Coyote...Remember what

Coyote...Remember what Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior, James Watt, said:"When the last tree is cut, the Lord will return".

"Wealth can not be created, only taken from others, the environment and the future". And we can see the results.

Old Newton also discovered 300 years ago the law of reactions, which means that the more "wealth" we "create", the benefits are canceled out by the reactions. As we, again, can see it in our daily lives and in the news.

The problem is that economists and politicians haven't figured it out yet that they can't piss against the wind, because they have marble pissoires where there are no winds.

Perhaps it would be time to send them out into the open to, hopefully, find out what the world, and life, are about, which happen to be long established physical laws and not harebrained ideological theories.

Ed Deak.

BC Public Service investments...

Here is this website to which Pender Paul refers. Mind, it is a daunting list, from which it is time consuming to separate the wheat from the chaff.

http://www.bcimc.com/publications/pdf/Inventory/Inventory20090331.pdf

"The whole rotten system has

"The whole rotten system has to fail - and the sooner the better." Seems the only way for real change.

"The problem is that economists and politicians haven't figured it out yet that they can't piss against the wind, because they have marble pissoires where there are no winds. " Well said Ed!

The Last Tree...

"Old Newton also discovered 300 years ago the law of reactions, which means that the more "wealth" we "create", the benefits are cancelled out by the reactions. As we, again, can see it in our daily lives and in the news." Fait Lux.

It is the essential quandary that human societies, and their economies function within, no doubt my friend.

It has become increasingly clear of recent years to me, that human societies are both going to have to content themselves with functioning at lower population levels, and with more modest standard of living expectations... at the upper levels of the class structure, presuming its ongoing existence, which I don't actually presume, no less than the bottom orders. (This latter nonetheless being where the main focus of the "Green" intelligentsia tends to be erroneously placed, in my view.)

And indeed, my friend, the seeming "going nowhere" character of the period does get depressing from time to time... waiting for that last tree to fall Second Coming. :-)

The faithful better be

The faithful better be careful about this Second Coming, because their Lord may not be too happy to see the horrible mess they've made of a fantastically efficient and beautiful system He created for their benefit.

I ain't no lord over anybody, or anything, but if I'd see some idiots wrecking the work I made for them to be used and enjoyed wisely, I may just pick up a 2x4 and beat the crap out of them.

Ed Deak.

Hey lynn!

Do you suppose George Orwell drew some "inspiration" from the poem you cited about Esso, for his 1984?

Susan Smitten

It was common for the United States government to make promises to Native Americans that were to remain in effect “for as long as the wind blows, the grass grows, and the sky is blue.”

I hope for the Beaver Lake Cree that "the wind" blows forever - because the Tar Sands is taking away the grasses and the blue sky.

Gwest, Coyoteman

So then what? Just give up?

Shareholder activism has not been practiced on a “smart” or large enough scale. Heck if some of these environmental organizations know these industries as well as they say they do, they should be able to turn a profit and put the funds back into further activism. They could buy and sell for effect and keep market analysts guessing. Conversely, they could endorse companies that they feel are “good” and then pull funds out when goals are not being met.

However, the quest to be “ethical” gets in the way.
One legitimate environmental organization came to my door one day asking for a donation. Because I wanted it to be a one-time thing, and did not want to get on a mailing list, or bother with a tax a receipt, I offered cash. They would not take my cash without giving me a receipt, so they left empty handed.

If an organization does not have confidence in itself to be able to ethically collect donations, then how is it ever going to “win” a battle full of dirty tricks?

Giving cash to anybody

Giving cash to anybody claiming to represent some organization, without a receipt would be asking for trouble, as it would encourage all kinds of crooks to come collecting.

As many already do, not to mention "investment" outfits, stealing people blind, in the news all the time. .

Ed Deak.

Moat as a passing amusement....

"Heck if some of these environmental organizations know these industries as well as they say they do, they should be able to turn a profit and put the funds back into further activism. They could buy and sell for effect and keep market analysts guessing. Conversely, they could endorse companies that they feel are “good” and then pull funds out when goals are not being met."

It sounds to me Moat, like... Though you are so twisted you are actually kind of funny, in a sick. kind of way, as the system is itself. ...like you should be talking to someone more like the "official" Greens. I suspect, though I don't know for sure, they might be more on your wavelength. I'm sure as hell not. Even though I find your sociopath's depravity mildly amusing. :-)

GWest can speak for himself.

It isn't ethical to invest in share capital companies - period

Share capital companies don't give a shit about producing 'real' useful products and rewarding the labour that creates them - they care about nothing except spinning money. most of it leveraged about 30 to 1.

Anyone who thinks they can be a part of that scam and then use the phony 'profits' to do something good with them belongs in CAMPBELL'S camp.

You're welcome to it.

But don't think you'll change ANYTHING because you've already been co-opted.

