lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

In the early 70's, scientists warned coastal communities against draining wetlands, suggesting that doing so would increase the likely hood, frequency and severity of storm surges. In the early 2000's, after draining 1000's of acres of wetlands, billions of dollars in damage and 100's of lives lost - scientists discovered that the draining of wetlands - increased the likely hood, frequency and severity of storm surges, recommending spending 100's of billions of dollars to rebuild those wetlands.

In the late 60's/early 70's, scientists discovered extremely complex biofeedback systems in our environment, realizing that altering one segment, such as the extinction of a single species, or elimination of a single habitat, had far reaching and often catastrophic consequences and effects elsewhere. This knowledge fostered efforts to reduce or eliminate such events, by protecting endangered species and their habitats. Fast forward to 2019, when efforts to undermine or eliminate such protections takes place. How long will it be before scientists rediscover that such folly has serious consequences, another 30 years?

Know what both scenarios have in common? Both put profit ahead of all else. Did the land developers in coastal States who championed the draining of wetlands and who made billions in profit as a result, have to pay for any of the damage storm surges caused? Nope. Did they have to pay anything for the reclamation of the wetlands they drained? Nope, they get to keep their billions - while taxpayers spend billions to recover from the damage they caused.

Reinventing the wheel every 30 years or so in this country, costs the public trillions of dollars - while the intervening years sees trillions in profit - for those few individuals/companies that paid for Government to be deaf, dumb and blind to the science.