Two Funerals

SUBHEAD: The Death of Jacko and Walter Cronkite present us with an interesting rite of passage this month...

By John Schettler on 20 July 2009 in The Writing Shop - http://www.writingshop.ws/html/two_funerals.html

One stood as a symbol of the lost American Dream, the other marked the loss of credibility, authority and legitimacy in our media and government.

Hello America.

In case you haven’t noticed, while you were watching American Idol, all the dance shows, Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, Survivor, Big Brother and a host of other nifty TV shows, the America you live in has undergone a dramatic change. Your friend, the banker, has been real busy.

image above: Walter Cronkite and Michael Jackson in their forties. After loosening standards, they fired a bloated real estate market in the housing boom, all to create phantom wealth based on nothing more than agreements between thieves. They thought they were immune from risk with their securities, CDOs, Swaps and Derivatives, but the crisis of confidence saw their securities trading game go bust as well. Most major banks are effectively bankrupt. But instead of taking their losses, they took $14 trillion in public money, passing the losses on to you and your kids. Then they took your house and credit cards for good measure, and your jobs. This accomplished, they changed all the accounting rules to revalue toxic bad debt at boom time prices, and presto chango, they announced a big comeback of profitability. The NY Time took this magic trick to task in a recent article when they wrote: “The recession — with its yawning gap between the bonus class on the one hand and the foreclosed upon and newly jobless on the other — (has created) a widespread sense that winners in this economy are produced by a game that’s rigged. Which is why the response to last week’s earnings bonanza has been a mix of, among other things, bafflement and anger. If these companies can return to the festivities so quickly, were they really having the near-death experience they and the government claimed? And if taxpayers risked their money when they backstopped Wall Street’s misadventures, why aren’t they sharing in the upside now that the party has started again? And did these companies have the time to rethink the risk culture that landed us in this jam in the first place?” No. They did not. They just got back to the same slice and dice hucksterism that created the whole mess, conveniently hiding all the losses off balance sheet and rigging the books. So the second Great Depression is now well underway—all brought to you courtesy of Wall Street and the US banking system. All across America foreclosures continue, jobs are lost in record numbers, businesses fail, retirement portfolios evaporate, marriages fail, property crime increases, the middle class becomes poor. The boomers, who thought life was about ever increasing home equity and ballooning stock portfolios, have now gone bust. They outspent every other generation by a factor of two, and now stand shocked at the edge of retirement realizing there is too little in the piggy bank to even provide a fraction of their daily needs. They are going to stop spending and save like crazy now, and with them goes the heart of the us “consumer” economy. It’s just not coming back. Don’t wait for it. The game is over. The greatest heist and wealth transfer in history has just been perpetrated under the guise of a “financial crisis.” Rich Dads at places like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan laugh all the way to the bank. Financial bonus payouts and executive salaries reach record levels. The average American is now just one lost paycheck from being on the street. Like the entertainment shows before it, you can do little more than just watch it all on the TV news, which only tell you a sliver of the real truth. Because the media is not about presenting any true picture of reality to you, but rather all about perpetuating the fantasy illusion we called “The American Dream” and selling you all the junk and landfill that accessorizes it--24/7. But the American Dream is dying

It’s been dying for years but few noticed, mistaking the “flip that house” pump and dump scheme for real economic growth. The economy grew because we all joined in the feeding frenzy and agreed that it should. We agreed that the no doc loans were legitimate offers and legitimate risks, that the option ARMs and interest only loans were legitimate mortgages at legitimate values, that having three houses was somehow normal, (to go along with our three cars). And when it all came tumbling down we seemed shocked to learn that the lives we had been living were based on an equal measures of fantasy, unsustainable debt, and a healthy pinch of fraud. Then we switched to “American Idol” instead, to try and forget about it all, and mourned instead the death of the “King of Pop” in place of the funeral we should be having for the American Dream we all bought into at 29.9% interest.

Somewhere in that act of reflexive denial is a well of hidden shame. Because we knew, deep down, that we all played the game the bankers and Wall Street traders concocted. We played it with Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Discover, and we were the ones that walked into the bank to ask for those home equity loans, and we were the ones pushing that carts around Home Depot. We thought that we could just blame it all on Bush and Cheney, as so many of us did, myself included. We thought that we would finally settle the matter when we voted for “change we could believe in” and sent a charismatic young man to the White House. What we overlooked was the glaring fact that the White House doesn’t run our economy, and that all the agencies and power centers that do run it are staffed by banking industry insiders, the same folks that set up and delivered the pump and dump scheme in the first place. They bought and paid for Congress long ago, and they lobby ceaselessly to fend off mortgage modifications, changes to securities and derivatives trading regulations, caps on their salaries and bonuses, changes to the credit card laws, implementation of fair accounting rules. That’s how diligently they look after their wealth, and ensure their continued domination of economic policy designed to fatten their bottom line at the expense of everyone else.

All the greed, fraud, and corruption was as much our own fault as it was a product of the hucksters on Wall Street. Every con game needs a willing mark, and we were all too willing, thinking that we could also get something for nothing--nothing down and low easy monthly payments. In too many ways we all participated in the game when the good times were rolling. Remember the barfing baby teaching us all how to become day traders in the stock market for $7 bucks a deal? Remember the little bald headed bankers that were crowding into our foyer to compete for our business? Remember the snooty housewife turning down one loan offer after another to look for a better deal? In their place we now watch endless TV ads promising to negotiate away our massive, crushing debt, the inevitable consequence of our credit based society and the phony economic boom it created.

The staff writers of the Herald tribune.com in Florida exposed how the game was played there: “Unscrupulous property flippers would buy houses or condos, then drive up the price in a few days or weeks by selling it to someone they knew. Buyers used the inflated price to get bank loans for more than the property was worth, leaving money for flippers to split as profit…The deals -- many of them inflated sales among friends, family and business associates -- drove up property values and tax bills during the boom, fed bank bailouts and failures after the boom, and fueled the foreclosure wave that has gutted property values.”

After a year of research into the shady housing deals the writers concluded: “Many of the questionable flip deals were orchestrated by real estate professionals…Lenders facilitated fraud by approving mortgages on suspicious transactions…Lenders continued to finance flips even after the boom, when property values were declining and price increases should have raised suspicion…The actual amount of fraudulent land deals in Florida is likely more than $10 billion.” And that is just Florida. God only knows how bad it got in the new foreclosure capital of the world, California.

It’s easy to slam the banks for what they have done, because it was so transparently greedy and corrupt, though few could see this while they were signing their loan papers. It is much more difficult to look in the mirror and realize that “we the people” allowed them to do all of this, and indeed, we gleefully participated in it all as it was happening. We allowed a government to be purchased with lavish campaign contributions and molded by lobbyists. And someone pulled those levers in the election booth to send senators and representatives back to Washington, term after term, many occupying their seats for the better part of their adult lives. The system is there because the people put it there and now they allow it to stay in place unchallenged, unreformed, and unchanged, no matter what Change.Gov would have you believe.

Let’s face it… The banks did what they did because a wolf is a wolf. But if you want to really find a place to lay the blame, it’s because the people of this nation have become sheep. We allowed ourselves to buy into their grand casino game. We gleefully took the stack of chips they handed us and sat down at the roulette and card tables. We pulled the levers on the slot machines, called “one armed bandits” for a good reason—because the odds in all the games at Vegas are statistically rigged against the player and always favor the house. The same can be said for all the laws in the game of lending and credit. We bought into the game just like any good gambler who thinks he can beat the house and hit that big bonanza. We allowed ourselves to be branded with a FICO score and prodded and poked with penalties, interest hikes, points and fees, until we did just what the bankers wanted us to do, saddling ourselves with unsustainable debt to buy all the things we have since recycled to landfills. And through it all we simply amused ourselves to death, just as Roger Waters so glibly points out in his song by that same title in the sidebar.

Two Funerals

So yes, we mortgaged our future for a long, long weekend in our Neverland economy. Is it any wonder millions mourned Michael Jackson, a man in debt up to his eyeballs who had built a fantasy land amusement park estate to hide away from the world? They saw, deep down, a glimmering of themselves in that lost American Idol—the veritable King of the pop culture we so adulate in this country. The Jackson funeral struck a deep vein in the contemporary American soul, simply because it stood as such a glaring and obvious metaphor for the pop ridden nation as a whole. You have only to follow the top ten queries on search engines like Google and Yahoo to see what’s on America’s mind. Jackson’s funeral was followed a week later by the death of a truly remarkable man, Walter Cronkite, once touted as “the most trusted man in America.” It came right on the 40th anniversary of another moment of American greatness, the first landing on the moon 40 years ago. (What have we accomplished since?) While Cronkite’s death received due mention on the news, it was barely noticed by the rank and file compared to the media frenzy that followed the demise of Jacko. This alone is a salient comment on the sad state of the American mind and soul—as least as far as it is represented in the media these days.

James Kunstler, always on point, summed up the hidden meaning of Cronkite’s death this way:

“It wasn't about the death of one hugely esteemed individual; it was about the broad institutional failure of TV news in general and the current grievous loss of legitimacy and authority in shaping a national consensus of reality. Watching the old clips of Cronkite delivering the evening news years ago, one couldn't help weighing the contrast with the current spectacle of snide, combative, overbearing idiocy acted out nightly by the likes of Kudlow, Olberman, Kneale, O'Reilly, Matthews, and Dobbs as they shout down their invited guest commentators, pander to their demographic, and diss their rivals for ratings.” The sad state of our media is perhaps nowhere more evident than the fact that comedian John Steward of The Daily Show, on Comedy Central, is now perceived by many as one of the few touchstones to reality. His acerbic and combative comedic wit routinely dismembers mainstream media puppets like Jim Cramer and so many others, and strongly hits the nub of truth that lies behind all human laughter.

These two funerals tell our story today—one marking the death of the fantasy land economy in this nation, running on a something for nothing vapor of equity and credit, and the other marking the death of legitimacy and real authority as vested in our media and government institutions. One funeral marks the loss of something we must willfully let go, the other the loss of something we desperately need to restore. They come at a time when America most needs the psychological rite of passage a funeral provides—for we must, as a nation, lay the sham of our old economy to rest and somehow find a new legitimacy in media and government if we are ever to face and undertake the massive transformation in our “way of life” that this crisis demands.

