Is Competition Sustainable?

I keep hearing that we need to be more competitive to make it in the global economy, but I can't believe the multinational corporations that dominate the global and industrialized economies will ever let anyone else win.

Plus which, I've been reading some great stuff about how we are at least as cooperative by nature as we may be competitive. What if Nature Herself were cooperative too?

Rebecca Solnit's book "A Paradise Built In Hell" describes how disasters seem to attract lots of ordinary people who just pitch right in the start cooperating to help in whatever ways make sense. In fact, it turns out that often official disaster relief and security actually get in the way and make things worse by imposing their bureaucratic and hierarchical plans on what is already spontaneously underway, as was seen not just after Katrina but after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake.

"Elite panic" is behind official efforts to control the situation, whether it is caused by fear of being unnecessary or fear of vengeance by the have-nots. Elite panic is why people who are taking necessities from stores after a disaster are seen as looting if black and as requisitioning if white, as happened in New Orleans and Haiti.

I've also been reading about Open Space Technology, guidelines from originator Harrison Owen. He shares some of his philosophy about jobs, a view that's very relevant to economic competitiveness.

"After all, if we did only what we cared to do, not much would get done. Or would it? Isn't it true that jobs done by people who don't care are not worth much? Is it not also true that people who care greatly accomplish incredible things? And fortunately, there are a lot of different people who care about a lot of different things, which means there is a high likelihood that the majority of things needing to be taken care of will be taken care of--by someone who cares."

What if we could all, worldwide, have economies where we took on the tasks we care about the most? We can all have work that matters, if we care about doing first what matters most.

And we can still compete--with ourselves, to just keep improving.

Dear readers, please ignore the comment below which it turns out leads to porn-spam. I will delete it as soon as I figure out how.

Ban Styrofoam & Be A World-Class City!

Seattle did it a year ago, and we can too. Check out this chart of replacement products.

And we could also start charging by weight or volume for regular garbage, just as Seattle does for businesses. That would be a really effective way to reduce tipping fees.

Colonial Ecology Rules?

On the news last night I heard about doctors doing cutting-edge research on helping old people live longer and accident victims regain the use of various appendages. The problem here is the amount of money being spent on doing this when so many babies and mothers are so poor and hopeless as they are now. These doctors must be as clueless as Wall Streeters about people's daily reality around the world, for them to be patting themselves on the back when so many lack the basics of survival - clean air and water, healthy food, and snug shelter. It would be far simpler and cheaper for them to just write prescriptions for these necessities, whose absence sabotages more expensive health care.

Then in the paper this morning I read about Monsanto's uber-Frankenstein desire to not just imitate but monopolize Mother Nature. According to the classical theory of hubris, the plans of men are the jokes of the gods. And karma suggests that monetizing bits of the ecology, as Monsanto continues to do, is rather asking for it. Still, as Prof. Shapiro suggests, ordinary people en masse are already buying in to technology that is equally opportunistic, narrow, and risky.

But what does all this have to do with colonialism or ecology? Well, colonialism is when one entity infects another somehow, acting from within as well as without. And ecology is a system, a network, where the effects of such actions are seen. Both entities, as well as their surroundings, can be seen as systems, definable and interdependent. And so much intercontinental biological cross-contact and colonialism has already occurred, I think we need to talk about how to somehow reintegrate ecologies from where they are now.

For example, I still mourn the eucalyptus, a few giants cut to the ground at a newly-formed nature preserve south of Sacramento. The idea was to eliminate non-natives, but in a place where there were few trees, I didn't like the idea of getting rid of what was there without having something comparable to replace it. When I do that in my garden, I get self-invited botanical invaders.

So what principles should we use to make such decisions? How can we co-evolve with what's here to be more sustainable and less opportunistic, as a species?

Sustainable Business in Sacramento?

I read in the paper this morning that the chamber of commerce backs the strong mayor. Apparently the chamber thinks that sustainability is bad for business, and that a strong mayor will be good for business. But what does KJ think about sustainability?

The recent meeting of his new arena task force suggests he doesn't think much about it. I went to their kick-off town hall meeting last week, and they started off saying the task force was all about economic development. But it really is just about the arena, and jobs for developers.

Most of the people in the room were men, and I was the only woman who spoke to the panel. It's time for the men in the chamber of commerce to refocus on the true and original purpose of business, which is to serve consumers. And consumers' most basic needs are clean air and water, healthy food, and snug shelter. These are the first priorities of economic development for human welfare.

Sports and entertainment arenas are not a basic consumer need. And we don't need to spend a lot of money on them. If we want basketball, we can have a city league. If we want entertainment, we have local and state politics at our doorstep.

CA's Unsustainable Legislature

Why should our dysfunctional, money-addicted legislators get to dodge the pay cuts that have cratered the budgets of so many ordinary Californians?

Offhand, I can't think of any reason that we would not be better off with the part-time legislature we used to have, and I am not alone. But I am sure there are reasons, even if I'm not sure that survey results are based on discussion of complete and rational pros and cons.

Let's start talking!

Looking Busy

I don't understand why KJ's call for a tent city for the homeless hasn't been as popular with developers as his latest effort to make Sacramento safe for the NBA.

If developers want to do something that's really useful for the community, they could build more affordable housing for the homeless. They could build housing that ordinary people could afford to buy.

Or they could try to save some of Sacramento's money, like SMUD, instead of spending it on more sprawl.

Sports Arenas Of, By and For The People?

Mayor Stork announced a new task force to figure out how to get a sports arena at Cal-Expo, I guess because the old task force didn't work it out.

Or maybe it's because this task force will announce its results just about the time we get to vote on KJ's strong mayor proposal. Given the expected members of the task force - "City Hall officials, business leaders and attorneys" - I think one can pretty much predict that they will say what insiders dressed in fancy suits usually say. 'We're wealthy so if you follow our advice you will be too.'

Right.