"The Green Thing"

Discussion in 'The ChitChat Lounge' started by mermaid, Apr 11, 2012.

  1. mermaid

    mermaid New Member

    Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the older woman that she should bring her own shopping bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment.

    The woman apologized and explained, "We didn't have this green thing back in my earlier days."

    The cashier responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations."

    She was right -- our generation didn't have the green thing in its day.

    Back then, we returned milk bottles, pop bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so they could use the same bottles over and over. Yes, they really were recycling.

    We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen; and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

    But, we didn't have the green thing back in our day.

    We walked up the stairs, because we didn't have an escalator in every shop and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.

    But, she was right. We didn't have the green thing in our day.

    Back then, we washed the baby's nappies because we didn't have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an 'energy gobbling machine burning up 220 volts;' wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.

    But, that young lady is right. We didn't have the green thing back in our day.

    Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And, the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the county of Yorkshire.

    In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us.

    When we packaged a fragile item to send in the post, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap.

    Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn petrol just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power.

    We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

    But, she's right. We didn't have the green thing back then.

    We drank water from a fountain or a tap when we were thirsty instead of demanding a plastic bottle flown in from another country.

    We accepted that a lot of food was seasonal and didn’t expect that to be bucked by flying it thousands of air miles around the world.

    We actually cooked food that didn’t come out of a packet, tin or plastic wrap and we could even wash our own vegetables and chop our own salad.

    But, we didn't have the green thing back then.

    Back then, people took the tram or a bus, and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their mothers into a 24-hour taxi service.

    We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances.

    And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint.

    But, isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the green thing back then?

    Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smart-ass young, 'informative' person. Remind them:

    Don't make old people mad. We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off.
  2. rickkkyrich

    rickkkyrich Guest

    Very thought provoking
  3. alpha1

    alpha1 I BLUES!

    Progress = how much you can screw the original environment.

    Started with the cave man learning agriculture.
    And its been uphill / downhill (whichever way you take it) ever since.
  4. mermaid

    mermaid New Member

    Indeed thought provoking, as we have become a machine, no doubt abt it.

    @ Alpha1 we did start with caveman culture to go uphill nt downhill , v havn't left any space in screwing up the environment, i think these issues can be handled on our end, as in an individual's end.
  5. wylder

    wylder New Member

    So are you guys gonna shutdown that computer and switch over to newspapers and snail-mails?
  6. rickkkyrich

    rickkkyrich Guest

    Good old days..
  7. alpha1

    alpha1 I BLUES!

    Not as long as competition is revered in our society.
    Its the competition with natural elements that led to all the "development".
    And now its competition among ourselves that is fueling the "development".

    If these issues could've been handled, they would have happened long time ago.
  8. wylder

    wylder New Member

    Is competition or development the enemy? Would you rather be living in the Dark Ages?

    I'd say its more like poverty and lack of education... That leads to ignorance and population explosion. This increasing population puts pressure on our natural resources causing the said environment issues. Also, larger population favors the rich as the rich can buy their way out of problems while the poor face the wrath of inflation and poorer living conditions. This just deepens the divide between the rich and the poor, fueling the vicious circle all over again...
  9. alpha1

    alpha1 I BLUES!

    Well, I have not taken anyone's side till now.

    But going by my long running stand - competition is according to natural laws.
    Development is according to natural laws.
    If development is leading to "environmental problems" - so have various events in the history of this planet.
    The "weak" cannot adapt and perish, the "strong" adapt and survive.

    So if we are creating an environment which has increased CO2, decreased O2, increased SOx & NOx, decreased sun light, increased surface and air temperatures - its not really much different from what has happened over millions of years on earth.

    Earlier our environment comprised primarily of ammonia and CO2, reduced levels of O2.
    This lead to anaerobic life.

    With growing O2 levels caused by photosynthesis - aerobic life took over the reins and anaerobic life was restricted to uniclellular organisms. At the time of Dinosaurs, our atmosphere had far greater O2 levels. Which has now reduced.

    Perhaps my paragraphs above doesn't contain accurate info wrt gases and percentages, but the gist is that Earth has been ever changing.
    Humans are part of Earth, and today, a significant agent of that change.

    With increasing "pollution" we are making environment non-conducive for the "weak" species, and conducive for "strong" species. Evolution in action. Perhaps humans themselves will be weak, and perish.
    But life as such goes on (unless we create Solar sized Hydrogen bomb and create another Sun on earth)

    * strong and weak has nothing to do with physical or mental levels. It is to do with adaptability in the particular environment / situation.
    In an urban world, uneducated farmer = weak, educated lawyer = strong
    In a rural /uncivilized world its the other way round.
  10. ayu135

    ayu135 New Member

    So doesnt this imply that we humans need to adapt or we will perish, and adaptation here may imply cutting down the CO2 emissions for example because we humans can exist only in the present environmental conditions optimally. Also survival of other species is essential for our survival so we have to protect them as well.
  11. alpha1

    alpha1 I BLUES!

    We are already trying to adapt.
    by using our technologies.

    How far this will be sustainable, only time will tell.
  12. wylder

    wylder New Member

    We may not truly appreciate the gravity of the changes that we are talking about here. Today we are very confident of the way we can adapt to changes in our environment but we may not be always able to fight nature. Yes, the more adaptable species will endure it but do not assume man is the most adaptable or fittest for survival. In general the higher you are up the food chain, the more delicate a balance you are in.

    Kinda like the story of the dodos. Dodos were inhabitants of Mauritius. They had no predators in the island. This made the species so fearless and confident that when humans discovered the island, these birds would walk right into your hand. The humans thus needn't hunt for their dinner...

Share This Page