There’s an old saying: “If you are going to dance, you have to pay the piper.” Time to pay up. Our children and grandchildren will now live in an America we would not have believed possible while we were busy flipping houses and remodeling our kitchens and baths. The gutted neighborhoods, for rent signs, long lines at the unemployment office, these are what we leave to our kids to sort out now. And how many of us will also be asking them to take care of us as well, since the old 401k ain’t what it used to be?

So things are the way they are because we allowed it all to happen, and this is the way it will continue until the people of this nation decide otherwise and demand real Change.Gov. When we demand an end to lobbying in congress, truly reform campaign contributions, purge government of financial industry insiders, set down rigorous new laws and regulations to enforce fair lending and credit practices, eliminate derivatives trading, abolish the Federal Reserve and return issuance of money to the people’s government, do away with fractional reserve lending. And this is just the start—the fire that must happen if we are to clear away rampant choking “growth” that was largely based on fraud and corruption in this country. Then the real work begins—the building out of new walkable communities, a revitalized rail system, decentralized alternative energy model, local food production, more equitable wealth distribution, a return to production of real things of value, and not pixilated “wealth” created by keystrokes in a Fed computer system. That list is so long it could take generations and never be accomplished. Or it might be accomplished in one sweeping revolution, such as that which founded this country and set us on a new course that saw the United States become the greatest nation on earth—a title it can sadly no longer lay claim to. Can we be great again?

Perhaps that is not the point at all. Can we be real again is more to the heart of the issue. Can we embrace core values of love, family, work, sustainability, frugality, temperance, forbearance, common effort, community. This is the real question before us now.

Can we discover if we really ever did believe those high sounding words ascribing the new way of life that was founded on this continent so long ago? Can we truly deserve the powers and authority, the solemn privilege and charge that the founding fathers and so many others fought to deliver into our hands—we the people, the United States of America. Will we truly become citizens of this nation and do the work before us, or will we continue to spin “Thriller” on the DJ set, settle deeper into our reclining sofas, and amuse ourselves to death with nostalgic thoughts of the good old boom times as we watch the twilight of our collective national decline?

The choice is ours.

Consciousness and Complexity

SUBHEAD: We humans taking our first steps toward societal transformation. By Dr. Michael P Byron on 18 July 2009 in OpEdNews - (http://www.opednews.com/articles/Consciousness-and-Complexi-by-Dr-Michael-P-Byro-090715-151.html)

Image above: Chimpanzee using a tool to collect and eat insects. From http://animal.discovery.com/mammals/chimpanzee Recently my wife Ramona and I watched a PBS program entitled "Ape Genius." The program sought to uncover the cognitive abilities and limits of the great apes: Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Orangutans, and Gorillas. Their mental capabilities were contrasted with those of humans. The deep question posed was: Given the many similarities between humans and great apes, why are we so different? Only humans have art, music, global organization and so on? Why?

According to the investigation great apes do not actively teach newly learned skills to others. Learning can and does occur, but only by passive observation of one ape to the actions of another. Also, apes are emotionally impulsive-similar to human three year olds, but dissimilar to human four year olds. For example, if an ape is given a choice of two bowls of fruit which contain differing amounts of fruit, and is asked to choose only one bowl, the ape will invariably choose the bowl containing the most fruit. Further, if the ape is asked to give one bowl to another ape, while keeping one for itself, it will always give the bowl containing the least amount of fruit to the other ape. So far so good, humans would generally do the same. However, when an ape is placed in a situation where the other ape receives the bowl of fruit which was not selected for it by the first ape, then despite learning that the way to obtain the most fruit is to offer the bowl with the most fruit to the other ape, the choosing ape simply cannot do this. It sees the bowl with the most fruit and always immediately selects it for itself-even knowing that by doing this the other ape will receive the full fruit bowl, and not itself. Human three year olds behave similarly, while older human children soon figure things out and offer the fuller bowl to another child knowing that by doing so; they will receive it for themselves. Great apes are emotionally unable to do this. Interestingly, if an ape which has learned to recognize and understand the meaning of human numbers is used in the experiment, they will offer the higher numbered bowl to the other ape knowing that by doing so, they will actually receive the greater number. Abstraction seems to break the grip of emotional impulsivity. Overall, while great apes have rudimentary technology-including in some instances, manufactured spears, and while they are capable of learning by observation of other apes, their consciousness limits their degree of social interactivity. Apparently this limit is somewhere below the threshold of net interaction at which specialization and complex, coordinated, society emerges. Language is not discussed in the documentary, though I suspect that if chimps could develop a complex language and use it among themselves, their level of organized social complexity might rise above the threshold. In the case of humans, we are above the threshold at which great organized social complexity emerges. Yet, we may be as cognitively limited as our ape cousins. Consider that we know scientifically, that our actions are destroying the planetary ecosystem, altering the weather, and that this global civilization is based upon ever-increasing use of ever-diminishing hydrocarbon energy resources. Our rational response to this would be to immediately take drastic actions to remedy these behavioral errors. Yet, our material wealth, the position and power of societal elites, the very way that we have been indoctrinated to understand and interact with reality itself, is based upon preservation of the existing patterns of social order. So we as a global society, effectively do nothing. At least we do not take effective actions in a timely manner. Global warming: it's a hoax, just ask conservative commentators such as George Will, Rush Limbaugh and Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe. Not to worry. Same response to peak oil concerns. The market will somehow always keep us supplied with all the energy we can use, or science will, or there is simply no foreseeable shortage of hydrocarbon energy to begin with. Not to worry-all is well. And so on for all of humanity's mounting existential threats. Like the great apes we are able to comprehend reality abstractly through mathematics, and for humans, science, but at a concrete, tangible level, we are unable, as a species, to translate abstraction into changed action. Humans fail the test, though at a higher level of social complexity than great apes. This conclusion strongly suggests that a creature that was cognitively to humans as we are to great apes would NOT fail this test. Therefore it is possible to not fail. The question before us is: is it possible for humans to not fail it? Can we change the thinking, the fundamental consciousness, of enough of our fellow humans in the time available to get it right? Alternately, if this can't be accomplished, can we create a parallel social ordering within the midst of the old, self-doomed order, which as the old order self-destructs will endure and replace it? Both of my books Infinity's Rainbow: The Politics of Energy, Climate and Globalization, and its sequel The Path Through Infinity's Rainbow: Your Guide to Personal Survival and Spiritual Transformation in a World Gone Mad address these issues in some detail. Basically, I believe that it is already too late to save our very flawed global civilization. Further, I do not believe that this is a desirable goal as its perpetuation means ever greater ecological devastation to the entire biosphere. However, I believe that we can transform ourselves as individuals, and by organizing with like-minded others we can become the nucleus of a successor societal complexity which will transcend the limitations of the present one. We need to be consciously aware of the entire web of life, matter and energy in which we exist. We need to understand and empathize with others-other humans, other living creatures. Although we evolved in scarcity, we need to learn that ever greater material accumulation beyond necessity is counterproductive to ourselves and to all life. A complex social ordering based upon these principles, in addition to being environmentally sustainable, would be capable of greater emergent complexity-though not necessarily greater material complexity-than our present one by at least an order of magnitude. This is the goal towards which we need to organize and transform ourselves. We can start by turning off the TV/Radio for a while and just sit outside and watching the natural world around us. Learn to see what's actually out there. Do this as an exercise at least several times a week. Better yet, do this mental exercise while taking a walk in a natural setting so that the mental exercise becomes physical also. Beyond this, there are numerous well established techniques for consciousness expansion-meditation, dancing, sacred plants, music and many more. Consider practicing one that is compatible with your own values and personal attributes. At the same time, learn to think analytically and logically. Holistic comprehension of reality is complementary to logical analytical reasoning. Try to learn to harmoniously think like both a scientist and a poet. We are different from the great apes in part because we can consciously control our instinctive selfish behaviors better, and because our awareness, and degree of interaction with, others of our species is greater. Our consciousness includes and interacts with that of other members of our species more fully. Yet, as I've shown, it is still quite limited. We are still closer to the apes than we are to the angels. By expanding our innate mental abilities to abstract essential details from complex reality-just as the apes did when using numbers rather than actual objects-we can develop clearer understandings of which forms of social ordering are sustainable and which are not. In the context of possessing a wider awareness of others than most contemporary humans have, we can then be much more likely to act with the good of all others in mind. Such a society would likely pass the test I mentioned above. We could then be that creature which is to humans as humans are to great apes. The necessary evolution is mental not genetic. By beginning with these changes in ourselves we take our first steps toward societal transformation. That road will be long and hard. Yet if there is to be a future worth living in, we must journey down it. I'll have more to say about personal and societal transformation in subsequent essays. .

The Plastic Bag Ban

SUBHEAD: The Great Plastic Bag Plague. We can do something on Kauai now! By Tara Lohan on 05 September 2007 in AlterNet - http://www.alternet.org/environment/61607/the_great_plastic_bag_plague [Editor's note: Why post an article from 2007 you ask. Because Kauai may soon have a ban on disposable plastic shopping bags and this article makes a good case for why you should help support this ban. Bill 2321 Plastic Bag Reduction is on the Kauai County Council Agenda for July 22, 2009.ap . Your support is needed to move this bill into law.] It turns out 'paper or plastic' is a life or death question for our environment. They're ubiquitous. They accompany us home each time we shop. They swirl about our oceans, they cling to our trees, they drift down our city sidewalks, they adorn metal fences, they're consumed by animals.

image above: Plastic bag caught on coral reef appears like a jellyfish

They are an urban tumbleweed, a flag of the consumer era. Each year across the world some 500 billion plastic bags are used, and only a tiny fraction of them are recycled. Most of them will have a short lifetime with a consumer -- they'll be used for the few minutes it takes to get from the store to home and then they're thrown away. But what does "away" really mean? Plastic shopping bags can last up to a thousand years in a landfill. In the environment, they break down into tiny, toxic particles that become part of the soil and water. Fortunately, some communities in America have started taking serious action. Stephanie Barger has seen what washes up on the shores of Southern California. The executive director of Earth Resource Foundation, Barger has helped clean up the sands of Orange County and has helped educate people about the effects of a society that embraces disposability. For every bag, there's a cost. Environment California reports that plastic bags, and other plastic refuse that end up in the ocean, kill up to one million sea creatures every year, such as birds, whales, seals, sea turtles, and others. And the number of marine mammals that die each year because of eating or being entanglement in plastic is estimated at 100,000 in the North Pacific Ocean alone. The Algalita Marine Research Foundation learned that "broken, degraded plastic pieces outweigh surface zooplankton in the central North Pacific by a factor of 6-1. That means six pounds of plastic for every single pound of zooplankton." Which means, when birds and sea animals or looking for food -- more often, they are finding plastic. Our history with plastic bags is short but significant. The Film and Bag Federation, an industry group, reports that plastic sandwich bags were unveiled in 1957 and quickly became a part of our routine, with department stores adopting plastic shopping bags in the late '70s and supermarkets employing them by the early '80s. Although bags are given out free these days, they are not without their costs. Retailers in the United States spend $4 billion a year on plastic bags, which gets passed on to customers as higher prices. A global problem According to Vincent Coob, founder of reusablebags.com, about 500 billion to 1 trillion plastic bags are used worldwide every year and are causing a global epidemic. The enormous demand for plastic bags ties into the surging global demand for oil -- plastic bags are made from ethylene, a petroleum byproduct. In the United States alone, an estimated 12 million barrels of oil is used annually to make plastic bags that Americans consume. "Eliminating the use of disposable plastic bags is about more than just the environment," said Barger, "it is about health, sustainability, economics and focusing on what kind of quality of life we want."