Read the book - watch the stockmarket and listen to Warren Buffett - what's going on (and why it's going pear shaped) is pretty obvious.

Alright Ed.

Ed, I can’t argue with you. I look forward to your posts too much.

Just hoping that we can take some wealth from some “other” sectors.

The other side of the coin

I can't tell whether Pender Paul's being obstreperous or argumentantive, but he's not too far wrong with BCIMC lacking the will for shareholder activism on our behalf, despite the directions the trustees gave it several years ago.

However, there is a new administrative boss in town (I forget her name and too lazy to find the binder it's in), and she's really quite good. She's been working on rebalancing the consulting actuarial report requirements with GAAP so your benefits can continue to be paid, but she's about finished that, and hopefully she's willing to take on shareholder activism again.

However, with the tar sands, that will often take the form only of cleaning up the watersheds, and reducing the cancers in the people and the fish downstream. Reducing naphthenic acid limits by 95% to European levels? Bwaaahahahahaaaaa!!! Not in this century.

No, GWest is right, the equity markets are a moral disaster for everyone concerned. But there are alternatives.

Quick! Equity or debt markets - which is bigger? If you answered equity markets (stock and options markets) you'd be dead wrong. Debt markets (corporate and government bonds, options and futures) are ten times bigger. THey may have been prone in the past to skulduggery and manipulation, but the banks appear to be on a short leash now, and insurance companies much more so. And with proper hedging and investment strategies, debt returns can be every bit as safe as reasonable returns in traditional markets - that is to say 6-8% year-over-year, which is as successful as it is adequate.

That's not me telling you that - it's Paul Krugman and a host of other economists. It's long past time to leave the dogshit companies to the sordid equity markets as they deserve, focus on the ones you really want to support (a la ethical investment opportunities) and rely on standard debt financing for the rest of your returns. Nobody gets rich quick, but nobody falls into the toilet either. And that's the way it should be.

After all, if it worked for 60 million poor in Bangladesh, where the Grameen bank helped lift more than 15 million of them into the lower middle class (by 2008's estimate) then it must be able to work elsewhere too!

RickW

"But seriously folks, should the Liberals oust the Conservatives, what WILL they do to change things, considering the obscene relationship our dollar has with petroleum production?"

Don't forget, petrodollar profits are a provincial golden goose, and Alberta and BC are scarcely as beloved as they might have been fifty years ago. If the Liberals wanted to make a splash, they could do it at provincial expense with hardly a squawk east of Cypress Hills, and you'd probably hear a whole lotta cheering from the Atlantics and Quebec to boot.

It might even be an election-winner for them, if they demonized the tar sands enough. You just need photos of the poor three-eyed natives in Fort Simpson eating their fish with three assholes while grandma keels over with another obscure cancer never seen before, running in a continuous loop on the networks every night (something they're particularly good at doing, I'd say), and there's not only your issue, but your election victory as well.

Coyoteman

Ok, try this then for an ethical question.

I had this… um… “friend” who read this book, “If It is Raining in Brazil, Buy Starbucks” a few years back. This person was so interested in what he read, that when he saw a major global event he took the advice of the author and bought shares in a company that makes helicopter gear components. You see, a major military power was going into the desert in 2003 to look for WMDs. This hostile gritty environment was going to be hard on the military equipment, especially the Apache helicopters. My friend did not support this war, but felt that there was money to be made. The share price of this gear making company doubled, and he cashed out. The share prices soon collapsed.

Although money was made as a result of the war, did this particular investment “support” the war effort, or did it “leech” off of it? I suggest it was a leech investment. The investment did not prolong the war and was made after it started. The only lousy feeling was knowing that if the war increased in intensity, more money stood to be made. A bit of a paradox.

All I am suggesting is to try something different when battling the big corporations. Shareholders can have pull, and do have some rights. I would like to see what Greenpeace could do as shareholders. Showing up a shareholder meetings as legitimate attendees, asking for tours of facilities, and voting on major company changes could get interesting. If Greenpeace invested in the Oil Sands, would they have a more legitimate voice in the region?

Hey, I am just playing with ideas here. That’s all. There are so many more creative ways to do things than hold up traffic, or spray paint crap.

So what are your suggestions then? Just watch and moan? Write a letter to your MP demanding change? Get a bumper sticker? Blog more on the Tyee?

A suggestion...

Make shareholders criminally liable for criminal actions of their boards and employees....

I can see the legal system and the insurance business winning in the short term, but long-term, it'll be good for everyone. After all, we've spent a couple of hundred years creating the current abysmal state of affairs.

zalm.....

I cannot see making shareholders criminally liable, remember, those holding Nortel or Enron suffered as they lost all share value and really knew nothing of the scams that their companies had become.

I know what you are getting at though. Worth looking into.

