Climate change activists in the Financial Post
FP Letters to the Editor: Suzuki and Boyd vs. Foster
What a breath of fresh air it was to read, on the pages of theFinancial Post, David Boyd’s response to Peter Foster’s uncritical defence of free-market fundamentalism (David Suzuki’s Andean Fantasy, Jan. 16). It is time that the unceasing refrain of “the market will solve everything” is retired once and for all, and Mr. Boyd provides empirical evidence (as opposed to Mr. Foster’s rehashed and unsubstantiated ideology) as to why that is so.
It is now the 21st century, and the human family is facing unprecedented threats to our global survival, including climate change, ocean acidification and species extinction. None of us, no matter how committed to Ayn Rand we are, are going to be financially secure after Mother Nature presents us with her long-overdue bill. I’m pleased to see that theFinancial Post has finally gotten real, and taken this into consideration.
Christine Penner Polle, Red Lake, Ont.
David Boyd’s article was a breath of fresh air! A study by Mark Jacobsen at Stanford University has shown that the world could meet its energy needs through renewables by 2030. The Canadian Renewable Energy Alliance has a link to a report by EREC and Greenpeace showing how Canada could quickly and dramatically reduce CO2 emissions. This would foster economic vitality throughout the nation; ethically, it is essential to make this switch towards conservation and reliance on renewable energy sources.
Too bad we did not make this shift years ago. Now, we must mobilize as if we were at war to do our part in the global “fight” for a healthy future. We need a hefty price on carbon, investment in conservation and renewables and an end to fossil fuel subsidies. ASAP!
Jan Slakov, Salt Spring Island, B.C.
Bravo to the Post for printing the piece by Dr. Boyd.
I am not opposed to capitalism, but have felt lately that we are headed for, and even in, what I view as “extreme” capitalism. The economy is a human invention and not based in science. To me, this means it needs to be reviewed. There is no economy without human beings and the environment. There are no human beings without the environment. An example of this being that people need trees in order to breathe. The environment, on the other hand, needs neither. Peter Foster’s extreme view has led me to believe that he does not understand this correlation.
I have been wondering if I was wasting my time reading the Post when extreme views as Mr. Foster’s were being posted. My interest has been renewed by your printing Dr. Boyd’s piece.
Sharon Howarth, Toronto