A growing list of communities and countries are beginning to rethink their dependence on plastic bags. Already a complete or partial ban on the bags has been approved in Australia, South Africa, parts of India, China, Italy, Bangladesh and Taiwan. Africa has seen an increasing problem with bags as Environmental News Network reports, "South Africa was once producing 7 billion bags a year; Somaliland residents became so used to them they renamed them "flowers of Hargeisa" after their capital; and Kenya not so long ago churned out about 4,000 tons of polythene bags a month." In Asia, the bags were banned in 2002 in Bangladesh after they were considered to be major factors in blocking sewers and drains and contributing to the severe flooding that devastated the country in 1988 and 1998.

Taking a different route, in 2002, Ireland imposed a 15-cent tax on bags, which led to a rapid 90 percent reduction in use. Ireland uses the tax to help fund other environmental initiatives. Bags are also taxed in Sweden and Germany, and are set to be banned outright in Paris this year. In the United States, Californians Against Waste estimate that Americans consume 84 billion plastic bags annually. The United States has been slow out of the gate in addressing the growing problem with plastic, but recently momentum has started for positive change. Currently 30 rural Alaskan villages and towns have banned plastic bags. And in March the city of San Francisco became the first major municipality to ban the use of plastic bags, and nearby Oakland has followed suit, but not without controversy and litigation from industry groups. Californians themselves discard about 19 billion bags each year. Over the years a growing coalition of environmental and consumer groups have been pushing for the state to take action. This summer their work resulted in the passage of Assembly Bill 2449, which requires all supermarkets, pharmacies and other large retail stores to provide bins to help consumers recycle. While this is a step in the right direction, many who have been aggressive on the issue, see the law as a disappointment. "It is basically just fluff -- most big stores already have the recycling bins," said Barger.

Bryan Early, who works for the Sacramento-based Californians Against Waste, admitted the legislation was a compromise. With pressure from the grocery and plastics industries, the law includes a provision that takes away the rights of municipalities to put a tax on bags the way Ireland did. Hence, San Francisco and Oakland's push to ban the bags entirely. But the devil is in the details. The Oakland legislation (which would go into effect in January) requires large markets to use bags made of recyclable paper or "bioplastics" -- bags made from compostable materials like cornstarch. But a supermarket trade group calling itself the Coalition to Support Plastic Bag Recycling has sued, saying that the ban in Oakland and San Francisco conflict with the state law requiring stores to have bag recycling programs. The group argues that compostable bags and petroleum-based bags would be confused by consumers and the compostable bags would contaminate the plastics bags during the recycling process.

"We are wasting energy fighting about disposable bags," said Barger, "when we should be putting energy into educating people about reusable bags." Alternatives vs. the solutions While lawyers will hash out the details in Oakland, there is a lot we can do as consumer and advocates -- some approaches are better than others. Compostable or bioplastic bags may seem like a good solution to the typical plastic ones, but Barger believes they are more of an alternative -- not a solution. The bioplastics may be made from natural products, but they also may contain a whole bunch of chemicals we don't know about, said Barger. And since most of them will come from corn or soy, they'll also mean more use of farmland laden with petroleum-based pesticides and fertilizers and the same environmental and energy costs to truck the bags to market. And, while the bags may not last a thousand years, they do break down slower than regular compost and could last up to six or eight months in the environment -- threatening wildlife just the same.

"Bioplastics is really just replacing one problem for another and doesn't address what is wrong with our throw-away culture," said Barger. Neither paper nor plastic Which brings us to the "paper or plastic" question. The best answer is really neither. Paper bags have their own environmental cost. According to Vincent Coob, 14 million trees were cut down in 1999 to produce 10 billion grocery bags for Americans. The production and shipping of the bags also contributes to global warming and air pollution. The best alternative Barger and Early agree, are reusable bags and education -- lots of it. By purchasing a reusable cloth bag, consumers can save hundreds and perhaps thousands of plastic or paper bags. If you can't afford one, then reusing a plastic bag for as long as possible and then recycling it (if you are lucky to live in California or the few other places that offer the service) is the best bet. It is also important, Barger says, to educate grocery store managers and ask them to talk to their employees. Political pressure helps, too. Ask your elected officials to consider legislation to impose bag taxes or bag bans. Probably the best thing we can do, though, is change our behavior as consumers and begin valuing durability instead of disposability. "There is a crisis happening right now," said Barger. "We have got to stop the flow of plastic today. People really want some organization to fix this problem. But we are the only people that can fix it."

Council agenda: Transparency

SUBHEAD: We need to insist on at least having a balanced committee to represent the interest of the public. By Michael Levine on 18 July 2009 in The Garden Island http://www.kauaiworld.com/articles/2009/07/18/news/kauai_news/doc4a61886601017287879585.txt Fulfilling the promise made by way of a unanimous vote last month, the County Council will publicly discuss issues of open government at its next meeting, according to the agenda published on the county Web site Thursday night.

image above: Cartoon by Adam Zygus that appeared in the Buffalo News in 2006

From http://www.adamzyglis.com/images/cartoon271.jpg But the discussion, the fruit of a crusade for sound, transparent governance by council members Tim Bynum and Lani Kawahara, may not even be the first of its ilk to hit the table Wednesday. Also included on the agenda is a resolution from council member Dickie Chang and Vice Chair Jay Furfaro that would establish a three-member ad hoc Special Advisory Committee “to review and recommend amendments to the rules of the County Council.” The resolution and its review of council rules could overlap considerably with the Bynum and Kawahara communication which seeks to address council members’ access to the agenda, the placement of public documents on the county’s Web site, equitable and timely circulation of documents, and general access to information. Furfaro and Chang each said in separate phone interviews Friday that the proposed committee will include former council Chair Ron Kouchi, parliamentarian and Kaua‘i Island Utility Cooperative Chairman of the Board Phil Tacbian, and the Honorable retired Judge George Masuoka. Kaua‘i Chamber of Commerce President Randall Francisco will serve as the committee’s alternate member, they said. The committee, if approved by the council Wednesday, will have 90 days to review the rules and report back with recommendations. “I’m working with Councilman Chang ... to have an outside group review our current rules and make some recommendations,” Furfaro said, noting that the committee will not be authorized to make changes, a power that rests with the council and cannot be delegated. “It’s always good to have fresh eyes look at things.” Chang said the council could have formed a committee of its own members, but he felt this approach was a better one. “What I felt was much more fair in the eyes of the public is if we get an ad hoc committee of extremely reputable and smart people that understand government and understand our plight,” Chang said. “The public can rest assured to know that we are looking at the rules.” Chang described the proposed committee members as “very, very qualified and very, very neutral.” “I hope the public understands that this ain’t no ‘old boy network,’” he said. Furfaro pointed to a pair of specific issues that he hoped the committee would address: the interpretation of managing the agenda, a rule that Bynum sought to amend with a motion on June 3, and the rule pertaining to committee chairs “being the conduit of gathering information,” an issue that Furfaro flew to Honolulu “on my own nickel” to clarify with the Office of Information Practices. Bynum, who said Friday he requested that the communication from he and Kawahara be heard before the resolution from Furfaro and Chang because members of the public have asked that it be addressed early so they do not have to wait for it, expressed mild support for the committee. “I have no objection to the formation of this committee, because our rules certainly need to be looked at, but I don’t expect that it will delay consideration of a (separate) resolution to address members’ access to the agenda,” he said. Kawahara expressed skepticism at the political maneuver by Furfaro and Chang. “Sadly, I think it’s a distraction and a delaying tactic,” she said in a phone interview. “I have no issues with the people that were selected, but ... we were ready to discuss this weeks ago with other the council members, and we’re still willing and hopeful that other council members will talk about it on the council floor in the public domain. “I am concerned that this is a way of trying to remove the public from seeing us work and construct our rules,” Kawahara said, wondering if the ad hoc committee would be subject to Sunshine Law rules for public meeting. “It seems kind of sad that we all just can’t talk about it.” Bynum, too, voiced concern over the handling of the situation and his goals when pushing for the discussion.“There are going to be changes,” he said, “but are they going to be cosmetic changes, or are they going to be fundamental changes?” [Editor's note: Are you mad as hell? How much more of this are you willing to take? Are you ready to talk trash? Man-oh-man this Wednesday is the day to speak up and let the County Council know where you stand. The agenda for the 22nd is loaded and fully charged. http://www.kauai.gov/Government/OfficeOfTheCountyClerk/CountyCouncil/CouncilAgendas/tabid/73/Default.aspx Lets take them in the order they are scheduled. C 2009-251 Communication (07/16/2009) from Councilmember Dickie Chang andVice Chair Jay Furfaro, transmitting for Council consideration, aresolution to establish a Special Advisory Committee to review and recommend amendments to the rules of the County Council of theCounty of Kaua’i. (See Resolution No. 2009-48) This looks like an end run to head off and negate: C 2009-259 Communication (06/16/2009) from Councilmembers Lani T.Kawahara and Tim Bynum, requesting agenda time to discuss the following: 1) Councilmembers’ access to the agenda. 2) The placement of public documents, including meeting minutes on the County’s website. 3) Equitable and timely circulation of Council Servicesdocuments. 4) General access to information by the public andCouncilmembers.[Referred 06/16/20091 I am sure we all got a good laugh and some cold chills from the Dickie Chang quote, “I hope the public understands that this ain’t no ‘old boy network." The "old boy network" that Furfaro and Chang chose will move any discussion of rule changes for sound, transparent governance away from public view. Having a committee that does not include proponents of open government, no women, no input from Bynum nor Kawahara, is a SHAM. There is no balance here. How about every councilmember taking a stand on the above issues? If he does not support any one or all of the four items, why not? We need to insist on at least having a balanced committee to represent the interest of the public and open televised meetings, at all times. If those ad hoc advisory committee members are to influence the decision, they should give testimony on the proposed County Council rule changes along with the rest of the public in an open hearing.]

