Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: r9etb
"Unlike normal citizens, developers have virtually unlimited resources, and large staffs of lobbyists and lawyers who can devote all of their time, efforts -- and campaign contributions -- toward total victory. Eventually the normal citizens will miss a meeting, and then they're toast."

I hardly know where to start. - Your view of the development process is right out of the modern Marxist's resource for activism.

No, developers do not have anywheres near 'unlimited resources' and every cent that they are forced to spend fending off misguided activists must be added to the price of the homes that ultimately get built.

Most large developers are publicly traded companies that will fold at the drop of a hat if they are unable to complete their projects on the 6-7% profit margin that competition allows. - When you fight these developments you are raping your own children, not some imaginary, ultra-rich land baron.

Wildlife and housing cannot coexist, and since housing is necessary, and wildlife is an expendable luxury, which do you think should prevail? - There is no absolute need for wildlife; man only occupies about 2% of this world, while wildlife has the other 98%.

What the enviro-NAZI are asking is impossible, unless you're willing to allow your children to be murdered to save some superfluous bugs.

51 posted on 12/20/2001 12:05:45 PM PST by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: editor-surveyor
No, developers do not have anywheres near 'unlimited resources' and every cent that they are forced to spend fending off misguided activists must be added to the price of the homes that ultimately get built.

For all practical purposes, their resources are unlimited. To whit:

Let's say it you vs. the developer. The developer has a full time staff, plenty of lawyers, and so on, whose job it is to spend all day every day on that development.

You have .... you, and maybe some associates, who have day jobs, and many other responsibilities -- your time is limited, theirs is not.

Also, you have a limited amount of money to spend -- to you $5,000 is a lot for a year. To the developer, they spend that much every week on toner for the copier.

since housing is necessary, and wildlife is an expendable luxury, which do you think should prevail? -

The fallacy here is that it's an either-or proposition. It's not.

There is no absolute need for wildlife;

You're absolutely sure about that?

man only occupies about 2% of this world, while wildlife has the other 98%.

Which has nothing to do with the point I was making.

What the enviro-NAZI are asking is impossible, unless you're willing to allow your children to be murdered to save some superfluous bugs.

Oh, come now. That's an insane comparison -- even you can't believe it.

53 posted on 12/20/2001 12:19:08 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson