Is being green the new black?

Murtle

gromituk wrote:

I am not talking about money saving here - I am talking about the environment. The two are often in conflict. Just because we are on MSE doesn't mean absolutely everything has to boil down to spending less money.

The ethos of MSE is to get better value for your money, not neccessarily to spend less money. If that makes sense. So if you are passionate about Green/ethical then to be able to find the best stuff at the best price.

Well it made sense it my head

rubix_76

gromituk wrote:

Sorry, I don't understand what you're getting at. I'm talking about children who are in care (usually very unsatisfactory) or with foster parents (better, but not necessarily satisfactory) - I don't know who you are saying I am blaming. .

I'm sorry you missunderstood me, but I was just talking about the "green" aspect. I thought you meant it was "greener" to adopt a child than to have your own. So my statement saying about it "being their fault" meant bringing up of the child would have an "environmental impact" regardless of who brought them up.

gromituk wrote:

I am not talking about money saving here - I am talking about the environment. The two are often in conflict. Just because we are on MSE doesn't mean absolutely everything has to boil down to spending less money.

Murtle wrote:

The ethos of MSE is to get better value for your money, not neccessarily to spend less money.

I agree completely with both of you. Martin once said If you want a Ferrari instead of a Lada, then fine, you won't get a Ferrari for the same price as a Lada, but get it as cheap as you can.

In MY OPINION that is the ethos of MSE, not scrimping on anything and everything.

I'm off my soap box now, would anyone else like to borrow it, just kidding.

Rubix

gromituk

rubix_76 wrote:

I thought you meant it was "greener" to adopt a child than to have your own. So my statement saying about it "being their fault" meant bringing up of the child would have an "environmental impact" regardless of who brought them up.

Yes, it is "greener" to adopt a child than to have your own, because the child that needs adopting is already in the world, and so it results in fewer children overall. This is no-one's fault; it is just a fact. Of course if adoption became so fashionable that people started to have children just to be adopted, then this would no longer be the case!

pollys

My goodness me what a debate about my 4 children. Why 4? not sure really, but my family generates less rubbish for landfill than any other family/couple on our street. We are the only ones who grow some of our own food (tomatoes, lettuce,spring onions, courgettes etc very small scale) We are the only family that uses local shops and avoids the supermarkets.

My 9 year old was horrified to see paper being put in the rubbish bin at school and has now suggested to the school council that every class should be reducing, reusing and recycling, he has also suggested compost bins. If "green" people do have larger families and the children from these families make schools, clubs etc become greener then surely that is a good thing, and there are always going to be people who want one or no children, I don't think that there is going to be a population explosion because "green is the new black"

Adoption? well we must be even greener than I thought because my husband and his sister were both adopted:j

gromituk

Thanks for coping so well with the ambush!