G West – hope you have room under your mattress for retirement

Ahh.... G West, share capital is not unethical, the shady actions of insider traders is the problem, as well as the government lobbyists that are hired to keep their company on the inside track.

Share equity is no more of a scam that the concept of paper money. Paper money only has value because we say it has value. And sometimes it is not even represented with paper. People make money trading money online. Crazy.

At least with share equity, in theory, the price of the share is related to the assets and performance of the company. But not always of course – I do remember Nortel.

And yes, I am interested in the book that you suggested in a previous post.

Anyways if you believe Robert Prechter, the market is going to get punished anyways very soon.

Regardless no matter what

Regardless no matter what even if people turn pink, as long as the USA needs oil the Tar Sands will continue to run...Oilberta and Ottawa both have pro big oil governments that do as Big Oil tells them to.

zalm

Just have to get rid of the moniker "incorporated" is all.

And Moat, perhaps it is time for us to increase our matress size..........

Moat

The problem is simply that the 'theory' and the practice are so far removed from each other.
Corporation Law needs to be changed. Corporations should not have unlimited life. Directors and corporate officers should be criminally and civilly liable for their actions; voting power on corporate decisions should not vest in one particular class of chares and small holders should have more effective ways of influencing corporate policy.
Deferred Taxes are a scam - always were and always will be; consolidations with unprofitable entities should not permit profitable firms to limit their tax by spreading losses from subsidiaries over their whole operations.
Purchases and mergers must only be permitted if the firm is actually undertaking a new venture - not simply to gobble up another firm's retained earnings. If an extractive industry (potash is a good current example) makes its living exploiting a Canadian resource it should ONLY be a Canadian entity…with Canadian workers and Canadian governance – Globalization has only been a success for corporate thieves and riverboat gamblers.
Corporate Capital taxes need to be increased .
The Income Tax Act must be changed so any dollar, how ever earned is a dollar subject to income tax.
And that's just the start of it.

Engagement vs Disengagement and The Status Quo...

I think it is clear enough by now that GWest has it correct about yourself, Moat, when he replied to you, "But don't think you'll change ANYTHING because you've already been co-opted.'

Again, with which I entirely agree. Which applies pretty much to the current "official" trade union movement as well, and the NDP. All have been fairly completely corrupted and absorbed into and become as part of the current dominance of capitalist ruling class ideology everywhere and at all levels.

And Zalm, at least this side of capitalism, when he said, "Make shareholders criminally liable for criminal actions of their boards and employees...."

And that should of course include the big pension investor funds, which would force folks like those of us in the Public Service Pension Plan of BC, for example, to more closely police where our own pension funds are going. As it is now, we trust too much the moral code, goodwill and honesty of those, who think pretty much like Moat actually, who are typically "overseeing" these pension plans for us.

As it is now, "immorality" is pretty much the norm, with exceptions always of course, and runs pretty much across the entire gamut of the economy at all levels. Which means, that even "official" organized Labour no less, has been similarly infected by the moral/ethical standards of "the system", which says, despite attempts to dress it up in a clerics collar for appearance sake, that it is every man/woman or union for his/her self, and the Devil take the hindmost.(Again, the hindmost being the working poor and the underclass.)

No Moat, you and your kind are obvious enough by now here, I think.

Conversely, I advocate "disengagement" from "the system", withdrawing from it and turning on it in a revolutionary, radical social change kind of way, creating an entirely new concept of democracy and working class/community engagement and rule over the economy. Which I suggest, as it is firmed up, popular control and direction over the economy, carries with it, its own radical change implications for politics and the political institutions of society.

But beware of the fascists in the interim.

Shareholder activism?

So you buy shares in a Tar Sands company wait for the share price to go up, sell, then take the money and run? Isn't that just called stock trading?

I think people have their blinders on here this is a CLOSED system and the only thing that is going to bring it down is force ie violence, like I said in my last post someone is going to find all the official channels of dissent and disruption ineffectual and will take matters into their own hands. Someone is going to perceive our society as rotten and are going to step outside the bounds on collective social morality and pressure and try and bring the system down because what they believe they are doing is morally right.

What we have up north is cultural manifestation of exploitation and violence sooner or later someone is going to start pushing back, like it or not.

G West and riverboat gambling

I agree with some of what you have written. Not all, because private property and free market principles do have a place in society. Risk and reward are important, as they lead to invention.

I too, get a little uncomfortable when the extractive industries are controlled by corporations rather than Canadians through good governance. I get even more nervous when it comes to our food and water supply.

I laugh at my own investing folly sometimes. When Nortel went down, I gambled (Riverboat style) that it still might survive and return to some measure of success. Who knew that that once all the dirt was out in the open, there would be even more dirt? I sure didn’t… because I was not an insider.

coyoteman

Co-opted? Huh? Really, you can do better than that. I don’t think I am co-opted, but I am part of this society as a result of being born in Canada and holding citizenship. It isn’t perfect, but things could be a lot worse. But I am not yet ready to give up on the free market, or on the concept of good government, as rare as it may seem.

