Today, somewhere in NSW, a person will be turned away from a hospital because there is no bed available or because the needed service is no longer provided.

Last night a few million dollars went up in smoke over Sydney and other places.

I wonder what the Carbon Imprint of this pollution was and how people can live with such hypocracy.

A timely topic, and a challenging one, as evidenced by this 2008 article and poll on the subject in an online magazine aimed at those concerned about the environment. Almost half the poll respondents, even of this publication, thought that to not celebrate with fireworks was being too much of a wet blanket, despite their heavy environmental cost.

http://www.treehugger.com/culture/firew ... mpact.html

Let's weigh the benefits of fireworks with other euphoria inducing pastimes.

Alcohol and drugs exclude children and can cause bodily, emotional and financial damage.
Sex excludes children and can have well documented side effects.
Music comes close but it's impossible to please all tastes simultaneously.

Fireworks are an innocent pleasure and please all ages, and the homeless and wealthy alike, this makes them the best choice of entertainment for New Year's celebrations.

Organized firework displays at public expense only came in after the Government banned private buying/possession/use of fireworks.

I'm all in favour of fireworks but not while essential medical services are crying out for funds.

Any thoughts on the distress caused to thousands of animals?

RSPCA?

The RSPCA do provide guidance to animal owners about fireworks displays which also provides some information on the distress they cause particularly to dogs and horses.

http://kb.rspca.org.au/How-should-I-car ... ys_82.html

Very noble of them but what about all the birds, possums and other animals in the Botanical Gardens, the Domain and Hyde Park?

Are they not entitled to some protection as well?

Premier Barry O'Farrell has promised that the Pacific Highway will be upgraded through Urunga, on the State's North Coast after an horrific accident claimed two lives a few days ago.

State finances are tight, which is why the upgrade wasn't done years ago when it was first promised.

One wonders where money could have been saved so that the highway was fixed and lives not lost.

It is an interesting ethical question in the broader sense. You seem to be asking 'should money be spent on enjoyment, when there are needs not being met?' On face value one would suggest no, but in reality all needs can never be met. Medical facilities could always be improved, roads could always be upgraded, the poor could always be looked after better. If you take that stance, then money can never be spent on enjoyment.

Ethically I would suggest that governments have a responsibility to look after both the wants (enjoyment) and needs of the people they govern. By all means question the balance, the priorities (and whether you enjoy fireworks!) but to suggest we don't spend on wants until all needs are met, means we can never spend on the non-essential

the best way to eliminate the ethical pollution from the world is to make sure that you are right. This is fact that this world reflects exactly what we have done. So, changing ourselves is alternative to change others. If we are ethically good, our attached people will definitely good.

I really agree with Christine.

This is really a problem nowadays. If we really care about the nature for our future grandsons to experience earth then we should stop this pleasures.

Just like brown said: The best solution is to start yourself preventing these ethical pollution.
______________________

Benefits for electric sign leasing
Peace of Mind..... Is IN STOCK NOW