Many of us seem to think all we need to do is get Obama elected and he will take care of the rest. And the scientists will find a new liquid fuel for our cars as well.
We vote every day with our dollar and our actions. This faith, hope, or whatever you want to call it in our leaders to come is unjustified. It is only through the actions of all, or most, that change will come. Why should obama care about sound economic policy, energy policy, agricultural policy, or climate policy if we don't, as evident by our excesses all over the spectrum?
Drive less, grow some food, have a neighborhood potluck, read a book, buy locally produced food, pick up the trash in front of your house, and encourage other to do the same. One day it will be cool to care about others and the planet. We vote every day, many times a day.
Stop down-talking coal and oil until you stop using electricity and using products made from or transported to you with oil. There is nothing that will come even close to matching the billions of btus produced from fossil fuels. The sooner we accept that the sooner we accept the climate will change or we will change our lifestyles- dramatically.
10/6/08
Backyard Food Gardens
Plan-
- Centered around a
- Grows food plants along with herbs, fruit and nut trees
- Weekly farmers market
- In poorer neighborhoods
- Sells cheap
- Goal of bringing quality food to poorer, urban communities.
- Expand to installing nursery plants into backyards
- For free
- For work or trade
- For cash
- Find donors, grants, government funds
- Umbrella under a non profit
- Care of gardens
- for free, if needed
- training provided to residents
- multiple levels of support to be offered
- Market services door to door
- Local based work force
- Expand nursery
- library
- kitchen- indoor and outdoor, solar oven
- workshop space
i. seed collecting
ii. germination
iii. nutrition
iv. medicinal herbs
v. companion planting
vi. politics
vii. justice
viii. potlucks
ix. cooking
x. many more
- Being neighborhood based, early nurseries would be role model for expansion into unplanted neighborhoods, using as much local resources, both materials and labor, as possible.
- Ideas inspired over the past 2 months, moving to a 4 season growing environment, participating at spiral gardens, seeing the need to grow food where people are, educating the people about how food, and energy, is produced, and finally put to paper after the ‘food policy for the next administration’s dialogue at uc <st1:place w:st="on">
- Food Policy for the Next Administration, Wheeler Hall, UC Berkeley, Oct 1, 2008- notes
i. We must go back to the garden and have incentives, possibly through health care, for feeding people healthy food.
ii. Teach Children
1. How to garden- environment
2. How to prepare food- community
3. Basics of Nutrition- health
iii. Plant 5 arce White House Lawn
1. Hire a White House Farmer
2. Encourage Youth to become food producers
iv. We need a polyculture approach, a systems approach
v. We need millions of farmers to replace the oil and chemicals that currently grow food
vi. Take Chemistry class
1. Go beyond organic chem.
2. Green chemistry
vii. Fill key positions in
1. Policy makes future and people make policy
viii. Be Heard- don’t be passive
1. City Council
2. School Boards
3. State Legislature
ix. We need a farmer in each family
x. Vote with your fork
xi. We need leaders who care about food
xii. See www.fooddeclaration.org
seems some folks in the east bay are doing this already-
my farm- http://myfarmsf.com/about.html
all edibles- http://alledibles.com/
10/2/08
The End of Wall Street
* http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212648830465179.html
* Wall Street Jounral
* SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
The End of Wall Street
"The world had changed," said the Morgan Stanley spokesperson yesterday, and you can mark that down as the understatement of the year.
She was explaining the company's decision late Sunday night to convert back into a bank holding company some 75 years after the Glass-Steagall act sundered the House of Morgan into J.P. Morgan, the bank, and Morgan Stanley, the investment firm. Under pressure from the Federal Reserve, Goldman Sachs made the same choice this weekend.
And so, in a single week, the era of the independent investment bank has ended. Wall Street as we've known it for decades has ceased to exist. Six months ago there were five major investment banks. Two -- Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns -- have failed, Merrill Lynch is selling itself to Bank of America, and now the last two are becoming commercial banks. Adam Smith, that great market disciplinarian, is punishing excesses and remaking American finance long before Congress can get into the act.
Both Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs will have two years in which to arrange their affairs to conform to the capital requirements and other rules that govern such commercial banks as Wells Fargo, BofA and Citigroup. That will mean less leverage -- assets that are perhaps 10 times their capital bases instead of the 20 or 30 to 1 they have sported as investment banks. That in turn means less risk and almost certainly less profit and lower compensation.
In exchange, they will be able to accept consumer savings deposits as a ready source of funds. They also get the promise of greater stability and continued access to Federal Reserve lending facilities such as the discount window. To be more pointed, they'll have a better chance at survival, not least because they also will be able to avoid certain "mark-to-market" accounting rules that have forced writedowns on troubled securities.
