Jump to content

American Lifestyle- Harmful?


20sGirl

Do you think the American lifestyle of convenience and consumption is harmful or are there other factors at work?  

37 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think the American lifestyle of convenience and consumption is harmful or are there other factors at work?

    • YES, it will be the end of us all.
      6
    • YES, but you can rise above it if you try.
      20
    • NO, the American lifestyle is good for the world.
      4
    • NO, the American lifestyle works for America, but may not work for other parts of the world.
      3
    • I don't know.
      2
    • None of these.
      2


Recommended Posts

"Enjoying something doesn't make it right. Some people enjoy driving with a crack pipe in one hand and a 40oz. in the other. Call me old-fashioned, but I don't condone that, either." (quote, dbigtex56)

undeniably something we must consider, dbigtex. at the risk of exposing the anti-SUV hippy i truly am, i must say that participating in the preservation of the human race must be undertaken on a voluntary basis. despite the overwhelming evidence out there that suv's and all other gas guzzlers impact our environment in a negative way, sales are soaring so somebody's sure enjoying them.

some people when questioned about owning suv's get all defensive and seem threatened about their preference, while others dismiss the question by asserting their right to choose whatever vehicle is best for their family situation. each of us as individuals must determine how we fit into the overall puzzle. i do not feel it is my right to dictate to anyone what kind of car they should drive, as we do live in a "free" country. on the other hand, sitting back and not speaking your mind can condone something silently by implied consent, so i understand why those concerned with the environment fly it up the flagpole.

in this day and age of technology there should exist fuel that is more friendly to the earth, as well as mass transportation plans to allow more people to park the car as often as possible.

as far as the "american" lifestyle being safe or harmful, i prefer to align myself with ideals that i feel adopt a healthy global existence. imo, too much emphasis is placed on compartmentalizing and not enough on relating to the world population. it's not enough to tell your kids, "their starving in ______ so clean your plate!".

recently i went to the planitarium with my son to see a lazer show and was overwhelmed at what a fraction the earth itself comprises, much less one country like america. i try keeping up with the news of other countries, for example the irish times online and the bbc news on cable. our news media stops the clock for hurricane coverage of florida while the peasants on the island it just finished destroying do what they've always done, bury the dead, rebuild and wait on the next one. they accept this as a condition of living, while we whine about the inconveniences. if i did not want to deal with the threat of tropical storms and hurricanes, i simply would not live where they strike unless i had to.

for the record i probably would seem "extreme" to most people since i parked my car five years ago and decided to utilize public transportation. of course there are times when driving cannot be avoided, but i am pleased with my efforts and the result of taking what pollution out of the air that i could. that said, i am a "live and let live" person and feel one's lifestyle is something personal and not open to public scrutiny.

debmartin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Issues of SUV safety and mileage aside, I would question whether SUVs are really that much "fun". I drove an SUV for several years - needed something that could fit bikes - but driving it was so not fun. Acceleration was poor, mileage was poor, the ride was awful and the handling abysmal. The high center of gravity magnifies every bump in the road and makes it a lot harder to take corners. It was like carrying a lot of excess weight. I just prefer something small, lighter, and more agile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

been away for a while....just wanted to say that i was playing devils advocate on some issues. i do drive a SUV - Avalanche...it drives awesome...better than most cars i have owned. The primary reason I have it because i have twins and a HUGE stroller that will not fit in the trunk of a car. plus...the kids take up the back seat so there is always the issue of going grocery shopping or whatever...i needed the room! BUT - I do enjoy it and think that everyone should drive what makes them comfortable. I don't do it to destroy the environment or as a symbol of anything...i would get an H2 if that were my goal...and my truck gets the same gas mileage as some minivans...and i did own a mustang right out of college that got worse mileage!! I drive it because it fits my needs and makes me happy! If they ever make a full size hybrid...i will own it. I heard they are soon!

When there really is a shortage in oil...the market will demand a more effecient fuel and i am all for that!! I could use that as an arguement for driving SUVs...the quicker we use up the oil...the quicker we will get a better product ;-) I just argue the issue because I truely think it is sorta a silly thing to argue. BIgger things to worry about than what everyone else is driving.

I enjoy all the discussion...I love getting all the points of view!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simplify. Turn off the TV. Get out of your car and walk. Eschew fast food. Learn a musical instrument. Pick up a pencil and draw or write. Visit a shut-in. Start a garden. Define yourself by who you are, not by what you consume.

It's a cliche but true, less is more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another interesting take on the subject:

Grocery options tied to obesity

Study shows inner-city stores lack healthy foods

By ERIC BERGER

Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle

The world is full of assumptions, such as money equals happiness. Some assumptions are true, some are not.

In science, when a researcher decides to test an assumption, it becomes a hypothesis. The basis of all scientific experiment and observation is the testing of one or more hypotheses.

This makes Galileo Galilei a real hero to scientists. For nearly two millennia after the height of classical Greece and the teachings of Aristotle, the basis of "science" was theory.

Galileo — shockingly — determined it might be a good idea to test these theories with actual experiments. Do heavier objects actually fall faster than lighter ones, as Aristotle proclaimed? They do not, Galileo found. Modern science was born.

There remain many untested assumptions. Rebecca Lee, an assistant professor of health and human performance at the University of Houston, decided recently to examine one.

A common refrain among health researchers who study obesity is that residents of poor inner-city neighborhoods don't have easy access to fruits and vegetables. Residents of these areas — across all ethnic groups — have higher weights than the general population. Is a lack of fresh, healthy food a contributor to obesity?

To answer this question, scientists first needed to determine, for sure, whether this perceived lack of access to healthy food really existed. So Lee and her colleagues in Kansas City studied 13 urban housing developments (with median incomes of $23,000) there and four suburban communities (median incomes of $42,000).

The researchers found that all 13 urban neighborhoods had at least one store that sold food within half a mile. But, in a majority of the neighborhoods, the available options were liquor and convenience stores or pharmacies. Just three of the neighborhoods had supermarkets.

Green beans were available in just one of the 13 neighborhoods, while oranges and apples were available in at least eight.

All of the suburban neighborhoods had a well-stocked supermarket. The quality of produce at the suburban stores were also rated significantly higher than in urban stores.

Lee and her colleagues confirmed their hypothesis.

How realistic is it, then, for doctors to advise patients in low-income, urban neighborhoods to improve their diets to become healthy?

"From a public health standpoint, it is simply unrealistic to put the burden on responsibility when there are no health choices for them in their neighborhoods," Lee said.

Lee is now testing whether the same effect exists in Houston neighborhoods.

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
It's a cliche but true, less is more.

Yes, but not every place (especially) in Houston is conducive to walking. In fact, walking (and/or biking) is downright dangerous in some places - no sidewalks force people to walk on the street where I live on Ella (just south of 1960). That's really taking your life in your hands the way Houstonians drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...