You advocate disengagement from the system, but I don’t see how that is going to help you in the short and long term – especially if you live in a city where you have to cooperate with others to ensure a comfortable survival. You seem to be playing with the concepts of libertarianism and anarchy. Both are not comforting concepts. Once you disengage, someone else will be quite willing to take the capital and opportunities that you leave behind, and then use that capital to keep you on the margins.

Rick W.

"Do you suppose George Orwell drew some "inspiration" from the poem you cited about Esso, for his 1984?"

Don't know about this poem, Rick, but I have read that The Spanish Civil War was a turning point for Orwell... and for Chilean poet, Pablo Neruda as well - their subsequent works reflecting that - in their unmasking of the inherent perversities in totalitarianism.

I find these lines of the poem among the most striking and poignant in their despair:

"Standard Oil wakes them up,
Puts them in uniform, designates
Which of them is the enemy brother,
And the Paraguayan wages its war
And the Bolivian is destroyed "

And posted the poem primarily because of them....because again it highlights what I see as a central problem we all face - that we are allowing the corporate cabal and their political puppets to set the agenda, and to turn the people one against another. ("designates/ which of them is the enemy brother"). They use us to destroy one another.....and then they move on...under a new name, new banner. Same old Orwellian death grip though - where: "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength"

And the "new world" madly marches on.

Lurching, then limping

To the same old loony tune.

Certainly we see it on the global scale with the demonisation of Iraq, then Iran , now Pakistan. (We all know why help is being stalled for the victims of the devastating floods there.)

We "predictably" react to corporatism's agenda instead of asking of ourselves: What do we want? What is our human agenda? What does a decent, civilized and vitally alive society mean for us? I don't see those questions being taken on by political parties. They, too have become merely reactive to the agenda of the corporate guys and gals....and by doing so have been largely co-opted...into shells of what they once stood for.

It's often said by artists that it is extremely hard to create something new - that almost everything has been done before.

And in many ways that is our central problem now, whatever so-called "evolved" state we have reached, it is clearly a highly dysfunctional one.....ahhh, much more than that, it is now almost all pretense and posing... and ultimately suicidal......so how do we proceed from here?

What will make this new world we all hope and struggle for... truly new?

Some go Beyond the Fringe

Some demonise energy extraction. Some gather in dank halls and castigate all while precisely predicting an apocalyptic future is just about to happen. Some imagine that everyone who believes in a free market economy, about 90% of humans, is a member of a conspiratorial cabal that schemes to manipulate those that "know the TRUTH". Truth knowers recruit adherents heavily during economic ebbs.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec10/recession_08-19.html

http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/15/reasontv-matt-ridley-on-his-ne

R/M old man....

I imagine you are right. But let's call it what it is, and what it has been known as until western spin dictated otherwise: Barter.

As to this "free" nomenclature, we here in the west are NOT free to barter - because governments of all stripes do not trust their citizens to declare the barter so that taxes may be assigned. In other words, bartering is illegal.

lynn

It was these lines that put me in mind of Orwell's work.

Reminds me of what I read of the beginning of the end of the Roman Empire.

Pretence, Posing and Suicide...

"We "predictably" react to corporatism's agenda instead of asking of ourselves: What do we want? What is our human agenda? What does a decent, civilized and vitally alive society mean for us? I don't see those questions being taken on by political parties. They, too have become merely reactive to the agenda of the corporate guys and gals....and by doing so have been largely co-opted...into shells of what they once stood for. " Lynn wrote.

Written certainly with as much or even more passion than I have read from you before, fine woman.

We are at just about the very bottom of this dilemma, I think Lynn. With perhaps naked fascism yet to come out of Loony Toons Amerika and echoed here with a kind of Vichy regime treachery by our own US Empire Loyalists, hand in hand with the police state more and more voices are beginning to warn us is coming (See the recent RealNews,), and of which we got a small foretaste of at the recent G20... which would make everything instantly more perilous for us all, of course.

(And why, assuming your genuineness Sockeye, you must be careful, even here, and not take anything for granted. And don't think they can't reach through the internet to find out who you are, if they really want to. Even a nom de plume is no guarantee of immunity.)

And I know, while some here continue to delude themselves with dreams of investment riches, as the economy slides deeper into the abyss of its own ruling class creation, that in other quarters frustration is growing and delusions of quick, easy and violent "fixes" might be toying with the minds of some. Careful. These are not complete idiots we are dealing with here, just greedy ones, who in other regards are as like extremely smart and dangerous.

