Top 10 Most Polluted ... Socialist Bodies of Water

Environmentalist love to talk about how the Western World, and particularly the United States is causing such mass destruction of the planet, yet when one looks around the world what we find is that everywhere you see Socialism, you see an environment under assault.  If anything the Free Market ideals that have made the U.S.A. the most advanced and prosperous country in the world, also makes it one of the cleanest.  Why?  Our political system wouldn't allow for someone who allows the destruction of their ecosystem to stay in power, as they so easily do in Socialist countries.

Let's just take a look at the top 10 most polluted bodies of water in the world, and every time, it's Socialism that has allowed the destruction of that body of water.

#1.  Lake Karachay.
The most polluted place on earth - Russia

Lake Karachay in Russia looks FANTASTIC from this photo, yet it's the most polluted place on earth.  While Russia is no longer part of the U.S.S.R, truth is that the United Soviet Socialist Republic not only gave us Chernobyl, they also gave us many, many, many of the most polluted places in the world, this Lake at the top of them.  The Soviet Union used this lake as a dumping spot for all of the nuclear waste from their largest nuclear production facilities called Mayak.

In 1968, following a drought in the region, the wind carried radioactive dust away from the dried area of the lake, irradiating half a million people.  Love that socialist Utopia!

#2.  Matanza-Riachuelo River
Translates into "Slaughter Creek"
Buenos Aires Argentina

Socialism for foes and Capitalism for Friends is practically the National Anthem in Argentina.  The victim here is Matanza-Riachuelo River in Buenos Aires.  Pictured here on the left, the "flows" of garbage is just one example of the type of "water" that feeds into this disgusting river.  3.5 million people live in its contaminated basin. Something like this would NEVER be allowed to stand in the U.S.  What's worse is that according to Argentine newspaper, Página/12, $250,000,000 was set aside for a cleanup project in 1993, but only $1,000,000 was actually used to improve the conditions of the water. The rest was "misappropriated."  In other words, STOLEN by the Socialist Scumbags that run the country.  While every country has it's share of cronyism, backstabbing, skimming and outright bribery, only the corruption of a socialist lets you have 99.6% of the money for a project easily stolen by the Political Elites and have them simply get away with it.  Were are the rapid Corporate Raiders demanding "Social Justice" from those who stole this money and left this slimy mess they call a River?

#3.  Citarum River
West Java, Indonesia

While Indonesia is no longer considered a Socialist Republic since the old rulers literally drove the country off a cliff and destroying their currency, direct elections were only recently held for the first time in 2004, so they haven't yet had time to deal with all the corruption the Socialist legacy has left them with.  Let's face it, rapid population growth over the last 20 years is no excuse for letting the  Citarum River get into the shape that it's in, which threatens the health of everyone who comes in contact with the waters of the River.

#4.  Buriganga River
 Dhaka, Bangladesh

If you were to look at an article by "Socialism Today", you would think  that the reason there is such poverty in The People's Republic of Bangladesh is because of a failed "Capitalist Experiment".  Yet in their own article they speak of how when they won independence, the first thing they did was to nationalize most major industries.  Does that sound Capitalist to you?

The picture on the left shows you the yet another way that Nationalization and Socialism have taken yet another country down the road of destruction.  Not only financially, but environmentally.
All they can do is talk about excuses, there are never any results where they can point to a socialist system and say, "See those people over there, they are living better because of Socialism".

#5.  Ganges River
 Allahabad, India

India, a constitutional Socialist Republic, where the practice of taking from the poor and giving to the rich is practically legendary.  Slums that have been in place for decades are torn down and the lands given to the rich to redevelop.  While some of the former slum tenants are given free apartments in the new developments, many others are turned away to look for residence in other slums.  The vast majority of the lands are owned by the Government and generally the only real beneficiaries, just as in any other Socialist State are those who are well connected.

For the next 5 most polluted bodies of water, we have to go to China, the worlds biggest Socialist country, then back to India, then back to China, then to Israel.  What?  Oh, I'm sorry, did you think Israel was a western style Capitalistic country?  Practically the entire country is on the Dole! No, the Labor Party over there is firmly in control, even if they're not in control of the Government.  Kind of like here in the U.S.  Even if we have some leaders on the right, the Establishment that makes all the REAL policies is ALWAYS on the left.
Finally there's the Mississippi River in the U.S.A.  WHAT?!?  We're talking Socialism here?  YES, it's true.  The Socialist Policies of the U.S. when it comes to subsidizing Corn and Ethanol is what gave rise to the MASSIVE level of pollution in the Mississippi, and especially the dreaded "Dead Zones" in the Gulf.  Ending these Socialist policies would go a LONG way towards cleaning up this mess.  Remember it's not Capitalism that brought you these messes, it's Socialism.  So the next time some Enviro-Wacko tells you that we need to end Capitalism to save the planet, you remind of of Chernobyl.

