The Problem with Kevin

KJ's recent spin around the city council office suite highlights the main reason he should not be mayor. Both KJ and the security guard were acting emo. They were not using their heads, nor the principles that should be obvious to voters too but often aren't.

His cult of celebrity makes people stop thinking and start sentimentalizing, including, I fear, himself. If he were mayor, I believe the governance context would become even more polarized and less rational than at present. 

Relocalize The Economy!

Last week, I emailed local elected officials suggesting that they should meet ASAP with local banks, credit unions, and chambers of commerce to figure out ways to assemble enough local capital to provide commercial paper credit to local businesses. I'm not sure they were paying attention. 

This week, I emailed my representatives in the state legislature with the same suggestion. I'm not sure they are paying attention either, although I did read in the paper Bee this morning that the Governator is asking us to buy state bonds to finance some of the projects that voters already approved in previous elections.

Fortunately, California is the biggest state economy in the U.S., so I am sure there are plenty of people who could spare an extra $20 or $100 for 30 years or so (well maybe just a few years, actually, if the economy goes back up) to help build the capital infrastructure investments we will need to maintain our addictions to driving and prisons.

If you noticed that the scheme I just described, of us lending to ourselves, is just more of the same house of cards that has been falling down on Wall Street, a virtual 9/11, you may be wondering if this makes economic sense. 

If you feel confused about how ordinary shoppers like us can save the credit markets and the economy, perhaps the story of Sven and Ole, two ordinary brothers and innkeepers, will help put things in perspective.

One day, Sven realized that they had run out of beer for their guests. So they counted out the pence needed, hitched up the wagon, and were off. Returning with the keg full of beer, they had been gone for some time, and Sven was feeling thirsty. So after some thought, he said to Ole, "Ole, I'm very thirsty, and I would like a glass of beer. And I have a halfpenny in my pocket. I would like to buy just one glass of beer." 

After a moment of thought, Ole agreed, and the exchange was made. As they rode along, Sven quietly washing away his thirst, Ole began to realize that he, too, was thirsty, and would feel equally restored by a small cup. And he had in his pocket the halfpenny Sven had paid him for the glass of beer. So of course Ole proposed to Sven an equal transaction, just the reverse of the previous one. And of course Ole found his cup of beer very refreshing and sustaining.

But you know, it had really been a long day. And both brothers were really very thirsty, much more than a cup or two. And the more beer they had, the more refreshing each glass became. So, unhappily, when they finally returned to their inn, they had an empty keg and just a halfpenny.

So what is the moral of this story? Well, one moral is that beer is proof that God loves us. But the deeper meaning is that the economy really isn't about money, it's about real needs, such as clean air and water, healthy food, and shelter from unfriendly weather. These things may also be proof that Mother Earth loves us. After all, she's God's Mother too.

Kevin or Heather? #2

Both candidates have boosted my ego by inviting me to endorse them. And since I have not really been acquainted with Kevin, I have been able to talk with him at some length about some of my questions. And my concerns have been largely alleviated.

Sacramentans are fortunate that two such smart, capable, caring, and motivated people are running for mayor. No matter who gets elected, life will go on generally the same way, with the same citizens, council, city staff, businesses, nonprofits, etc., as we all take turns in various roles. However, I fear that neither of the candidates really gets it about sustainability. Kevin thinks we need to tackle crime first, but too many unsustainable aspects of the American way of life are already feeding crime. While Heather supports Sacramento's Sustainability Plan, it is a long way from sufficient. And sometime she acts like all we have to do is fix K Street.

However, the fact that both Heather and Kevin got close to 50% suggests that there is a split, a polarization, in the political opinions of Sacramentans. So no matter who gets elected, we as a community would need some serious conversations in order to come to mutually agreeable decisions about certain key issues.

But I do have a candidate I would like to endorse. You can find this person in the mirror, according to Pat Paul of Fair Oaks, whose letter to the Bee was approximately as follows:

The Real Candidate for Change

So much time, energy and, unfortunately, money has been spent this election year to position the best candidate for November. I would like to make a bold appeal for my candidate - you!

The platform - the real candidate of change. The time - now!

Every one of us has the ability to make positive changes in Sacramento. Starting today, make a positive commitment to a community concern of your choice and begin making real change happen.

Not sure where? Tutor or mentor our young people, assist our elderly or needy, change your consumption habits, work for the environment, change your energy usage, bring integrity back to all your dealings, take care of animals, or any other area about which you care. The list is endless.

No time to give? Then make a donation to the nonprofit organization you most believe in; even the smallest can make a difference.

