Standard neo-liberal economics makes no accounting for natural resources or waste sinks. Maine could cut down all of its timber and that would be a good thing, because of the jobs it would generate.

Maine could import trash for 100 Old Town dumps and that would be a good thing, because of the jobs it would generate. In neither case does standard economics take into account the worth of the woods, the worthlessness of the trash or the staggering expense of the secondary consequences.

Maine could burn all the trash from New Orleans, spreading mercury and every other toxic. We could poison our land, air, water and children and there would be no accounting for that destruction in our standard economic system. It would be good for business.

It would be good for business because the expense does not show up on the income statements of those businesses generating waste.

It might be cheaper for the mills to burn construction trash, but it is not cheaper for flesh and blood people. Already we cannot eat fish from Maine rivers. Spreading pollutants around as widely as we can is not cheaper because we will never be able to clean up the mess. It's only a matter of time before we cannot eat food grown on our own land.

Burning trash is good for business because sick people need more health care than do well people and more health care makes our GDP go up.

I can't imagine anything that exemplifies how far off track our economy has gone than the burning of construction debris. Buildings - one of the most permanent creations of our society - reduced to heat and a thin layer of dust. If you want to teach your children about the Laws of Thermodynamics and entropy - talk about the burning of construction debris.

We need to restructure our economy to eliminate waste. This is not going to be easy, but it is necessary.

To that end, I will submit LD2, "Trash is not commerce".