The article Treadmill Predispositions and Social Responses, by Schnaiberg Gould is related to the Silent Spill article, by Beamish, as it explains a general overview of what people are doing to the environmental, due to the expansion of production and the need for profits using The Silent Spill as an example. The Silent Spill further shows how people are careless about the environment during this expansion of production due to their narrow view of the need to make profits. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay First of all, Social Predispositions and Responses to the Treadmill ultimately explains that a rapidly growing population has very few social or ecological benefits and is believed to be the explanation for environmental damage. But the expansion of production and profits is the ultimate antagonist against the environment. The global spread of money, the increase in technology and the increase in information have made it possible to expand production, thus increasing profits. Expanding production has a direct impact on the environment through withdrawals and additions. Changing forms of energy have been a major factor retreating and adding to the environment, which is ultimately linked to technological changes. From coal to steam to electricity, there was a big leap in transportation methods that allowed trade (and profits) to increase on a global scale. This has taken many resources away from our environment, such as coal, oil and trees, causing them to become depleted. The processes by which we withdraw and use these resources add terrible effects to the environment, such as air, soil and water pollution. This affects all species, including us humans. Once companies get that big, they have to compete with other companies, ignoring environmental regulations even more. And although a larger population eventually leads to disorganization of the environment, production decisions are controlled by only a few individuals in the population, who crave only profit. Therefore, it is not population size that destroys the environment; it is the expansion of production. The intense obsession with profits clouds the vision of these decision makers, so that environmental impacts are easily pushed aside. An example of this would be the Guadalupe Dunes oil spill, as discussed in the article The Silent Spill. This oil spill has been going on for 38 years without any “warning”. Eight and a half to 20 million gallons of oil had leaked beneath the surface of the beach, destroying the environment. Unocal should have reported this spill, but did not do so so as not to lose profits or jobs. The company blamed its hierarchical system for the lack of communication that prevented the news from reaching the main location that would have alerted Los Angeles to the problem. All the employees felt like it wasn't their responsibility to say it. But the ugly truth was the fact that they weren't losing money from this spill, and were still making profits, so they didn't want to get in trouble or risk the industry being shut down, because that would mean a loss of jobs and profits. . In the past, companies began as small family-run organizations, where the owners were managers and had relationships with their employees. They worked to support their family and a few others, but they did not have the goal of earning as much money as possible. They were held responsible and then notthey have damaged the environment in general. Now, with big companies assigning hierarchies, no one feels responsible for harming the environment because they feel so small and unimportant in their company. This allows production to easily destroy the environment without anyone feeling guilty. It is shocking to see how people become so absorbed in earning profits for themselves that they allow the environment to become so impoverished and disorganized. People don't realize that this affects all species, including themselves, in the long term. Most people, like Pinchot, believe that the environment and nature exist for human consumption. But only Pinchot realizes that we must support the environment if we want to continue using it. With such rapid production in today's world, we will exhaust our resources and have nothing to support us. Everyone is worried about their profits, but they don't realize that profits will hit a dead end once they no longer have the resources to continue making them. This type of mentality is very widespread in my project area, Asia and the South Pacific. With Asia growing and producing so fast, yes they are getting very rich, but soon that won't matter anymore when they have used up all their resources and can't live a healthy life due to air pollution. As for Australia, the Great Barrier Reef, which is an extremely important ecological landmark, is being depleted due to pollution and disrespect of people. As you can see, no one feels guilty about any of these problems and they are meeting their profit goals, so they feel no need to stop their selfish actions. The environment will one day make people regret this fact. Delaney Kipple February 11, 2016 Reflection 2 Rethinking Environmental Racism by Laura Pulido and Race, Class, Gender and American Environmentalism by Dorceta Taylor both show the underlying problem of racism as “White Privelage.” Rethinking Environmental Racism explains how racism is analyzed and applied to environmental racism, while Race, Class, Gender and American Environmentalism describes all the racism people of color have experienced throughout history. These articles go hand in hand, showing all the possibilities of reasons for the blatant environmental racism that exists and has always existed. Pulido's article explains how environmental racism is determined by its location, intentionality, and scale. Since this is difficult to detect in all cases, many cases of racism have very blurred boundaries. In most cases, it seems that environmental injustice is always attributable to less affluent and racially diverse communities. This makes it easy to blame industries and government for this discrimination. But Pulido describes a “chicken or the egg” scenario: what comes first, the place or the people? Are communities established and then industries choose the communities with the fewest whites to settle right next to, to intentionally pollute their lives? Or do people of color move to locations near industrial areas? It can be one or the other. Black communities are seen as less desirable, as they are defined by white privilege. Therefore, land is cheaper and industries buy this land for economic reasons. Or, perhaps, industrial sites are planted, reducing the price of land, making it cheaper for less wealthy people to move there. In Los Angeles, white people have steadily moved to more desirable lands throughout history, leaving people of color to archive them. the least desirable land. This cycle repeated itself.