We can make positive change starting now. And - who knows? Maybe then November's outcome might not leave us wringing our hands and shaking our heads so much.

I am a candidate of change, and I approve this message.

Muriel Strand

Dear Community Leader,

I am running for Mayor to put the issue of sustainability at the top of the public agenda.

Most of us realize Mother Earth is running a fever that will get worse before it gets better. Once we inject a particular puff of CO2 up in that beautiful spacious sky, its effect on the planet's energy balance and on global weather doesn't even begin to decline for a century or so, while much of it lasts for a millennia.

And respected scientists keep shortening their best estimates of the time left to us for making the fundamental changes needed now to avoid climate changes which will threaten not just civilization but our children and grandchildren.

Yet even though many people would like to slash their contribution to the problem, our addiction to fossil fuels is harder to quit than even cigarettes. Almost everyone is locked in to existing technologies and infrastructure, and there's not much room to make major changes in the short term. So efforts to date tend to focus on "Phase 1 sustainability," relatively superficial changes such as hydrogen cars, plasma combustion of garbage, and other high-tech opportunities for consultants to make money. But while small, short-term changes like fluorescent lights or minimizing HVAC use are good steps, they're just the first step.

And the danger is that the money, energy, and other resources already in the pipeline for relatively cosmetic changes won't be available later on when more people realize that truly fundamental changes will be necessary, such as we ought to basically stop driving. Why are we building more roads instead of converting existing ones to gardens?

But enough bad news. The good news is that, if we do it right, "Phase 2 sustainability" offers us healthier and happier lives than many now experience. And to do it right, we need a much bigger concept of physical efficiency, where the goal is clean air and water, healthy food, and shelter from the elements, not just a trivial or intermediate goal like better mileage. And it's not like everyone needs to jump to Phase 2 right away or completely, but those who do want to should have our support, encouragement, and investment.

Consider the advantages and benefits of Eco-Villages. With small farms close to small towns and a revival of traditional crafts and trades, we can deflate fossil fuel consumption enough to just drown it in the bathtub. (And we won't need nuclear power either.) By living in harmony with nature - including human nature - we can enjoy life with a balance of physical and mental activity, plenty of fresh nutritious food, and a friendly community that is economically secure because it is relocalized and self-sufficient.

The myth of technology says that without modern gadgets we will face discomfort, deprivation, and disease. But modern technology is never going to change biology or human selfishness. There is also the myth of the boring mean small town, where youth drink and fight because there's nothing else to do. But modern technology can't solve cultural problems. Only people can choose to exercise our cooperative instincts more often than our competitive ones.

I hope you will join me, before and after the election, in advocating and building a truly sustainable Sacramento, designed and constructed by empowered Sacramentans. If you would like to discuss any of these ideas in more detail, you can contact me at auntym@earthlink.net.

Sustainable Specifics for Sacramento

Develop and support (more) classes in traditional crafts & skills such as spinning, weaving, smithing, woodworking, etc.

Recalibrate city utility billing to effectively reward and motivate conservation and waste reduction.

Ban nonrecyclable plastic take-out food containers.

Match people wishing to trade houses and reduce their commutes.

Develop a low-cost community garden design option.

Actively support planting & use of tree crops such as pecans.

Tax lawns & plastic bags.

Develop a permitting process for composting toilets.

Develop a few standard designs & streamlined permitting process for passive solar construction & renovation.

Tax parking spaces.

Convert parking lots to urban farms.

Require traffic calming devices to be bicycle-friendly too.

Revise the vehicle code to give the right of way to bicycles

Require pedestrian walkways to be adjacent to buildings or residential gardens rather than adjacent to parking or streets.

Truly visible street addresses to reduce confusion & needless driving.

Ban leafblowers and other uncivilized machines.

Revise zoning codes to include inoffensive ways to keep chickens, rabbits & goats in residential neighborhoods.

Loans for graywater systems in residential & commercial buildings.

Redesign water treatment processes to compete with bottled water.

Convert parking pavement to water-permeable surfaces.

Invest in children - nursing, nutrition, skills - for elders' pensions.

Design & build a prototype manually-operated clothes washer.

Protect clotheslines, natural landscapes, and affordable housing from the "blight" label.

Recognize that when mothers are caring for their kids they ARE working.

Light-rail to the airport won't be needed when we can't afford to fly.

Delete oil subsidies.

Reduce the workweek to 24 hours so the same amount of work will yield more jobs.

"It's The Economy, Stupid"??

At the end of his column in today's Bee, Paul Krugman wrote "the very good economic record of the only Democratic administration most Americans remember."

