This statement is inherently flawed. Pretty much companies "ruin" the environment through emissions of some sort, whether that's burning coal or running a newspaper business. It's the effect on the environment (most importantly locally) that this is important.o.pwuaioc wrote:If companies are legally able to ruin the environment if it makes them a profit, is it ok that they do that, too?
My dad works as an environmental consultant. I've been out in the field with him before, probably twelve years ago now, and I remember it like it was yesterday. We were testing to see how a rubber plant's smell affected a nearby neighborhood when residents complained. We checked wind speed and direction and walked around the neighborhood. There was no smell, and it was unlikely there WAS a smell. But the company was sued, and they were forced to leave. My dad's data was ignored.
If this DID affect the surrounding neighborhood (which, as I said, is unlikely), then I would say it's not okay. You're profiting when the surrounding area suffers, and it's downright immoral. But when you're not affecting anyone adversely, who's to say that it's wrong?
.