The trick is going to be, to get to that "new world" of which Lynn speaks, with as few casualties as possible... all our people present and accounted for, and our house not seriously damaged. :-) If possible. Though I agree, it is unlikely that there will be zero casualties. For it truly is impossible to make scrambled eggs without breaking a few eggs.

Mass. Critical mass is the real issue. Not violence per se. Getting to there. Making the earth tremble beneath "their" feet.

But the worm is turning, if painfully slow. :-)

There's no "free market" or

There's no "free market" or "free trade", or "free lunch". The only difference is who controls all these rackets and who pays the full price, under the fraud of "freedom" ?

hat ideologies are about is to decide and licence the same human predators to screw anybody, under any colour of flag they choose.

The purpose of "competition" is to licence theft and the destruction of
real private enterprise and replace it with forced collectivization.

In my 53 years as a private enterpriser business owner in BC, I have seen a huge number of genuine, private businesses being wrecked by so called "free enterprisers", otherwise known as the corporate mafia, for the same purpose the communists have used it in Eastern Europe. The difference is that the commies were doing it with laws and bayonets, while the capitalists, as opposed to genuine private enterprisers, also with laws and the perceived power of imaginary capital , created from the air by banks, while both sides were singing the new version of the Internationale, now called "globalization"

Ed Deak.

Can you dig it?

Better plant some turnips Ed, it's almost all over. Won't be long before this steamroller sucks it all up, They are cracking down on corruption too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDtxgQOyWdg

Which car company should be the only one Ed? Assuming you'd give a thumbs down to all other nasty competition. Still have a soft spot for Datsun?

R/M old man....

And of course, you think things are working just fine:
http://harpers.org/archive/2001/11/page/0094
http://www.psfk.com/2010/05/infographic-the-worst-oil-spills-in-history.html

PS R/M old man......

And this province keeps subsidizing oil spills - AND not reporting it as an increased budget deficit to the tune of $70+millions.

But all is well............because when rightista governments go into deficit to subsidize industry, somehow it's still "free enterprise".

"Free Enterprise", Myth and Reality....

"But all is well............because when rightista governments go into deficit to subsidize industry, somehow it's still "free enterprise". RickW.

Realisticman is, of course, a spear chucker for the "myth" of "free enterprise".

The moral and ethical, no less than class contradictions within "the free enterprise system" abound of course, unnoticed by its star struck true believers in the mythology. When they talk amongst themselves, even they talk openly and candidly about "capitalism" (Read such as Fortune Magazine and the other "entrepreneur" catering rags.) But when WE speak even more bluntly and less dreamily about "capitalism", they suddenly don't like it, because of capitalism's long connotations history, and instead suddenly try to frame the discussion around the mythical "free or private enterprise".

Though "private enterprise" is, of course, the historical starting point for all later capitalisms, including corporate capitalism, the reality is by our time, that it hasn't existed for a long, long time... except on the very margins of the economic system... in rank and the context of its "commanding heights".

Still, the corporatists really do try to bring everyone onboard and into their tent, as a preference, so they do pay "small business" lip service. The reality being though, in the same practical day to day world everyone factually lives, that the mom and pop shop "small businesses" are closer to the working class, and as the working class goes, prospers or does not prosper, so do they.

The further away these small businesses evolve from their early beginnings however, and their early founders, the more by micro-degrees they begin to identify with and think like "Big Enterprise". So, while "the working class and progressive movement" needs to be aware of this contradiction within "small enterprise", and to include it in their "calculations", it is still a "social strata grouping" that can be appealed to and brought into the "social change tent". Again, reminding them that, how the working class consumer goes, prospering or not prospering, so do they, by and large.

True "free enterprise" in our time however, at the commanding heights of the economy, has not existed for a very long time. Corporate Capitalism rules... as quite a different enterprise model Beast.

Rickie

Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers. The Louisiana fishery reopened three weeks ago. Wasn't it going to be closed for a couple of generations, if not forever? That old Shock doctrine again.

As for letting you go a-bartering, that just doesn't work for society. You ultra-right-wing libertarians cannot be allowed to ignore your responsibility to help finance health-care, education and a strong military just to name a few. Think about it Rickie. Where would the money for needle exchanges, heat-shelters, public servants stress leaves and crack-freak inhalation chambers come from if everyone was bartering to their hearts contents?

coyote

It's all about size and volume. You want one suit? That'll cost you mucho. You want many suits? That'll cost you much less per. This was the beauty of the ready-to-wear industry that revolutionized clothing - and that wasn't long ago. Standard sizes for women's clothing wasn't established until 1937. The market for custom made or home made clothing declined rapidly as factories were established to make standard sized items. The extension of this today is Chinese or Bangladeshi made jeans in Wall Mart for $9.99. Don't bother looking for the Union Label. A couple of weeks ago I did my annual inspection of one of these interesting warehouses of 'stuff' and saw them. Heck, I'm pretty sure I paid $30 for a pair of Lee's 30 years ago. So jeans have become like data-storage. As the years go by the price goes down. 8 GB flash drives are not $240 a GB, which is the price I paid for flash storage ten years ago, now they cost $5. I can't say that those shoppers I saw in Wall Mart looked like the wealthy elite but there sure seemed happy with the ever-declining costs of whatever they were buying. It's clear that there is a market for this cheap stuff. There is also a market for expensive stuff. There are plenty of places where one can still have a suit made by hand. I'm sure they will stitch you a pair of denim jeans too.