Get out your 'ulu!

SUBHEAD: Ulu (Breadfruit) has many subtle varieties and there are many ways be prepared. Help the NTBG find the best of them. By Jon Letman on 14 July 2009 for National Tropical Botanical Garden

Image above: One of the dozens of breadfruit varieties grown at the NTBG Breadfruit Institute The National Tropical Botanical Garden (NTBG) is looking for Kaua‘i’s best original breadfruit-based recipes for its first-ever Kaua‘i Breadfruit Bounty Cookoff on Saturday, September 19th. Participation is easy and free! Pick-up an entry form at NTBG's Southshore Visitors Center across from Spouting Horn, at NTBG Headquarters in Kalāheo or online at news.ntbg.org under the heading "announcements." Enter up to one dish per category (appetizer, soup or salad, main dish, dessert) for the chance to win prizes and recognition of your best breadfruit dish at the upcoming public tasting event.

Recipes and entry forms must be submitted by September 7th, 2009.

For more information call Melissa at The Breadfruit Institute at 332-7324, ext. 221 or by email at breadfruitinstitute@ntbg.org.

See also: Ea O Ka Aina: Plant a Breadfruit Tree 3/31/10 Ea O Ka Aina: Breadfruit Redipe Experiments 11/15/09

Island Breath: Ulu - The Breadfruit Tree 12/31/06

The end is near!

SUBHEAD: Overpopulation, resource depletion and economic collapse are too great for industrial civilization to survive.

By Jim Lydecker on 11 July 2009 in the Napa Valley Register - 
(http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2009/07/11/opinion/commentary/doc4a5823c6d413a305037797.txt)


Image above: Political cartoon by Mike Luckovitch. From (http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/economy/ig/Economic-Cartoons/The-End-Is-Near.-j5B.htm)  

The End is Coming, But Not Because of Climate Change!
Listening to several politicians on the news makes me wonder what planet they go home to at night. When asked what the most important issue is facing America today, they began arguing about Obama’s cap-and-trade energy bill and global warming as if the world’s immediate fate hangs on this issue. The fact of the matter is this: It does not.

Global warming is a serious issue for the future, but by the time global warming really heats up, other crises will have destroyed our modern industrial civilization. Let’s look at the two foremost insurmountable problems. First is resource depletion. Eighteen months ago, demand was outstripping supply of many critically important resources. However, as the global economy nose-dived, demand and price plummeted. The crisis didn’t go away but was postponed as new deposits weren’t discovered. Case in point: Oil is 800 billion barrels from running out and we’ll be dry in 45 years.

Directly responsible for the success of agriculture and pharmaceuticals, it allowed the world’s population to increase from 1 billion in 1859 to 7 billion today. Without oil (of which there is no substitute), these revolutions will reverse causing mass starvation, rampant disease, wars, societal breakdown and a biblical die-off.

Ninety percent of the world’s population could be gone in less than 200 years. But don’t lose any sleep over this horrific scenario, as we have an immediate crisis in front of us that will bring the same ramifications, only quicker: The impending worldwide financial, fiscal and economic collapse. Most economists agree that “as goes America’s economy, so goes the world’s,” and most Americans feel ours is too big and powerful to fail.

Economist Nassim Taleb, author of the “Black Swan,” makes the point that anything as large as the economy will completely collapse when it weakens beyond a point. That tipping point was long ago. Think of our economy as a huge scaffold from which nuts-and-bolts and cross-bars have been removed. Yet the weight it is supporting, in this case the weight of the national debt, is increasing exponentially as we print money like there’s no tomorrow.

Instead of focusing on reducing the debt, the government is concentrating on stimulus packages that only inflate assets, stimulate nothing and deflate the dollar’s value. Revenues decrease on all levels so there is no way to address the ever-growing debt. It will only be a matter of time before the scaffolding crashes down. The recent destruction of$8 trillion of people’s net worth since 2007 makes a consumer-driven recovery impossible. And we have only seen the beginning of this disaster: Late August will bring what is now being referred to as the “fourth wave of foreclosures.”

Predictions are that it will be larger than everything that has preceded it combined, dropping real estate values another 50 percent in the next 18 months. Since January, more than six million jobs have been lost, most permanently. A recovery is not possible with such a huge, permanent welfare class existing on government handouts — handouts the government can’t afford. The Chinese know this charade can’t go on.

Five months ago they threatened to stop buying our debt until Hillary (of all people!) reassured them about our solvency. But did she? I believe she told them the truth: America is heading for bankruptcy.

Knowing this, the Chinese began binge-buying coal-and-oil fields, mines and multi-national corporations throughout the world before their excess dollars assumed the value of monopoly money. This began at the same time we started “nationalizing” American banking, insurance and auto industries.

On July 3, the Chinese demanded that the G-8 meetings place the dollar’s future on the agenda. The danger is that if the true value of the dollar is exposed and it no longer remains the world’s reserve currency, our economy will implode overnight. American societal collapse will commence. Resource depletion and economic collapse are nothing new.

Every civilization that has collapsed throughout history had done so due to their populations overshooting the carrying capacity of their land, natural resources and economies. (When you have finite resources, just the term “growth economy” is an economic oxymoron.) This is a simple concept: Population overshoot equals civilization collapse. The combined crises of overpopulation, resource depletion and economic collapse at the current levels are too great for any complex industrial civilization to survive.

As the global economy contracts, less wealth is spread around among more people lowering the standard of living. The wealthier the nation, the more it is affected. No country will be as hurt than the United States. Since few realize this awful reality is barreling toward, few will be prepared to do anything about it. At first, I expect there’ll be resource and currency wars to maintain the status quo, but soon we won’t be able to afford them.

Hapa Trail Defilement

SUBHEAD: The Knudsen Trust (aka Stacey Wong) prevails in the further destruction of Koloa & Poipu area.


By Paul C. Curtis on 17 July 2009 in The Garden Island News - 
(http://www.kauaiworld.com/articles/2009/07/17/news/kauai_news/doc4a5ff1cab805f826275376.txt)


Image above: Archeological area off Hapa Trail to be developed into suburban sprawl. Photo by Juan Wilson

[IB Editor's Note: Randal Valenciano is the judge who approved the Superferry coming to Kauai. That, and his to decision to Green Light the Hapa Trail development by Stacey Wong, indicate he is no friend of Kauai.]

A judge Wednesday afternoon denied a motion for an injunction to prevent developers from conducting construction activities within 50 feet of historic Hapa Trail. Fifth Circuit Judge Randal Valenciano sided with the developers, the Eric A. Knudsen Trust, in a contentious case involving the historic trail that runs from St. Raphael’s Catholic Church in Koloa to Po‘ipu Road through the heart of existing and under-construction resort developments. The church is where the paved Hapa Road ends and the unpaved trail begins.

Valenciano said David Kimo Frankel, the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation attorney for Koloa Native Hawaiian Teddy Blake, did not make convincing enough arguments supporting the injunction. Valenciano cited the 1978 case, Life of the Land v. Ariyoshi, that he also used in support of Blake’s appeal for a temporary restraining order issued last week prohibiting any construction or land-altering activity on or within 50 feet of Hapa Trail until Wednesday’s hearing.

The three-pronged test:

The plaintiff is likely to prevail; 
There will be irreparable damage if the injunction is not approved; and 
Approving the injunction would benefit the public interest.

On each point, Valenciano was succinct. “I think this is an open case,” he said of the first prong, indicating he is not sure the plaintiff would prevail. While bulldozers preparing land for the Village at Po‘ipu Knudsen Trust development did knock down portions of the wall on one side of Hapa Trail while doing their work, developers also agreed to restore 2,000 feet of the wall, so Valenciano did not see irreparable damage, the second prong.

Finally, Valenciano could find no fault with state Department of Land and Natural Resources State Historic Preservation Division officials who brokered a deal with Knudsen representatives to approve a final historic preservation plan that allows breach of Hapa Trail for the main entrance to the subdivision while agreeing to take the developer’s offer to restore 2,000 feet of the Hapa Trail’s eastern wall. Reconstruction of the wall is for the public’s benefit, SHPD acted in the public’s interest, the third prong, said Valenciano, adding that different people with different agendas handled the negotiations on SHPD’s end.

Troubling to Valenciano was the trust’s position they can “do stuff or take actions without repercussions,” adding that there is a segment of the Kaua‘i community who hold Hapa Trail as important historically and spiritually. Still, granting an injunction is a “drastic remedy,” said Valenciano.

The case is Theodore K. Blake, Plaintiff, versus County of Kaua‘i Planning Commission, County of Kaua‘i Planning Department, Ian Costa in his official capacity as planning director, DLNR, Laura Thielen in her official capacity as DLNR chair, and Eric A. Knudsen Trust, Defendants. Blake, through Frankel, argued that SHPD required the trust to establish a 50-foot buffer between construction activities and Hapa Trail, but trust attorney Michael Tom argued that the 50-foot-buffer idea was “concocted” after the fact. Linda Chow, for DLNR, said trust developers are not abiding by terms of an interim protection plan, and do not yet have final approvals necessary to breach Hapa Trail for the purposes of the subdivision’s main entrance road.