#6.  Yellow River – Lanzhou, China

#7.  Yamuna River – New Delhi, India

#8.  Chaohu Lake – Anhui Province, China

Jordan River – Israel

#10.  Mississippi River, United States of America

The Coming Environmental Disaster

The Environmental Protection Agency and some large business (especially GE who makes the bulbs and owns NBC and MSNBC), including Wal-Mart, are aggressively promoting the sale of compact fluorescent light bulbs as a way to save energy and fight global warming. They want Americans to buy many millions of them over the coming years.

But the bulbs contain mercury, a neurotoxin, and the companies and federal government haven't come up with effective ways to get Americans to recycle them!

"The problem with the bulbs is that they'll break before they get to the landfill. They'll break in containers, or they'll break in a dumpster or they'll break in the trucks. Workers may be exposed to very high levels of mercury when that happens," says John Skinner, executive director of the Solid Waste Association of North America, the trade group for the people who handle trash and recycling.

Skinner says when bulbs break near homes, they can contaminate the soil.

Mercury is a potent neurotoxin, and it's especially dangerous for children and fetuses. Most exposure to mercury comes from eating fish contaminated with mercury, however, that can change now that we're adding more and more mercury filled bulbs into our homes and places of business.

Some states, cities and counties have outlawed putting CFL bulbs in the trash, but in most states the practice is legal.

Pete Keller works for Eco Lights Northwest, the only company in Washington state that recycles fluorescent lamps. He says it is illegal to put the bulbs in the trash in some counties in Washington, but most people still throw them out.

"I think most people do want to recycle, but if it's not made easy, it doesn't happen," Keller says. "And they're small enough to fit in a trash can. So by nature, I think most people are not recyclers. So if it's small enough to fit in a trash can, that's where it ends up."

Experts agree that it's not easy for most people to recycle these bulbs. Even cities that have curbside recycling won't take the bulbs. So people have to take them to a hazardous-waste collection day or a special facility.

The head of the Environmental Protection Agency program concedes that not enough has been done to urge people to recycle CFL bulbs and make it easier for them to do so.

"I share your frustration that there isn't a national infrastructure for the proper recycling of this product," says Wendy Reed, who manages EPA's Energy Star program. That programs gives the compact bulbs its "energy star" seal of approval.

She says that even though fluorescent bulbs contain mercury, using them contributes less mercury to the environment than using regular incandescent bulbs. That's because they use less electricity — and coal-fired power plants are the biggest source of mercury emissions in the air.

The difference however is that while Mercury emissions at Coal Fired plants can be controlled with tougher legislation, Mercury in our homes and offices, and especially landfills cannot be easily contained.

Reed says the agency has been urging stores that sell the bulbs to help recycle them.

"EPA is actively engaged with trying to find a solution that works for these retailers around recycling the product, because it's really, really important," Reed says.

But so far, she says the biggest sellers of the bulbs haven't stepped up to the plate.

"The only retailer that I know of that is recycling is IKEA," she says, referring to the Swedish-owned furniture chain store.

Reed says the EPA has been prodding other retailers, such as Wal-Mart, to do more.

"We are working with Wal-Mart on it, we are making some progress. But no commitments have been made on the part of Wal-Mart," she says.

Wal-Mart didn't respond to requests for a comment on the issue.

EPA also has asked retailers to sell the lower mercury compact bulbs that some manufacturers are making. Engineers say you can't cut mercury out completely.

Some other big companies have started paying attention to the recycling problem.

General Electric has been making compact fluorescents for 20 years. Now the company admits that the little bit of mercury in each bulbs could become a real problem if sales balloon as expected.

"Given what we anticipate to be the significant increase in the use of these products, we are now beginning to look at, and shortly we'll be discussing with legislators, possibly a national solution here," says Earl Jones, a senior counsel for General Electric.

In fact, Jones said he was having his first talks with congressional staffers on Thursday.

Story originally by Elizabeth Shogren