>>2019220Who would rip up a lawn of a property they didn't live in? That would be some hardcore guerrilla gardening. Also if you were renting a property, you wouldn't do it without the owners permission either. Not sure where you got these ideas from because they just do not make sense. You missed the point here champ.
Yes, recycling is a meme, everyone knows this (except for aluminium which has a 95% reuse rate). The earth is warming, a fact that is proven year after year, but it's the cause of this warming that's debatable. Are humans to blame or is it just a natural cycle of the earth; there are arguments for both sides.
Thing is, this is all beside the point as we weren't even talking about this. We were promoting the idea of how wasteful maintaining lawns are just so peoples property can be aesthetically pleasing. It is incredible that this is the US's largest irrigated crop.
Crazy thing is, 200 years ago lawns only became popular because it was a way for the elite to show off their wealth. If you could afford to not use your land for agricultural purposes and display a manicured lawn, you were the super rich. The poor had to actually utilise their land to grow food needed for subsistence.
The water, fertiliser, energy and time spent tending to a lawns would be better spent on tending to home gardens. The fruit, vegetables and herbs created by these gardens would provide the community with locally grown produce limiting the need to transport food in from vast distances away and reducing a reliance on fossil fuels, a limited resource. How is this not a good thing?
And is it really playing to the globohomos? It's actually doing the opposite. It gives people control over their food, keeps money local, promotes bartering and community relationships while not relying on and filling the pockets of large corporations.
I always thought the right supported self reliance, but maybe they just get triggered by what the left think and automatically do the opposite.