It's absolutely true that the U.S. annual deficit was turned into an annual surplus for a few brief years at the end of 1990s, and the U.S. accumulated debt began a slight decline. (However, it's not news that since then the Republicans have tripled or quadrupled the total debt, which will be funded by future borrowing at oil-fueled interest rates.) 

More unfortunate even than that perhaps was the Clinton administration's failure to understand that "It's Not The Money, Stupid." The infatuation of both parties with trade and globalization was based on a widespread and mistaken idea that money is essential and inherently positive, and that it is reliably related to economic benefit. In effect, economists typically recast the standard definition of efficiency used by physicists into a calculation about the amount of money attracted by a given input of energy and other resources.

The annual Earthday season is a good time to review what the economy is about. An earth-friendly economy would look at overall human efficiency, the amount of human welfare available from a given input of physical energy and resources. The physical part of human welfare is: clean air and water, healthy food, and protection from extremes of heat, cold, and rain. If the rules of money suggest that funding my retirement through investing in the stocks of corporations that are raping Mother Earth and selling us junk food is a good idea, then the rules of money are wrong.

In times of stability, money can provide an efficient shortcut to evaluate what's economically good and bad. But in times of turbulence such as we confront, the true relationships between moneys and realities are equally turbulent, and a return to fundamental principles is the only way to keep one's bearings. Maslow's hierarchy builds on the foundation of physical needs listed above. Other things like sleep, affectionate touch, meaningful work, community are all important for a happy natural human life, and his schematic offers a perspective outside of the box of business as usual.

A balanced economy would integrate all these human needs into a culture of life that would support sustainable and relocalized societies, as well as all the other species without which life in this ecosystem would be boring (like my cat) or impossible (like insects).

Education

It's not about test scores. It's not about grades. It's not about diplomas.

It's about what you learn. It's about what you can do. It's about learning how to provide for yourself, both directly, and indirectly by taking care of others.

It's about being economically productive. But it's not about the money. It's about knowing how to get clean air and water, healthy food, and shelter from hot, cold or rainy weather. It's about meeting the hierarchy of needs described by Maslow.

It's about knowing how to think. (Hint: Don't believe everything you think.)

If you are a parent who is concerned about their child's education, I recommend "The Teenage Liberation Handbook," by Grace Llewellyn, available at your local library. It can liberate parents as well as youth.

How To Be Tough On Crime

Crime is behavior, so one must be tough on the behavior. But being mean to criminals and temporarily banishing them to haphazard cruelty in prison is just that same kind of anti-social behavior. Discipline - relentlessly kind, firm and consistent correction of behavior - is instead in order.

Most people's dominant feeling about crime is natural fear of violent crime. Unfortunately, many lack a rational understanding of the differences between violent crime and property crime, both legal and statistical. For example, few realize that both perpetrators and victims tend to share the demographics of poverty, youth, and masculinity. Nor that most criminals who have guns get them to protect themselves.

And it can be hard for youth to find good role models. Our country was the violent, pre-emptive aggressor in the war with Iraq, but national leaders don't know how to back down and be respectful and peaceful. Moreover, economic insecurity and rampant unfairness suggest that the comfortable people don't care about anyone else either so what goes around comes around. It's also worth noting that malnutrition can make people act out and commit crimes.

Do We Have A Right To Health Care?

I think we have a right to the basic foundations of good health--clean air and water, healthy food, and warmth. And plenty of sleep and affectionate touch. Providence had arranged a world where obtaining these needs led to exercise and cooperation. But then coal, oil, wage-slavery, and adolescence were discovered, not necessarily in that order.

I don't think we have the right to live forever, nor does it sound like much more fun than never sleeping. (And the real solution to the social-security/medicare 'crisis' is to invest in truly sustainable development, like early childhood education, apprenticeships, and eco-villages, not Bechtel and Blackwater.)

I do think we have the right to expect the legislature to approve sensible bills such as SB840 which can improve basic and preventive care while cutting the costs of red tape and the number of emergency room visits. Is the Republican policy of cutting government investment in societal health in order to increase private monetary profits our real health care problem?

As my golden birthday recedes behind me, I feel my body begin to soften and slow down. Eating right and exercising regularly are really great health care investments, and I continue to reap the dividends. But accidents happen, such as broken bones and mutations. That's what affordable health insurance should be there for. And also for key, simple modern preventives such as vaccinations. But no health care system will ever be able to do everything for everyone.

My prescription for myself is to get as much as I can of the foundations listed above. And also to try to get them in ways that minimize exploitation, and maximize the exercise and cooperation in one's life. And of course I try to inform others of these benefits, but they are often too busy watching TV which peddles a lot of junk. Germs are not the real problem.