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.

What About Proposition 8 and Freedom of Speech?

The notion that the word marriage only refers to the sacred union between man and woman is contradicted by what I found in an online dictionary :

4. to unite intimately: Common economic interests marry the two countries.

5. to take as an intimate life partner by a formal exchange of promises in the matter of a traditional marriage ceremony.

6. to combine, connect, or join so as to make more efficient, attractive, or profitable: A recent merger marries two of the nation's largest corporations.

7. Nautical. To lay together [the unwound strands at the ends] of two ropes to be spliced

8. to cause (food, liquor, etc.) to blend with other ingredients: [To marry oil and water]

http://dictionary.reference.com

So I am wondering about what will happen to people who use any of these definitions of 'marry' if Proposition 8 were to be approved by voters. Would those who use the word "marriage" in any of these meanings be penalized? Would offending dictionaries have to be burned?

Also, I found another website: www.marryyourpet.com. Fortunately for the authors of this website, they live in another country. However, would approval of Proposition 8 mean that the loving spirit I found at the website have to be electronically blocked from online access by Californians?

I am wondering if the proponents of Proposition 8 have really thought about the implications of this kind of law. We could even pass a proposition that pi should be equal to 3, but we would also be making a mockery of democracy.

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

A Similarity Between Economy & Ecology

It's a curious fact that getting rich in money markets and living off the land both involve taking a small cut of many many transactions. Successfully living within one's local ecology involves taking small portions of food and water from a larger whole that is flowing along around you. 

How small is small enough? That depends on how good you are at helping things keep flowing.

Kevin or Heather?

Last Tuesday night, a KCRA reporter asked me if I intended to recommend either Kevin or Heather as the choice in November for those who voted for me. Having had time to think it over, I recommend that those who would like a sustainable Sacramento ask each candidate whatever questions they need to ask to determine which of them is most likely to take effective steps toward this goal.

I fear that neither has a clear vision of sustainability, in part because they are both using the solutions of the past in an attempt to address the problems of the future. And I suspect that neither understands that it's not about the money.

So no matter who is elected, I urge Sacramentans to continue to focus on the issue of sustainability, and lobby their elected representatives to implement policies of sustainability. But I would also recommend that individuals and groups make their own arrangements for their own sustainable futures, rather than depending on any government to do it.

After Tomorrow

No matter who wins the vote, we will still face the same issues of achieving both ecological and social sustainability in the face of accelerating global climate change. Whatever we do, we must do it from the heart, if we are to have a prayer of success.

Amazing Earth, how sweet the air

Her children breathe each day

Blest be Her blue inspiring care

May we be worthy we pray

Amazing Earth with water clear

That washes every sin

Blest be Thy blood O Mother dear

Through Thee our lives we win

Amazing Earth we greet Thy Son

Who shines on all each day

His fire can burn at highest noon 

For forest shade we pray

Amazing Earth how good Thy food

In garden, grove and field

So full of thanks for Thee we would

Bless each and every meal

Amazing Earth whose every race

And bug and bird not least

Are called by Her Amazing Grace

In kinship with each beast

Amazing Earth we count Thy blessings

Many more than we deserve

A sin to think we own such things

Forgetting Whom we serve

(Now go to youtube.com/watch?v=5OuP6sPiViQ and pretend you are hearing Leann sing the poem above.)