Not hardly. I was just pointing out the idiocy of the left's environmental schemes. Like windmills and other "green energy" projects, it doesn't matter if paper recycling is counterproductive to their claimed goal, as long as they care about the environment (and have more of our money to spend).
I am old enough to remember when environmentalists were concerned with actual pollution, i.e., chemicals released into the environment that are harmful for people and other life. Of course, even back then, the only solution was more government control along with higher taxes and government spending, redistributing assets from those who worked for them to those that the left believe should have them.
Then the iron curtain fell and the former communist countries were revealed to be the worst polluters in the history of mankind, littered with toxic waste dumps that no one would tolerate on property they were allowed to own. Gosh, maybe more government control wasn't the answer?
So the environmentalist left stopped caring about pollution and focused instead on carbon dioxide, a trace element that not only is not harmful to life, but is essential for the continued existence of all life on Earth. Why CO2? Because it is a natural byproduct from the production of most goods, which in turn are mostly produced by wealthy and successful capitalist countries, because they produce far more goods per capita than any communist or socialist country ever could.
Of course, the only solution remains the same, more government control along with higher taxes and government spending.
I misunderstood. I apologize.