When everybody wins the environment loses is a very good take on what we are learning about in class. Post World War Two, the data that McNeill is giving is saying that everyone is winning off of technological fixes, even the environment. I really like the Ducktown story of the land eventually profiting a technological fix and also having the plantations have that transformation of a techno fix element with it. The author does a good job of showing that the government is a director of the transformation technological fix. He does a good job connecting this to his opening statement of that even the environment can win from the techno fixes post WWII. I like the twist on the Anaconda arsenic problem, and how eventually they were sitting on over a hundred-thousand dollars from the arsenic emissions collected. This also ties into the different ways of showing how technofixes are different like the relocation, and delaying of them. I think he has a compelling argument post WWII because the transportation is better, and the delaying of it is better than making it worse.
Although I think LeCain’s argument is a good one, my mind sticks to what is important in my mind which is that every tech fix needs to be looked at like a socio – trophic cascade. We need to think several steps ahead of just what is wrong now and what can be fixed. Thinking forward one step ahead has never been an excellent chess strategy, so why do we apply it to fixing mines and other superfund sites? How we do this, I’m not certain but we do still need to get the copper and other minerals. I think if everyone knew the socio part of the problem, we would have more people recycling these minerals, and also being more aware of what kinds of tech fixes the government and scientists should work on.