“They don’t have a current right to breach the wall,” she said. Ian Jung, representing the County of Kaua‘i defendants, said the county is stuck in the middle, trying to act as a facilitator to balance the rights of landowners and protection of historic places. Who owns Hapa Trail?

Ownership of Hapa Trail, a dirt road bisecting present and planned Po‘ipu resort developments, was questioned in court Wednesday. While most had operated under the assumption that the trail is county property, an attorney for the state Department of Land and Natural Resources said it is state property. “Hapa is still a state road. Legal title is with the state,” said Linda Chow, state deputy attorney general representing the DLNR.

If Hapa Trail is state property, plaintiff Theodore K. “Teddy” Blake can’t prevail in seeking the injunction because it sued the wrong entity, said 5th Circuit Judge Randal Valenciano. Blake sued the County of Kaua‘i, state DLNR and the Eric A. Knudsen Trust.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Knudsen to Spoil Poipu 1/18/09
Ea O Ka Aina: Old Koloa Town Monkeypods 1/11/08

The Plastic Frontier

SUBHEAD: The plastic plague known as the “great Pacific garbage patch."

Image above: The Alguita with some of crew before departure. From http://www.trashvoyage.com/2009_06_01_archive.html

By Jan Lundberg on 19 July 2009 in Culture Change - http://www.culturechange.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=488&Itemid=1 Captain Charles Moore is today one of several men of the hour. But if there are people on this planet hundreds of years from now, surrounded by all the non-biodegradable, toxic petrochemical plastic saturating the oceans, he will be spoken of as the man of the hour -- a Cassandra that people started to seriously heed. On the tenth anniversary of his findings establishing the Northern Pacific Ocean Garbage Patch, Capt. Moore and his crew are out there now sailing again. Before the update on Captain Moore's voyage for his Algalita Marine Research Foundation, that started June 10 on the Oceanographic Research Vessel Alguita, watch his riveting seven-minute mind-blowing presentation at the TED talks. This is followed by the voyage's description and blog, ending with more resources and background. Help stop the plastic plague!

From the Green Planet Films website: http://greenplanetfilms.org/blog/?p=164 North Pacific Sub-tropical Gyre Exploration 2009 Pacific Exploration Project Background In conjunction with Algalita Marine Research Foundation, the ORV Alguita was the first vessel to sample the surface waters of the area that has now become known in the popular press as the “great Pacific garbage patch." Algalita’s research team was also the first to develop a standard methodology for sampling, and processing the samples, of ocean surface for micro-plastic debris. This effort has resulted in data for plastic debris levels and the corresponding zooplankton (larger than 1/3 of a millimeter) levels in the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre (NPSG), for winter and summer months. The next move is a series of voyages back out to the NPSG during the summer of 2009 with the goal of gathering data that will expand upon what we already know. So why is it important that we collect more data? Because the potential impacts of oceanic micro-plastic pollution, a mid-late 20th century phenomenon, are wide ranging and poorly understood. For instance, fish collected from the NPSG in 2008 were found to have plastic in their stomachs. What does this mean for the ocean ecosystem, and to a larger extent, human health? We know there are pollutants that are attracted to and concentrated on plastic, not to mention the array of pollutants within the plastic itself. What does it mean for humans and other animals that rely on these “plastic fish” for food? In addition, very little can be done to directly fix micro-plastic pollution. For example, the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the United States extends 200 miles in all directions from every US coastline, including the Northwest Hawaiian Islands (NWHI). This line marks the jurisdiction of US federal environmental management agencies. However, outside of this area they are not mandated to mitigate negative environmental impacts to protected species and to the environmental wealth of the country. This means that the open ocean waters of the world are a difficult place to justify government spending on research or cleanup efforts, unless impacts to the US Economy (i.e. damage to a fishery stock from plastic ingestion), can be, beyond all reasonable doubt proven to government (remember, we have been arguing wether cigarettes are bad for us since the 70s…). For this reason, direct sampling of the central ocean gyres of the world has to come from nonprofit groups like Algalita Marine Research Foundation, at least until the issue is present enough in the consciousness of the general public to bring about change in what has become a true tragedy of the commons for a global generation.

In order to address this issue we will embark on a summer of sampling in the NPSG. The voyages will be split into three legs, as follows: 1. Moving Forward: 1st leg, June 10th to July 25th, 2009 2. Spreading the Word: 2nd leg, August, 2009 3. Resample of the NPSG: 3rd leg, September, 2009 Moving Forward: 1st leg of the gyre trip, June 10th to July 25th, 2009 The most logical expansion of the monitoring and quantification being done in the NPSG is west of Hawaii encircling the NWHI, including Midway and Kure. We intend to travel Northwest from California turning around after passing the International Data Line at approximately 35N Lat and returning to Hawaii on the northern side of the NWHI chain. The total trip duration will be approximately 6 weeks. This will provide both water samples from trawls and fish tissue samples for analysis back on land. Based on remote sensing data, models, and NOAA monitoring efforts within the NWHI monument, there are two major reasons for choosing this as the next expansion of our study area. NOAA estimates, from a 2001-2005 study; that the annual accumulation of debris within the national monument is 52 metric tons. A significant amount of material is small plastics and yet there is no study of the impacts or a mitigation plan for small particle plastic pollutants in this area. We believe, based on NOAA scientists’ model simulation (OSCURS, DELI I) that a significant amount of the plastic pollution currently cycling around the North Pacific passes around or through the NWHI at some point on its journey. It is likely that most of the debris does not become ensnared by the islands or reefs, making the area a suspect for high concentration of small particle as well as large ghost net pollution. Another important reason for wanting to conduct a study at this site is that it represents one of the most pristine coral reef habitat left on the planet with one of its most endangered marine mammals, the Hawaiian Monk seal, as well as critical turtle and bird nesting areas. The importance of these islands for a myriad of species means that a full understanding of how these animals and their environment are interacting with plastic pollution is needed. Spreading the Word: 2nd leg, August, 2009 In early August approximately two weeks after arrival in Hawaii we plan to have the vessel depart Honolulu as a part of a major media initiative to help bring awareness to the issue of ocean plastic pollution. Since mitigation seems unlikely, especially for the small micro-plastics, education is the best tool to fight this issue. The people of the world have to become more educated about the final destination of a wide range of disposable goods, and at the same time the plastic and disposable good industries need to provide innovative alternatives that will appeal to the general public. Peligro Pictures in conjunction with Billabong and ScubaDrew Video will be taking part in a two week giant loop approximately 1000 miles NE of Hawaii into the NPSG, which will include not only the Alguita, but the Billabong Seaplane and another long range vessel as well. The combination will provide a platform for celebrity guests to come out and witness the problem first hand, while providing their thoughts and commentary on the issue. Resample of the NPSG: 3rd leg, September, 2009 The trip home from Hawaii back to California will include a resample of the original 1999 summertime gyre crossing. This 10-year time span will allow for much stronger statements to be made about the rate of growth and about the seasonal changes in plastic density. The data from the 1999 trip will be significantly strengthened by a summer sampling of the same transects and beyond during this ten year anniversary of our first trip to the garbage patch. The levels of plastic can then be compared to the levels found ten years ago, and related to our model predictions, allowing for a determination of growth during that period. This trip will also be comparing the amount of fish caught in the manta trawl, with a particular interest in the family Myctophidae (lantern fish), to levels caught during the winter transect run in February 2008, and for the first time assessing the load of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPS) in their tissues. Follow the ORV Alguita's summer research through the Ship's Blog From the Alguita's blog website: "Manta sample #33, the last of the day, ran for a half hour and produced an astounding amount of plastic. A stark contrast to Manta #29 deployed 3 hours (roughly 9 nautical miles) prior. As I stated yesterday, the trash accumulation zone is patchy and tremendously dynamic." Further background: Download the 2009 Pacific Exploration Brochure: the PDF Two minute film by Algalita: The Garbage PatchCourtesy Center for Biological Diversity: "Twenty Years of Saving Species" "Sailing plastics to the Garbage Patch" The vessel Plastiki: 10,000 empty 2-liter plastic soda bottles! June 26, 2009sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com "The Pacific isn’t the only ocean collecting plastic trash"June 18, 2009A swirling 'soup' of tiny pieces of plastic has been found in the Atlantic Ocean."Many cities are banning plastic shopping bags or passing laws forcing stores to charge for the bags. Plastic bags are a major contributor to the plastic marine debris situation in the oceans when the bags are washed to sea by rivers and runoff after rains."Christian Science Monitor Critical comment from Jan Lundberg, petroleum industry analyst 06.27.09 In the article and comments so far there is no suggestion to shut down the source. Petroleum’s toxic and climate-changing nature, responsible for more than plastic, needs to be dealt with more strongly than attempts to educate and muddling toward legislation that may lack teeth. So let’s boycott petroleum to save the planet (and save money). This approach has the side-benefit of preparing for ultimate petrocollapse. We also need to recognize that we’re dominated by an ecocidal, materialistic culture that condones and rewards waste and greed. Until we reject the present system and build an alternative, the plastic plague will grow along with climate distortion. .

KKCR's Town Hall Meetings

SOURCE: Ken Taylor (taylork021@Hawaii.rr.com) SUBHEAD: The current economic downturn on Kaua'i - How you, your family, and friends are coping.

Image above: Beginning of west Hanapepe Town, still reeling seventeen years after Hurricane Ininki. Photo by Juan Wilson.

From press release by Kauai Community Radio (KKCR) on 17 July 2009

The first installment of the "Be Heard" Town Hall Meetings will focus on the economic downturn. If this series is successful, KKCR will host similar meetings on a periodic basis on other topics to be determined.

Who Should Participate? In particular, we are looking to hear from the local families and residents living through and coping with the economic downturn.

We want to hear directly from the people affected most - the families and residents of Kaua'i.
It is important that our focus is "bottom up" and "grass roots" rather than "top down".

By gathering and summarizing important grass roots information, we want to provide a valuable perspective to each other and to officials, businesses, groups, and organizations who might be able to help. In short, we are looking to help uncover problems and match them up with the local resources that can help.

This series of initial meetings is seen only as a beginning. Again, KKCR will provide its airwaves and web presence as a community resource to support an on-going dialog in addition to this initial effort.

