Save the trees! Don't recycle.
According to economics, this is the correct way to do things.
By not recycling, demand for trees goes up.
When demand goes up, more are supplied.
Thus, not recycling means more trees will be supplied, (planted) increasing the number of trees.
There are a few problems with this particular situation (forests will still be destroyed for tree farms, the number of trees on earth must be below the number supplied in order to have an effect) but the basic principal works.
Another example: We have over a billion cows on earth. We use cows for lots of things. We have few polar bears on the earth. We have no uses for polar bears.
Make sense? It's an interesting concept, one of the few times economics seems illogical.
April 15, 2011
11 Comments • Newest first
[quote=Blazejsg]What?[/quote]
TS thinks there are tree farms.
There aren't enough to make his argument valid.
[quote=gath]@Yummys It would, provided that you have enough land to plant trees in. Genetically altered trees would probably be employed too.[/quote]
:o I have to disagree. I said that the rate of the tree growth won't match the rate of demand, not the number of trees. Also, genetically altered trees may not properly suit all the types of products you are going to make from the tree.
The recycling industry is pretty beneficial, and I think it's best that it's staying. Recycling centers provide many jobs to people. Also, less recycling will mean more municipal waste pileup, meaning our landfills will have to grow larger. There will be less area for planting trees.
And if you have a huge forest of trees growing, the shorter trees won't be able to get enough sunlight and they'll die out. This not only wastes the trees but it also means more CO2 released into our atmosphere. The large amount of trees growing simultaneously will emit a large amount of CO2 itself as well.
[quote=GreenKilla]awww but they look so cute and cuddly! <3333[/quote]
[url=http://oxun.ge/uploads/posts/2010-10/1288097543_funny-pictures-polar-bear-kid-glass-zoo.jpg] Adorable. [/url]
[quote=harajukudoII]I still don't get it....
I'm like seriously slow.
I need more examples , please! (;[/quote]
Alright. There is a high demand for chickens, right? People like chicken. Anyway, we put chickens on farms and raise them for slaughter. Because we constantly need chickens, there is always a large amount of chickens around. If it's profitable to raise chickens, someone will raise chickens and keep them alive. However, nobody has any use for tigers, so we're fine to let them all die. If tigers were tasty, someone would own a tiger farm and raise them to kill them. However, at any given moment, there would be a lot mire tigers around then there are now.
Economically speaking, the best way to save an endangered species is to eat it.
@daniel3b If more are necessary to meet demand, more will be planted.
@Yummys It would, provided that you have enough land to plant trees in. Genetically altered trees would probably be employed too.
The rate of the demand can't be met by the growth of the trees.
[quote=gath]And in order to meet continued demand, more trees will also be planted. Again, this doesn't work unless the number of trees demanded is above the number on earth currently, because otherwise, there's no reason to plant more.[/quote]You actually think people will plant more? They'll just cut down more.
[quote=daniel3b]Here's the thing... you're not recycling trees, you're recycling products made from trees. So you're increasing the demand for products from trees, which means for more products to be supplied, more trees get cut down.[/quote]
And in order to meet continued demand, more trees will also be planted. Again, this doesn't work unless the number of trees demanded is above the number on earth currently, because otherwise, there's no reason to plant more.
@Kevvl Yeah, we'd need to have enough demand for trees to make planting trees necessary to meet demand, in which case, it's a great idea.
@Jamiroquai It's a proven economic concept. From a purely economic standpoint, this is great.
You are a genius let's start farming trees and selling them.
Here's the thing... you're not recycling trees, you're recycling products made from trees. So you're increasing the demand for products from trees, which means for more products to be supplied, more trees get cut down.
Except that most of the time, trees aren't specifically grown to be chopped down. People just go to forests and do it.
Time to kill the polar bears.