This year's market turmoil had called into question the viability of the investment-banking business model as far back as March, with Bear Stearns's collapse. The Fed gave the remaining banks access to emergency lending, but it was clear from the start that this taxpayer lifeline wasn't sustainable without a greater degree of federal oversight. What Morgan Stanley and Goldman did Sunday night was to choose their poison -- submitting themselves to commercial banking regulation rather than have it imposed on them either through legislation or merger, as Merrill recently did in selling itself to BofA.
The result will be a sturdier but also less-innovative financial system than we have had in recent decades. That has its benefits; we're paying the price for some of the more dubious innovations right now. The new system will have more capital and less direct lending through such vehicles as asset-backed securities. Direct lending is highly efficient and has provided funds for many useful ends. But it is also riskier in a panic because it lacks a capital cushion to absorb the losses when asset values decline. In another sign of this new world, Morgan Stanley followed the weekend's news by announcing that it had sold a 20% stake to Japan 's Mitsubishi.
Wall Street's transformation also means that private equity companies and hedge funds will be the new financial innovators and move further onto investment banking's traditional turf. But both hedge funds and private equity have intrinsic limitations on their ability to raise money and fund their activities, so neither is a perfect substitute for the former role of the investment banks.
In some sense, the pure-play investment bank was itself a regulatory artifact. In the depths of the Depression, separating the investment functions from the banks was considered necessary for the stability of the commercial banks. Thus Glass-Steagall was born, and this week that separation can finally be said to be undone.
As for the long-term effects, expect them to be as hard to predict as the full effects of Glass-Steagall were in 1933. Adaptation and innovation have been hallmarks of our financial system since before there was a Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley. If Congress is wise next year as it attempts to reorganize our financial system, it will recognize the benefits of a sturdier system without crushing its ability to innovate.
* Wall Street Jounral
* SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
The End of Wall Street
"The world had changed," said the Morgan Stanley spokesperson yesterday, and you can mark that down as the understatement of the year.
She was explaining the company's decision late Sunday night to convert back into a bank holding company some 75 years after the Glass-Steagall act sundered the House of Morgan into J.P. Morgan, the bank, and Morgan Stanley, the investment firm. Under pressure from the Federal Reserve, Goldman Sachs made the same choice this weekend.
And so, in a single week, the era of the independent investment bank has ended. Wall Street as we've known it for decades has ceased to exist. Six months ago there were five major investment banks. Two -- Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns -- have failed, Merrill Lynch is selling itself to Bank of America, and now the last two are becoming commercial banks. Adam Smith, that great market disciplinarian, is punishing excesses and remaking American finance long before Congress can get into the act.
Both Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs will have two years in which to arrange their affairs to conform to the capital requirements and other rules that govern such commercial banks as Wells Fargo, BofA and Citigroup. That will mean less leverage -- assets that are perhaps 10 times their capital bases instead of the 20 or 30 to 1 they have sported as investment banks. That in turn means less risk and almost certainly less profit and lower compensation.
In exchange, they will be able to accept consumer savings deposits as a ready source of funds. They also get the promise of greater stability and continued access to Federal Reserve lending facilities such as the discount window. To be more pointed, they'll have a better chance at survival, not least because they also will be able to avoid certain "mark-to-market" accounting rules that have forced writedowns on troubled securities.
This year's market turmoil had called into question the viability of the investment-banking business model as far back as March, with Bear Stearns's collapse. The Fed gave the remaining banks access to emergency lending, but it was clear from the start that this taxpayer lifeline wasn't sustainable without a greater degree of federal oversight. What Morgan Stanley and Goldman did Sunday night was to choose their poison -- submitting themselves to commercial banking regulation rather than have it imposed on them either through legislation or merger, as Merrill recently did in selling itself to BofA.
The result will be a sturdier but also less-innovative financial system than we have had in recent decades. That has its benefits; we're paying the price for some of the more dubious innovations right now. The new system will have more capital and less direct lending through such vehicles as asset-backed securities. Direct lending is highly efficient and has provided funds for many useful ends. But it is also riskier in a panic because it lacks a capital cushion to absorb the losses when asset values decline. In another sign of this new world, Morgan Stanley followed the weekend's news by announcing that it had sold a 20% stake to Japan 's Mitsubishi.
Wall Street's transformation also means that private equity companies and hedge funds will be the new financial innovators and move further onto investment banking's traditional turf. But both hedge funds and private equity have intrinsic limitations on their ability to raise money and fund their activities, so neither is a perfect substitute for the former role of the investment banks.