With the help of community volunteers, KKCR will host and record / broadcast meetings in the following locations:

WEST Tuesday, August 11, 2009 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm Waimea Neighborhood Center 4556 Makeke Road Waimea, HI 96796 Neighborhoods including Kekaha, Waimea, Pakala Village, Kaumakani, Hanapepe, Ele'ele, Port Allen, Kapaka, Mana (all other Kaua'i neighborhoods are invited as well) SOUTH Thursday, August 13, 2009 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm Koloa Neighborhood Center (click here for a map) 3461 Weliweli Road Koloa, HI 96756 Neighborhoods including Kalaheo, Lawai, Omao, Koloa, Po'ipu (all others are invited too) EAST / SOUTHEAST Tuesday, August 18, 2009 5:30 pm - 7:30 pm Hawaiian Studies Hale Kauai Community College 3-1901 Kaumuali'i Hiway Lihue, HI 96766 Neighborhoods including Puhi, Lihue, Hanamaulu, Wailua, Wailua Homesteads, Kapa'a, Kealia, Anahola (all others are invited too) NORTH Saturday, August 22, 2009 1:30 pm - 3:30 pm Kilauea Neighborhood Center 2460 Keneke Street Kilauea, HI 96754 Neighborhoods including Kilauea, Kalihiwai, Princeville, Hanalei, Wainiha, Haena (all others are invited too) A Partial List of Questions To Be Asked During The Meetings: - How has the current economic climate affected you as individuals? - How has the current economic climate affected your local neighborhoods? - What are the sources and causes of the issues? - What would you like to see done to fix the issues? - What resources are available in your neighborhoods that could be applied to the fix? (can include businesses, farms, other agricultural resources, churches, schools, other knowledge resources, non-profits, other organizations, individuals) Aspects to Consider During the Discussions: - Unemployment - Housing & Foreclosures - Hunger - Personal Debt - Healthcare - Loss of Key Industries or Businesses - Tourism - Agriculture - Technology - Utilities & Services (Power, Internet, Water, Garbage, Phone, Television, Radio) - Food sources - Long-term Sustainability & Self-dependence - Sovereignty - County Resources - State Resources - National Resources For more information, please call KKCR at (808) 826-7774 or email beheard@kkcr.org.

Peak Oil Day - 1st Anniversary

SUBHEAD: It is too late to prepare for Peak Oil—a year too late, in fact. Now the name of the game is adaptation.

By Richard Heinberg on 3 July 2009 of the Post Carbon Institute

(http://www.postcarbon.org/peak-oil-day)

On July 11, 2008, the price of a barrel of oil hit a record $147.27 in daily trading. That same month, world crude oil production achieved a record 74.8 million barrels per day.

For years prior to this, a growing legion of analysts had been arguing that world oil production would max out around the year 2010 and begin to decline for reasons having to do with geology (we have found and picked the world’s “low-hanging fruit” in terms of giant oilfields), as well as lack of drilling rigs and trained exploration geologists and engineers. “Peak Oil,” they insisted, would mark the end of the growth phase of industrial civilization, because economic expansion requires increasing amounts of high-quality energy.

During the period from 2005 to 2008, as oil’s price steadily rose, production remained stagnant. Though new sources of oil were coming on line, they barely made up for production declines in existing fields due to depletion. By mid-2008, as oil prices wafted to the stratosphere, every petroleum producer responded to the obvious incentive to pump every possible barrel. Production rates nudged upward for a couple of months, but then both prices and production fell as demand for oil collapsed.

Since then, with oil prices much lower, and with credit tight to unavailable, up to $150 billion of investments in the development of future petroleum production capacity have evaporated. This means that if a new record production level is to be achieved, further declines in production from existing fields have to be overcome, meaning that all of those canceled production projects, and many more in addition, will have to be quickly brought on-stream. It may not be physically possible to turn the tide at this point, given the fact that the new “plays” are technically demanding and therefore expensive to develop, and have limited productive potential.

On May 4 of this year, Raymond James Associates, a prominent brokerage specializing in energy investments, issued a report stating, “With OPEC oil production apparently having peaked in 1Q08, and non-OPEC even earlier in 2007, peak oil on a worldwide basis seems to have taken place in early 2008.” This conclusion is being echoed by a cadre of other analysts.

Maybe it’s a stretch to say that the production peak occurred at one identifiable moment, but attributing it to the day oil prices reached their high-water mark may be a useful way of fixing the event in our minds. So I suggest that we remember July 11, 2008 as Peak Oil Day.

We are now approaching the first-year anniversary of Peak Oil Day. Where are we now? The global economy is in tatters, yet oil prices have recovered somewhat (they’re now about half what they were in July 2008). World energy consumption is down, world trade is down, the airline industry is shrinking, and most of the world’s automakers are on life support.

It is too late to prepare for Peak Oil—a year too late, in fact. Now the name of the game is adaptation. We are in an entirely new economic environment, in which old assumptions about the inevitability of perpetual growth, and the usefulness of leveraging investments based on expectations of future growth, are crashing in flames. Even if economic activity picks up somewhat, this will occur in the context of an economy significantly smaller than the one that existed in July 2008, and energy scarcity will quickly cause most green shoots to wither.

It is impossible to say what will happen in the future with regard to oil prices. Clearly, very high prices kill demand by undercutting economic activity. Thus it is possible that the barrel price of petroleum may never break last year’s record. On the other hand, if the value of the dollar were to collapse, then the sky’s the limit for prices in dollars per barrel.

It is easier to forecast the oil supply trend: though we’ll see level-to-rising production temporarily from time to time, in general it’s down, down, downhill from now on.

Even though Peak Oil is now in the past, its annual commemoration on Peak Oil Day may serve an important purpose by reminding us why our economy is shrinking, and by focusing our thoughts on ways to facilitate the transition to a post-petroleum world.

What are some appropriate ways to commemorate Peak Oil Day? I’d suggest spending time in nature, engaging in a 24-hour oil fast, or organizing a neighborhood bicycle parade and solar-cooker bakeoff.

Mark your calendar. What will you be doing on July 11?

Help us "celebrate" Peak Oil Day by signing our petition.

What's up with the Superferry?

SUBHEAD: Latest on the Superferries, it is just as was thought. The military wants them. Maritime Administration sends vessels to shipyard

By Kaija Wilkinson on 16 July 2009 in The Alabama Press-Register

http://www.al.com/business/press-register/index.ssf?/base/business/1247735782115190.xml&coll=3 A pair of fast ferries built locally for Hawaii Superferry Inc. are being moved from Mobile to a Norfolk, Va., shipyard by the bankrupt company's main creditor, the U.S. Maritime Administration, MARAD said on Wednesday.

image above: The Hawaii Superferry Alakai sails into the sunset. Or does it?

From http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/tag/hawaii_superferry

Alakai, the first vessel to be built and delivered to Hawaii Superferry by Mobile's Austal USA, arrived at Lambert's Point Docks Inc. on Tuesday, while its sister ship, Huakai, is scheduled to leave late this week and arrive in Norfolk the middle of next week, according to Susan Clark, MARAD spokeswoman.

They had been moored at Mobile's Atlantic Marine shipyard, which is owned by former U.S. Navy Secretary John Lehman. Lehman was until May the primary investor in the Hawaii Superferry venture...

Clark said MARAD is now weighing all its options for the ferries, which include sale or charter.

She said the ferries are being moved "for insurance purposes" as hurricane season gets under way. She could not say if the Navy planned to look them over while they're in Norfolk...

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that the Pentagon would like to lease two high-speed ferries to fill the gap before the first of the JHSVs is built. When asked if the Hawaii Superferry vessels were candidates, a Navy acquisitions official told industry publication Defense News this week that they were...

Beyond Life Inc.

SUBHEAD: Any business that starts with the bank is not a sustainable business model, because it's already in debt. Peggy Nelson interviews Douglas Rushkoff on 1 July 2009 in Reality Sandwich http://www.realitysandwich.com/beyond_life_inc_talking_douglas_rushkoff In his new book, Life Inc., media ecologist and author Douglas Rushkoff tells the story of how the corporation has made us over into its own image, how we have altered our reality to serve its needs, and how we can take it back. In this conversation, Douglas illuminates the Dark Ages, reveals why there's a God on our money, and explains what we're really buying into when we buy that mortgage. We have the code to open-source everything, he says. Time to go to work!

