John Tierney's Argument Analysis

348 Words2 Pages

John Tierney’s piece is very interesting. It goes against I and many other people have been taught when it comes to recycling. As I read his article I kept saying to myself, oh wow, I never taught of that or that is an interesting perspective. When it comes to the environment I am not someone who keeps up with it so I know that (or taught) recycling is good, carbon emissions are bad, don’t litter, and so on. So, reading this, I don’t really have facts that may counteract what he said so in my case I will most likely take his word as fact more than other people would. The really shocking point was actually the last sentence when he stated: “How can you build a sustainable city with a strategy that can’t even sustain itself?”. I was very surprised reading that because we think of recycling as being sustainable. But when it comes to Tierney he believes that we have to get a carbon tax so that it is more expensive to put garbage in landfills and subsidize recycling. That is a very interesting point that he makes. …show more content…

I am glade that I read this one second because it counteracts what the first one said a little bite. I think that fact that he uses personal stories to make his point. He talks about a family that lives right beside a superfund site and their journey with it, I was able to connect to that much better than just getting facts thrown at me. As I read this article I was able to compare the two different perspectives from a more educated stance. The personal stories made me feel sympathy for those affected by the superfund sites. He goes through and talks about the fact that 40% of American will be diagnosed with cancer, that is really scary. Moreover, seeing images of a landfill makes me never to want to live near one. It is disgusting, unclean, and dirty and those are things I would never want near my