How do think we can bring this "free enterprise" system you speak to glowing of, to the health-care industry? There's some elite that have a grip on that.

Coming down to the last line of defence...

"It's all about size and volume. You want one suit? That'll cost you mucho. (ad nauseam.)" meandered Realisticman through the ruling class view of the world.

Now, what all this had to do with the subject under discussion, I do not know. Pretty meaningless pap, meant pretty much only for current true believers in the faith, in my view. It's all about capitalism as if it existed in a fairy tale vacuum, now long history. His little Wal Mart fable is certainly not the one that is currently wrecking so many lives, countries, economies and the natural environment all around the world, as it implodes in upon itself. All the while desperately lashing out militarilyy at its enemies closing in, inch by inch, for the kill abroad, steadily closing off all its options to hold onto all its Empire that it once was, but is increasingly no more.

Its sun is setting once again. Its enemies are nuclear arming against them, breaking their hereto monopoly.

Now, even within itself, there is the rumbling of the stirring natives, who are evolving a new understanding out of the emerging non-mythical reality. :-) While they ready and practise run the Police State option (G20)... their last line of defence.

coyote

"The reality being though, in the same practical day to day world everyone factually lives, that the mom and pop shop "small businesses" are closer to the working class, and as the working class goes, prospers or does not prosper, so do they."

That's no longer true. The working class goes to Wal Mart. In fact, the majority of customers at Wal Mart are working class. They are abandoning the mom and pop shops. Why? Bulk buying makes for cheap. Working class-leaning municipal governments, like a few in Vancouver have, punish further the mom and pop shops by escalating business property taxes out of realistic proportions compared to low residential taxes. Result; mom and pops close and big operators move into their place.

Mass

"Mass. Critical mass is the real issue. Not violence per se. Getting to there. Making the earth tremble beneath "their" feet."

Yes, exactly, Coyote... we need to meet the magnitude of their corruption with an even greater magnitude of clever seismic resistance.

Our greatest weapon ( and I mean this seriously)is a concerted and synchronized world-wide effort of unpredictability.

As a need for predictability is what fuels The Machine -

They need that we turn up, participate and behave in predictable ways.

Time for that to end.

Above, I mentioned in regard to the issue of real change and finding a new way that artists often remark how difficult it is to create anything truly new ....but I expressed the remaining part of that thought rather clumsily.....and I would now beg to differ with myself ;-)...it is not so much that everything has been done before....but more that it has become all too easy and all too seductive to replicate, rather than to create something truly new. Our commercial culture has trained us in the art of replication at the expense of both original and imaginative thought.

That is what the mass production that realisticman defends here relies on.

That we all buy into a ready-made vision and a ready-made world.

All malls all over the world now look alike. And so do most of the people that frequent them.

Our culture is being trained en masse. To buy, to think, to look alike.

The art of mass replication.

It is why radical change has become so difficult because they have us down to our shoelaces. Even the lowly shoelace has been marketed to make a statement- instead of the people wearing them. Our things and stuff now speak for us....and define us. Not that clothing etc hasn't historically always done so, but that now the market has become so pervasive, so deeply entrenched, controlling every inch of our lives, that it is hard to be free of its imperious grasp for even a moment - which we now see with little children who are being entwined at earlier and earlier ages into the uniform "delights" of the comodified world...with no time to play freely...before the Machine engages them in its gears and feeds them "the material goods".

The thing with mass production is that our resources are directed away from the community, to the impoverishment of its people, and re-directed towards the ever-increasing "needs" of production and its beastly private club Machine.

We create what we value. And it is quite obvious we need to change what we value, by becoming more aware of what is truly valuable - as we are absurdly choosing the production of lifeless things over the maintenance and conservation of resources that support Life itself.

R/M old man....

http://blog.airdye.com/goodforbusiness/2010/01/25/china-pollution-and-textiles-a-cotton-problem/
The textile industry is a significant source of pollution in China, and it is largely driven by the worldwide demand for cotton products.
It's called NIMBY. I'm sure you've heard of this.

As for the Gulf, let's give it few years. You've heard of Prince William Sound?
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2009/2009-03-24-01.asp
On June 1, 2006, the United States and the State of Alaska notified Exxon Corporation, pursuant to the "reopener" provision in the civil settlement, that additional restoration would be necessary to address injuries that were not foreseen at the time of the 1991 settlement.