image above: G"The Wedding" by Pieter Breugel with graphic overlay of "Life Inc" by Juan Wilson. See book cover detail at http://boingboing.net/2009/05/11/life-inc-chapter-one.html 1. Vol Is Hungry, We Must Feed Vol PN: The corporation is not a recent phenomenon; it goes back hundreds of years. What is the origin story of the corporation? Where did it come from, and what is it, exactly? DR: The corporation is the result of two innovations: the creation of centralized currency, and the creation of the chartered monopoly. In the late 1300s the upper classes -- the aristocrats, the people who had been feudal lords -- were becoming less wealthy relative to real people. As the merchant class and people in towns were producing and doing, the relative wealth of the aristocracy was going down, and this was a problem; the aristocrats wanted to continue the system that had been working for them for the last 500 years wherein they didn't have to "do" anything to be rich. So they hit upon the idea of passively investing in other people's industries. Suppose I am the monarch. I want to make money through your shipping company; how do I get you to let me invest? Well, I use what power I have as a monarch to write up a charter, which means I give you a monopoly in a certain area, and you give me 30% of the shares in the company. The chosen merchant avoids competition and gains protection from bankruptcy, while the king receives loyalty, because the merchants' monopolies are based on keeping him in power. He doesn't mind if a *few of the merchant class are as rich as he is, as long as he is able to get still richer as a result. But this was not the promotion of free-market capitalism. It was the promotion of monopoly, non-market capitalism! It was locking into place a set of players and a set of systems that had nothing to do with the free market. And it changed the bias of these merchants away from innovation; in other words, from "how do I innovate and maintain my competitive edge" to "how do I extract wealth from the realm that I now control?" Then they're going to be very conservative because they'll want to maintain what they have and not risk wrecking it. Conservative in that sense, but rapacious in another. Say I'm now in charge of the Colonies. What I want to do is extract their wealth; I want to prevent the people who live in the Colonies from creating any value for themselves. If the colonists are going to grow cotton, that's fine, but they're going to use MY seeds, my agricultural tools, they're going to use everything from ME. If you are a farmer you're allowed to grow the cotton but you have to sell it to ME at my prices. You're not allowed to make fabric out of that cotton! Fabricating is creating value. And then you're going to -- what? You're going to make it into clothes? Those are clothes you could have bought from me! No, no, no, you must give all the cotton to me, I'll put it on my ship and bring it back to England, then the king's other chartered monopoly, the clothes manufacturer, will make it into clothes, and then I'll ship them back and sell them to you -- at a profit. So it's all export crops? Right. And anything else I will shoot you for. And they did! And they DID. 2. Single-handedly Rehabilitating the Middle Ages So for about three centuries, the middle and merchant classes were doing really well. Towns that had been in shambles since the fall of the Roman Empire and had lived under strict feudalism were finally coming into their own. This all hinged on the use of local currencies -- grain receipts -- through which people transacted. They were what we would now call "demurrage" currencies that were earned into existence. Towns ended up creating more value than they knew what to do with! They started investing in their infrastructure and their windmills and their water wheels; and also in their future in the form of cathedrals and other tourist attractions. Are you saying these towns funded the cathedrals themselves? They didn't get money from Rome? They did not. The Vatican and central Rome did NOT build the cathedrals. The funds came from local currency, which was very different than money as we use it now. It was based on grain, which lost value over time. The grain would slowly rot or get eaten by rats or cost money to store, so the money needed to be spent as quickly as possible before it became devalued. And when people spend and spend and spend a lot of money, you end up with an economy that grows very quickly. Now unlike a capitalist economy where money is hoarded, with local currency, money is moving. The same dollar can end up being the salary for three people rather than just one. There was so much money circulating that they had to figure out what to do with it, how to reinvest it. Saving money was not an option, you couldn't just stick it in the bank and have it grow because it would not grow there, it would shrink. So they paid the workers really well and they shortened the work week to four and in some cases three days per week. And they invested in the future by way of infrastructure -- they started to build cathedrals. They couldn't build them all at once, but they took the long view -- with three generations of investment they could build an entire cathedral, and their great-grandchildren could live in a rich town! That's how the great cathedrals were built, like Chartres. Some historians actually term the late Middle Ages "The Age of Cathedrals." They were the best-fed people in the history of Europe; women in England were taller than they are today, and men were taller than they have been at any point in time until the 1970s or 80s (with the recent growth spurt largely the result of hormones in the food supply). Life expectancy of course was still lower; they lacked modern medicine, but people were actually healthier and stronger and better back then, in ways that we don't admit. That was right before the corporation and the original chartered monopolies were created, before central currency was created and local currencies were outlawed. When everything gets moved into the center, things began to change. It seems like the Dark Ages were not perhaps so "dark?" Yes, I think that's disinformation. I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist about these things, but I think the reason why we celebrate the Renaissance as a high point of western culture is really a marketing campaign. It was a way for Renaissance monarchs and nation-states, and the industrial age powers that followed, to recast the end of one of the most vibrant human civilizations we've had, as a dark, plague-ridden, horrible time. Historically, the plague arrived after the invention of the chartered corporation, and after central currency was mandated. Central currency became law, and 40 years later you get the plague. People got that poor that quickly. They were no longer allowed to use the land. It shifted from an abundance model to a scarcity model; from an economy based on annual grain production to one based on gold released by the king. That's a totally different way of understanding money. Land was no longer a thing the peasants could grow stuff on, land became an investment, land became an asset class for the wealthy. Once it became an asset class they started Partitioning and Enclosure, which meant people weren't allowed to grow stuff on it, so subsistence farming was no longer a viable lifestyle. If you can't do subsistence farming you must find a job, so then you go into the city and volunteer to do unskilled labor in a proto-factory for some guy who wants the least-skilled, cheapest labor possible. You move your whole family to where the work is, into the squalor, where conditions are overcrowded and impoverished -- the perfect breeding ground for plague and death! 3. There Is A God, And He's On All The Money The money that the king was releasing, what was that based on? The other currency was based on grain, it's a direct relationship to how much grain there is, and as the grain degrades, the currency degrades . . . The king's currency? It was actually not even gold: king's currency was based in the king's imprimatur. It was coin of the realm because his face was stamped on it. That's kind of abstract. It is. And because people don't believe in that abstraction, because they're used to grain receipts being based in something real, precious metal was required for the king's currency -- silver, gold; they had to use something that was considered valuable so people would believe! Fast-forward to the 1970s. After four or five centuries of people believing it, Nixon realized that people now DO believe, so the currency can be taken off the central metal and just be based on belief. That's when they started putting "In God We Trust" on paper money, when it was taken off the gold standard! That hadn't always been on there? No, it was on coins, but it wasn't on bills. Because finally, belief is all that's left. 4. Let's All Be Independent Together How does idea of the individual fit into these other developments? Corporatism, with its promotion of competition between individuals over scarce resources and money, laid the ground for individualism and for a heightened concept of the self. I'm a media ecologist, I look at media and society as an ecology in which changes in one area reflect changes in another. The notion of the individual was invented, re-invented, in the Renaissance. This is part of why it was a re-naissance, a re-birth of old ideas, the rebirth of Greek ideals. The the Greek notion of the individual, which was always "the individual in relationship to the state," the citizen, was recast as "the individual." The first individual in Renaissance literature was Dr. Faustus, who represented the extreme limits of greed. This was the new man, not a citizen of the city-state but an individual who has his own perspective on the world. We get perspective painting in the Renaissance, which meant the individual was a self-sufficient being whose point of view is important; we get reading in the Renaissance, which meant that a man can sit alone in his study and have his own relationship to the Bible, instead of gathering in the town square or the church, having the Bible read to him by a priest, as part of a congregation. So on the one hand it was this beautiful celebration of individual consciousness and perspective, but on the other it was all in the context of a new economy, one in which individuals were in competition against one another for scarce jobs, scarce resources, scarce land, and scarce money. Everyone is going to ask, but what about the artists? So: what about the artists? Historians say that one of the great things about the Renaissance were the patrons who could patronize a great artist. But before the Renaissance you didn't need a "patron" in order to be an artist! You could actually live in a town and do some stuff and be a great artist. The Renaissance model of commerce and arts was not a pre-existing condition of the universe. Yes, the Vatican could commission some basilica to be painted, but . . . I'd be interested to see what Leonardo da Vinci or Michelangelo would have been like had they not been part of a centralized bureaucracy, but instead been independent little homespun artist guys. They might have been better artists, you never know. So now we have individuals and corporations as we know them. The king's currency, centralized currency, is monopoly currency; demurrage currencies were declared illegal by the king. Why? First, centralized currency is easier to tax. Second, the king could remove gold from the currency whenever he wanted, he could basically suck the value out of it at will. And finally, because this is a currency based in scarcity, everyone has to compete for it. It's a way to help people who have money be powerful just for having money -- not because of what they can spend, but because of what they can hold. So money becomes a resource. It becomes a resource in itself. Actually it's a resource once-removed, literally a derivative, the first derivative. Centralizing turns money from a representation of something real into a derivative asset class. We live in this derivatives-based economy today, it has trickled down to us in the form of central banking. Now most people believe that the way to fuel an economy is for a bank to inject money, and the way to start a business is by borrowing from the bank. The way that money comes into existence is it is literally lent into existence. But for every dollar that is lent into existence, for every dollar you earn, there's a negative on the balance sheet somewhere. So there's debt right at the beginning? It IS debt, the money we have IS debt. Here's how it works. You start a business by borrowing $100K from the bank. This means that you're going to have to pay back say, $200K or $300K to the bank in 10 years when your loan is up. Where does the other $200K come from? It comes from someone else who's borrowed $100K from the bank! And where are they going to get that? Either they go bankrupt, because they can't pay it back, or they borrow another $200K from the bank. And then that has to be paid back, plus interest. So now they've borrowed $300K total and might have $900K to pay back. The money supply has to grow as a function of interest. The rate at which we do business and make profit is actually driven and determined by the debt structure of the company rather than supply and demand. This is what Adam Smith was actually talking about. Adam Smith was NOT a free market libertarian, he was not a corporate industrialist the way the Economist or the Wall Street Journal likes to paint him. Smith said that economies only work in scale, they only work locally. He was living in a world where everyone was a farmer, and he hated corporations as much as he hated central government, because he knew that an interest-based economy does not ultimately work. And that is because debt is not actually a product! There's nothing there. Nothing. Yet that's what it was made for. The debt-based economy was invented so that people with money could get richer by having money, that's what it's FOR. I'm not saying it's evil, it was an idea. But, it doesn't actually work. If the number of people who want to make money by having money gets so big that there are more people existing that way than actually producing anything, eventually the economy will collapse. It sounds like a big Ponzi scheme. It IS a Ponzi scheme! None of the companies we're looking at as companies are what they are, they're all just the names on debt. GM is a name on debt, Sony's a name on debt. The New York Times . . . . . . is a name on debt. They're all publically-listed, traded companies with these P/E ratios; there are the issued shares, and then there's the actual business: those two things aren't the same. The shares are actually more a drag on the system than they are an investment in the company. There's all this debt to pay back. 5. Corporations R Us Debt has an emotional component as well, in the sense of, you're going to owe me, and you're going to owe me forever. So, better get busy! Slowly over time, as corporations attempted to extract more and more value from people, both as workers