In some sense, the pure-play investment bank was itself a regulatory artifact. In the depths of the Depression, separating the investment functions from the banks was considered necessary for the stability of the commercial banks. Thus Glass-Steagall was born, and this week that separation can finally be said to be undone.
As for the long-term effects, expect them to be as hard to predict as the full effects of Glass-Steagall were in 1933. Adaptation and innovation have been hallmarks of our financial system since before there was a Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley. If Congress is wise next year as it attempts to reorganize our financial system, it will recognize the benefits of a sturdier system without crushing its ability to innovate.
When is enough enough?
when will they go too far?
how many of us actually care enough to get out of our comfortable lifestyle and speak out. to expect us to be 'led' to a better future is ignorant. we must build the future ourselves. we the people.
What has happened to us? All wrapped up in how important our lives are, how great we as a nation are, how busy we are and choosing not to learn about how our agriculture policies affect the farmers of the world, our drug policies are wreaking havoc everywhere, our energy policy will cause endless war, our meat industry often show just how low as a species we can sink with regards to any form of respect for other life, and more.
come on people- let's do what needs to be done- now!
at one point i thought all americans would be ok, if you were lucky to be born here then you were lucky to be in the greatest country there is, but overall we don;t even care about each other.
if i got mine then la di da.
don't dwell on the negatives. see the good in the world. don't be a downer. i've heard that a few times.
three things-
1. we are producing less oil than we did as a world 3 years ago- in 20-30 years we will probably be living using about 50% of the oil that we use now. how will that affect you lifestyle, your work, and your recreational activities- just think about it
2. the food production of the earth will decline as we have less fuels, fertilizer, soil, water, and more frequent storms and droughts. this will lead to a decrease in the population of earth. imagine that we are at 6.5 billion people now and in 50 years may be at 3 billion- carrying capacity. how will we get there from here? what different methods do we see our kind and compassionate leaders using?
3. capitalism requires growth- both in population and in energy use. we are moving to a world of less energy, food, and people. how does negative growth affect capital markets?
i don't think i am a pessimist, but let's take this to the personal level. we all know cigarette smoking kills- not only the smoker but the people around them. yet many of us smoke- a blatant disregard for our health and the health of those in close proximity to us. now some say that we are going to begin to care about people that are not us more than we care about us? i doubt it. nothing against smokers as there are many things we all do that we know, deep down, are not good for us individually or as a whole.
many seem to have faith in technology, or in people 'getting it', waking up, becoming 'aware', but i ask you- how many do you know with solar panels, who grow 10% of their food, don;t use fossil fuels more excessively than they should. how many of the 'aware' are actually living lifestyles that do not harm other human beings?
but things can be different. if we each make the steps we can- ask for help along the way, admit our ignorance in how to live without all the goodies that have made our lives so cozy.
the time will come when our enemy will not be 'drugs' or 'terrorists' but instead overconsumption, greed, and fear of not having enough and ignorance. we will look at non recyclers and excessive users in a bad light. this will not be easy as the enemy then will be us, our friends, neighbors, and relatives rather than drug pushers and the taliban.
we must not judge but welcome those who are willing to move to a more sustainable path. we must also do what we can to speed up this move, as it is not happening anywhere near fast enough.
i do not see myself as pessimistic in discussing the end of this day, as i see the new day coming and am looking forward to living in it.
we know what to do- and along the way we will be guided. lose the fear and be willing to accept change. only together will we make it. individually we will not survive.
when will we care- when our investments disappear? when our job is lost? when our friend or family member loses their house? when the lights go out? when the grocery store doesn't have any food? when china begins to march on the middle east? when rations for electric and gas are initiated?
Better yet- when will we actually do something?
--------------------------------------------------
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe,
But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
or
We don't own this place, though we act as if we did,
It's a loan from the children of our children's kids.
The actual owners haven't even been born yet.
But we never tend the garden and rarely we pay the rent,
Some of it is broken and the rest of it is bent
Put it all on plastic and I wonder where we'll be when the bills hit.
We can run,
but we can't hide from it.
Of all possible worlds,
We only got one:
We gotta to ride on it.
Whatever we've done,
We'll never get far from what we leave behind,
Baby, we can run but we can't hide.
I'm dumpin' my trash in your back yard
Makin' certain you don't notice really isn't so hard
You're so busy with your guns and all of your excuses to use them.
Well, it's oil for the rich and babies for the poor,
We got everyone believin' that more is more,
If a reckoning comes, maybe we will know what to do then.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
hell in a bucket and we can run by john perry barlow
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