The bigger picture

realisticman wrote:

"Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers. The Louisiana fishery reopened three weeks ago. Wasn't it going to be closed for a couple of generations, if not forever? That old Shock doctrine again."

Yes, even Obama said top scientists said there is no longer anything to worry about.

But now, apparently, even "topper" ;-) scientists are saying there is a massive long plume of oil deep under the ocean, many kilometers long and wide. It is moving with the currents and they have no idea yet what the consequences will be - but I think most people could make an intelligent guess how precarious that would be for marine life.

lynn

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=225260

The oil-eating microbes seem to "dislike" the plume. Could that be a function of temperature?

But not to worry: the plume will assimilate with the Dead Zone.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4624359/

And who knows what environmental "Frankenstein's Monster" may yet emerge?

To the barricades...

"It is why radical change has become so difficult because they have us down to our shoelaces. Even the lowly shoelace has been marketed to make a statement- instead of the people wearing them. Our things and stuff now speak for us....and define us." Lynn.

This writing by Lynn, I think, is the most important piece written this thread, starting from a discussion of the tar sands and leading out to this issue of how we change things here, definitively. And she is right.

Along the way here, beginning very soon, there has to be a seismic change begin to happen, as the prelude to everything that is to follow thereafter.

First, a change has to occur in the way we see and think of ourselves, rather than our "stuff" or "no stuff". As part of that, a special kind of selflessness needs to evolve in us, individually and collectively. We need to get in touch with our capacity to be selfless and empathize, in there beneath the layers somewhere of callousness and self-centredness that the system has encouraged in us with its "market centric" ideology, and we see most graphically in our right wingers here.

And then, instead of all the "private" little worlds we are encouraged to create and live within, excluding and exclusive by varying degrees, individual to individual, we need to open up and out to include and engage with our world, with a new fearlessness of those who have manipulated and successfully controlled us to a very large degree. (Through "market forces" and "media messages" manipulation, and fear of being cast down into poverty, without "stuff" if we don't behave or dress in a certain way.)

Before there is any hope in hell of finding a way out of here, this shallowness, and mindless "predictability", as Lynn called it, first we have to change ourselves and the "thinking" traps we have fallen into, no less than "the mass" out there.

But then, in the course of, learning and adapting as we go, because of the interconnectedness of it all, we have to set about changing the world, not far off, in some distant land, but immediately around us. And to do that, we really are going to have to be "unpredictable", in ways that blow "their" minds.

This is a journey scarcely begun, this generation, I think. But then maybe that's an arrogance of another generation. :-)

But Lynn is right. We do have to become "unpredictable" in ways that blow their friggin' minds. And we are going to have to reach across the generations here, 'cause it might, just might actually be harder for us "old radicals" who never really got over it. :-)

But being "fearless" is important too.

To the barricades. :-)

He says as company arrives from the coast. :-) Maybe I'll genteely sip a little scotch whiskey with these good folks first. :-)

Lynn, you keep talking to us, good woman. We need to hear what you have to say. Me too.

coyoteman

Trouble is, we're still living out the "post-revolution" phase of the last few revolutions (French, American, even the industrial - the latter best exemplified by "realistic" man and his pre-occupation with "stuff" - as though 10 buck jeans were importsnt!) But taken together, all these revolutions were laden with the promise of more stuff for the common people. Heck, even the expanionist British Empire couldn't have gotten anywhere without holding out the promise of riches for the commoners.

So in a nutshell, we're still living in the last gasps of the acquisition stage of these revolutions - refusing to believe that there isn't more stuff just over the horizon. And the toffs encourage us in this belief - if for no other reason than it keeps us from focusing on what they are doing.

We have a ways to go yet. Many share the beliefs of "realistic" man, namely that bounty is limitless. But (to tread on Ed Deak's grounds a wee bit) what does it take to make this bounty? And when will the fallout bite us, when will we (if ever) begin linking illnesses (to name just one biggie) to this fallout?

When will we "discover" that our "box" is only one of many?

Rickie

I know about the pollution from textile and leather plants in China and it is absolutely wrong and should be stopped.

The point was/is that 'stuff' is getting cheaper. We are all better off than ever before - whether you buy it or not. Sure there have always been some people that acquire too much 'stuff'. That's not the point. One thing about mass production is automation and that takes the workers out of the picture, out of the factory and into something else.

Anyway, after the fear-mustering sermon's here I'll do something predictable, just like the old radicals, and have a sip of Scotch.

Non Sequitur

Check out Non Sequitur today , Aug. 22, 2010

http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/

for a business analysis.