and as consumers and ultimately as shareholders and investors in our own 401k plans, we all basically outsourced our lives. I outsource my job to a company. I outsource my consumption to a company, I go to Wal-Mart, I go to Costco. I outsource my investing and savings to companies, I give it to Citibank, instead of the local banker or my credit union or my restaurant or my children or my cathedral. All of our interactions have been mediated by corporations -- you don't work for me and I don't work for you. Let's talk about different kinds of value. Right now we have money, we measure everything by the little green metric. But there are other kinds, we all know that, there are personal relationships, there are other ways of measuring value . . . We have different ways of experiencing value, but it's really hard to measure those. I feel that in the current environment, what people could or should be valuing makes them nervous, makes them anxious. What kind of stuff? Sitting with a friend . . . OK, I'll sit with a friend as long as I have my Paxil or something, because it's almost like we've been acculturated to be desocialized. We have been! I can spend time with you because we're doing work, right? Right, it's productive. Productive -- and we can measure it on the tape! Is it still turning? [yes] You're saying money is not value-neutral. Not only is money not value-neutral, but our money is not money-neutral. Our currency is not the only money. There are other kinds of money, just like there are different kinds of media out there, and they all encourage different behaviors. Computers encourage certain kinds of behavior, television encourages certain kinds of behavior. A gold-based money encourages certain kinds of behavior, a centralized currency encourages certain kinds of behavior, and a demurrage local grain-based currency encourages certain other kinds of behavior. The kind of behavior that our money encourages, intentionally, by design, is: hoarding. This is currency that earns interest over time so you want to hoard it and not spend it. And that's OK if you need that tool. But maybe that shouldn't be the only thing in the toolbox. It's like we only have a hammer and it's really hard to put in screws. Centralized currency is really, really good for competition, it's really, really good for big companies. Wal-Mart and Citibank can get money more cheaply; the bigger you are, the closer you are to the storehouse. And the big guys don't want local currencies, they don't want bottom-up value creation, work-based money, money that is worked into existence instead of borrowed into existence, because that reduces their monopoly over the means of exchange. The problem with defining ourselves by our jobs or socialism or by economic class is that we're not just our economics, we're not just our money. Right, I create value, but the value I create for my community is not just say, as a baker. It's not just as a tailor. It's also as the guy who brings those funny jokes to the party, the guy who has that beautiful daughter . . . And it's not just ONE thing and it's not measurable in just one way. 6. Home Sweet Home Depot From the 1920s to the 1970s an iconography was developed that turned corporations into our heroes. Instead of me buying stuff from people I know, I actually trust the Quaker Oat Man more than you. This is the result of public relations campaigns, and the development of public relations as a profession. Did the rise of PR just happen, or did they have to do that in order to prevent things from getting out of control? They had to do that in order to prevent things from getting out of control. The significant points in the development of public relations were all at crisis moments. For example, labor movements; it's not just that labor was revolting but that people were seeing that labor was revolting. There was a need to re-fashion the stories so that people would think that labor activists were bad scary people, so that people would think they should move to the suburbs and insulate themselves from these throngs of laborers, from "the masses." Or to return to the Quaker Oats example, people used to look at long-distance-shipped factory products with distrust. Here's a plain brown box, it's being shipped from far away, why am I supposed to buy this instead of something from a person I've known all my life? A mass media is necessary to make you distrust your neighbor and transfer your trust to an abstract entity, the corporation, and believe it will usher in a better tomorrow and all that. It got the most crafty after WWII when all the soldiers were coming home. FDR was in cahoots with the PR people. Traumatized vets were coming back from WWII, and everyone knew these guys were freaked out and fucked up. We had enough psychology and psychiatry by then to know that these guys were badly off, they knew how to use weapons, and -- this was bad! If the vets came back into the same labor movement that they left before WWII, it would have been all over. So the idea was that we should provide houses for these guys, make them feel good, and we get the creation of Levittown and other carefully planned developments designed with psychologists and social scientists. Let's put these vets in a house, let's celebrate the nuclear family. So home becomes a thing, rather than a series of relationships? The definition of home as people use the word now means "my house," rather than what it had been previously, which was "where I'm from.'" My home's New York, what's your home? Right, your town. Where are you from? Not that "structure." But they had to redefine home, and they used a lot of government money to do it. They created houses in neighborhoods specifically designed to isolate people from one another, and prevent men in particular from congregating and organizing -- there are no social halls, no beer halls in these developments. They wanted men to be busy with their front lawns, with three fruit trees in every garden, with home fix-it-up projects; for the women, the kitchen will be in the back where they can see the kids playing in the back yard. So you don't see the neighbors going by. No front porch. Everything's got to be individual, this was all planned! Any man that has a mortgage to pay is not going to be a revolutionary. With that amount to pay back, he's got a stake in the system. True, he's on the short end of the stick of the interest economy, but in 30 years he could own his own home. 7. Freedom Isn't Free Let's talk about technology. In terms of administering a shared goods-and-services system, the internet might be a good match. But it also seems that the internet, and machines and technology in general, can stand in place of actual relationships, and can be a stumbling block. How do you negotiate between those ideas? The word that describes digital for me is discrete. For example, take sounds. With an actual sound, no matter how hard we zoom in, it's still a real thing. There's still more fidelity, more information to be found. If I scan or sample it, I've now translated that sound in the real world into a number. Something that was an event, in nature, in the world, is now a number. It's a derivative of reality. That number encapsulates as many metrics and as much information about the sound as I'm capable of including, and I can then make copies of the number and manipulate them. So there's greater choice in that way. But the only things the number can reproduce about that sound are the things I've told it to reproduce. It only knows what it's supposed to measure. The reproduction process also involves a sampling rate, which necessarily leaves stuff out. Even if the sampling rate is so good, so super-mp3, that it's beyond my conscious hearing, there is still space between the samples. Just like a fluorescent light; there's space between the flashes. Now the question is, for all intents and purposes, is it the same, or not? I would argue that for many intents and purposes, it is the same, but for ALL intents and purposes, it is NOT. It is a re-creation of a thing, and an approximation, and without even getting spiritual and talking about prana and chi and everything else, there IS a difference. In high school when I needed to do a research project, I would go to the library to find a book. I couldn't help but see the 20 other books on the shelf nearby, I had to read 20 spines before I found mine. And in reading those 20 spines I would see stuff I wouldn't have found otherwise, and I might get ideas for my paper randomly -- not by predetermined choice! I would see them by virtue of the fact that some librarian who was alive before me made a decision, by virtue of legacies and input and real life messiness. Whereas when I'm in the digital realm and I know the book I want, I type it into Google, and it's there. And nothing else. This discrete freedom of choice sounds like a very controlled environment. I wonder how much real freedom that is? Right, what are my range of choices? And who's giving me that range? People are utterly unaware of that. So when I look at technology I say well great, people have the ability to write online, but they don't, most of them, have the ability to program. In other words we can enter our text into the little blog box, but we aren't thinking about the biases built into a daily blog structure, which are towards short, daily thoughts, not introspective . . . Or look at online communities. I'm going to become friends with another person who owns a 2004 red Mini with a sunroof, like mine, rather than with my neighbor who happens to have a different car; I'm going to look for that perfect affinity. But that's not a real relationship, that's my digital relationship, which is discrete! Discrete communities end up groping towards conformity of behavior really quickly. That's why it's a consumer paradise, because it really does celebrate the idea of increasingly granular affinity groups, increasingly granular product choices. 8. The Derivative Life, An (Un)Reality Show An over-arching theme I found in the book is how the common-sense stuff of our reality, the economy and money and shopping and working, is really science fiction; we don't live inside a "natural" economic structure -- we made it up. It gets very much like Baudrillard in a way. We lived in a real world where we created value, and understood the value that we created as individuals and groups for one another. Then we systematically disconnected from the real world: from ourselves, from one another, and from the value we create, and reconnected to an artificial landscape of derivative value of working for corporations and false gods and all that. It is in some sense Baudrillard's three steps of life in the simulacra. So by now, as Borges would say, we've mistaken the map for the territory. We've mistaken our jobs for work. We've mistaken our bank accounts for savings. We've mistaken our 401k investments for our future. We've mistaken our property for assets, and our assets for the world. We have these places where we live, then they become property that we own, then they become mortgages that we owe, then they become mortgage-backed loans that our pensions finance, then they become packages of debt, and so on and so on. We've been living in a world where the further up the chain of abstraction you operate, the wealthier you are. 9. The Way Out So since this is a system we created, we can create something else? Right, that's what open-source was supposed to be about. I believe that every realm of human experience and design is ultimately open-source if we choose for it to be. That's why I got interested in religion and money, because those seemed to be the two areas that people would not accept an open-source premise. Religion -- of course it isn't, those are sacred truths! But I would argue that Judaism was actually intended as an open-source religion. I've written a book about that, called Nothing Sacred, which was and still is controversial. Because if the Torah is open for interpretation, if it's this beautiful, myriad, hypertextual, hyperdimensional document that it is, then the whole thing is up for grabs: what happens to the real estate, the Israeli state? Money of course is the other big area, it's still the one thing they won't let you print. You've seen the dual currency idea from the Middle Ages coming back in certain places? We've seen it coming back for 10 or 20 years now in places like Ithaca, New York, and Portland, Oregon; little places with alternative communities and hippies and weirdos and Grateful Dead parking lots and things like that. They could try local currency because people were weird enough to go for it. More recently, after the economic downturn in Japan, dual currencies started to take hold in the non-"alternative" community. Everyone had time, but no one had money. Everyone was willing to work, but there were no companies they could work for. And since the only way we know how to work is to outsource our employment to a company, things looked bad. One of the main needs people had was getting health care to their grandparents and great-grandparents who lived in towns far away. No one could afford home health care for them -- people to bathe them, walk them around, give them their shots, their IVs, their bedpans. So if you can't afford the service what can you do? What they did was set up a non-local complementary currency system where you would volunteer a certain number of hours of work to take care of an old person where you lived. You would acquire credits, and then someone who lived near your grandparents would take care of them for the credits you paid. There was no money involved! The currency was literally worked into existence. Even after the economy improved and people got their health insurance back, old people preferred the health care workers who were coming from the real people rather than the ones that came from the companies. Now it's starting to hit places in the US where things are especially bad -- Detroit, Lansing, Cleveland -- these are towns that have resources in people, land, old factories. They have time, they have energy, but they don't have money and they don't have any corporate interest. So what can they do? Make a local currency, start doing things for each other. I'll fix your car, and you do something for me. And it's easy! When I talk to economists, or when I talk to bankers, they all say, "well that doesn't work, you need a bank to go in and invest in a community for it to happen." Actually -- you don't. You don't need the bank.

Promoting bank-lent businesses is basically saying that you don't believe in sustainable business models yet. Any business that started with the bank is not a sustainable business model, because it's already in the debt/interest track. This is where Obama is still confused. He should say, "Look, I realize the economic crisis is real, there are mortgages and loans and we're going to work on that. But the more important thing right now is, rather than spending $5 trillion of your great-grandchildren's money on these bankers that screwed up, let's see how can we spend a teeny bit of money and reeducate communities about real economic development and sustainability."