It will take years to set up, drill, produce, and refine the oil. Wake up people, this is yet another ploy to get the oil companies more profits. Where is Teddy Roosevelt when we need him??

By: teri

teri — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:31:35 +0000

It isn't the environment or being green. It is the ecology of Earth. Every aspect of life as we know it is governed by Earth's ecosystems, which are essentially, the living, physical body of Earth. From oxygen to fresh water to the gaseous composition in the atmosphere and inluding governing the climate, mankind and Earth are ecosystem dependent for life. The artifacts of civilization are dead planet and are much hotter than a dense, biologically rich ecosystem, and this heat is reflected. Science refers to cities as heat islands.

It is stupendous news that Americans care about their home, Earth, but ecological literacy should be their top priority as this is the path to take to save Earth. Every American should learn what an ecosystem is, what biological diversity is and why they should care. The protection and salvation of ecosystems is man's number one environmental issue above all else because our lives depend upon them.

By: Only HRC for me

Only HRC for me — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:31:34 +0000

Obama '08

YES, WE SCAM!

By: Gabriel

Gabriel — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:30:11 +0000

The Environment and the Economy are equally important issues. I hope that as we find alternative means for energy we pave the way for new industries that will eventually boost our economy. The U.S. should be a leader in innovation and technology, so maybe the federal government should establish a few grants to inspire the entrepreneurial spirit of our countries top scientists, engineers, etc...

By: shame on the DNC

shame on the DNC — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:26:10 +0000

Hey, who needs competition!

Do like Obama did – challenge all of the petitions so you are the only one on the ticket. It's that simple! That way, the people have no choice but to vote for you.

Change the Rules
Change your Stance
Change your Religion
Change your Close Friends
Change the Party

Change Obama can make you believe in! I believe it!

By: STILL FOR HILL

STILL FOR HILL — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:26:03 +0000

I told you CNN. This election is going to come down to two issues:

The first issue is energy independence. What makes sense to the American people? Sit on our thumbs. I think not. It's time to not only push for drilling, but to:

Invest in Nuclear Energy
Mandate higher gas milleage on all cars being sold in America
Reduce the Speed Limit to 55
Tax incentives for going green (hybrids, electric cars, etc.)
Investment in Coal research (We are the Saudi Arabia of Coal)

The second issue is taxes. Is it smart to raise taxes on anyone in the midst of a recession? I think not.

John McCain is right on both issues. I was going to vote for Hill, but experience doesn't matter to half the democrats, so I will cast my vote for McCain.

By: Amelia

Amelia — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:24:37 +0000

As the person quoted in the article said, this is a false dichotomy. However it is still sad that so many people are willing to sacrifice the environment for so-called economic growth. What about our children and grandchildren – what kind of world do we want to leave for them?

By: shame on the DNC

shame on the DNC — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:21:10 +0000

All the issues matter.

The disapointment is that out of all the highly qualified democrats running, the DNC selected and installed the least worth and the least qualified, with the most questionable judgement and character.

So Obama is not a show in as expected... He is the first and only candidate that will force millions of democrats to NOTvote for the party nominee.

What a shame to play these dirty tricks and fix a primary... at this important time in our nation's history.

By: and still we dems might lose

and still we dems might lose — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:18:31 +0000

Obama is the least electable democratic candidate, in a year when a democrat can NOT lose the election.

That is why the DNC and the left wingers worked SO hard to install him as nominee. EVEN an unqualified, ineperienced left wing socialist radical elitist has a running chance in today's political climate.

It was NOW or never for Obama- a country that is in such a bad way that even the worst democrat appears to be better to many people than the best republican.

Winning by default- that is the Obama way since he has no merits and no track record.

By: ProundToBeDemocrat

ProundToBeDemocrat — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:18:27 +0000

My guess is the 44% are republicans who can care less about the environment as long as the oil companies are making profit and as a resualt Bush and the rest of the republicans are getting richer, but what they do not understand is if the environment is not protected they will die with disease before they enjoy the money.