Interesting thing about China

There are probably a few million very wealthy people there - most of them part of the commercial and industrial management sector, not to mention the party elites - sort of the equivalent of Campbell and his Howe Street puppet masters relative to portion of the BC population they're working to price out of business..but there are more than a billion dirt poor folks spread across the rest of China.

Campbell, Harper, Ignatieff and the gang of thugs who make excuses for them won't be happy until the same proportions apply here in Canada.

That's not a question of fear - it's a matter of fact...sadly, many of the people who are, willy nilly, the victims of the scam, seem to think there's something in it for them.

Interestingly, a lot of those folks don't know much about what Canada used to be like and have no children of their own so the future is pretty much a moot issue too.

We are NOT better off than we’ve ever been – only immigrants to this country would maintain something as patently and obviously wrong as that.

Even prospective refugees, who would legitimately claim that coming to Canada is an improvement for them, have no place in a land of selfish bigots - Harper and his fellow travellers would simply send them home.

Sad.

Who's the bigot?

Revealing drivel proudly marched out - again: "only immigrants to this country would maintain something as patently and obviously wrong as that.". Were you in uniform, saluting and at attention when you wrote that?

Carole James is one of these immigrants you consider unable to grasp the 'truth'.

What do think of this?

"...The government has already welcomed the ship of migrants ashore and is doing its best to process these people according to their humanitarian rights. It has given no indication that they’ll be prohibited from staying in the country. But when the obvious is merely pointed out in passing—the fact that they come from an area known for terrorist and criminal activity—the whole situation is suddenly seen as lacking in “proportion”?

The Liberal opposition still finds fault with Harper’s measured stance: “There's a little bit too much on terrorism and human trafficking and not enough perhaps to indicate, I would say, a little bit of a level of compassion,” says one Liberal MP. “Just a sense of proportion on this whole thing would be nice.”

Perhaps we can look to Liberal opposition leader Michael Ignatieff for a take on how he’d handle the situation: “This boat was in the water for 90 days and ... what was the government doing?

Now we've got a situation where they've docked and they have to have individual confirmation of each one of them.”

Ignatieff was then asked whether he’s was suggesting that the government should have turned the boat back before it got to shore. He responded that no, Canada isn’t Australia. "

Methinks these Liberal clowns should shut up and stop playing politics with the immigrants. That would be nice.

His Igginess.

It'll be interesting to remember Iggy's quote should he ascend to the PM throne. One wonders how he will swallow that statement should he ever meet Australia's PM - particularly if it's the present Labor one.

R/M old man....

What about the pollution, and concommitant ill health? Who pays for those? And where does that come from, considering that the charge for same is not attached "up front" to the baubles that make us "better off". Will the consumers today pay for such? Will the manufacturers? or wil it be the next generations, after you and I are dead and gone?

Tell me, how does borrowing from the bank and not making payments on the loan make one "better off"?

Typical

Another out of context partial quotation.

What was actually written was this:
We are NOT better off than we’ve ever been – only immigrants to this country would maintain something as patently and obviously wrong as that.

I could have added that, in real income and affordability terms we have actually gone significantly backward.

Please try and quote accurately...immigrants, coming from much worse condicions would, naturally, approac the issue like a ltter day Pangloss.

Canadians who've been here, and conscious, since - say the mid 1970s - have an entirely different perspective.

The implication was both clear and unambiguous.

Rickie

I know that you're just a young'un 'cause you keep telling me I'm an old'un, so you probably don't remember when pollution was far worse than it is now. You don't remember belching cars before catalytic converters. Do you not know that salmon are back in the Seine, the Thames and, after a 100 year absence, the Mersey? Do you not know that it was us old women and men that caused a ruckus about things like dead fish from industrial pollutants floating along the Chicago waterfront that forced the creation of the EPA, in 1970, followed by Environment Canada in 1971?

Yes, Rickie my son, things are better now than they were before.

Deeper Digging Embarrassment

Your qualification further confirms your bias. The comment was not even specific to Canadians.

Anyone who'd post this:

The point was/is that 'stuff' is getting cheaper. We are all better off than ever before - whether you buy it or not.

In the face of the facts is the one who ought to be embarrassed. You may be better off, I assure the average Canadian is not...which was the substance of what I wrote. As you well know.

Only someone living in an irovy tower - especially in the most expensive place in the world to own a home - could make such a ridiculous statement.
We ARE NOT BETTER OFF. Every metric shows that Canada was a much more equal and affordable country 30 years ago.

Again, I repeat, only an immigrnant completely unfamiliar with what this country 'used' to be, could write such nonsense.

That isn't bias, it's simply factual analysis.

The comment was very clear - as anyone with a rudimentary understanding of the english language, and having understood the conditional clause contained in the following sentence, would understand..but, I'll repear it again, this time with wmphasis:

Please try and quote accurately...immigrants, coming from much worse conditions would, naturally, approach the issue like a ltter day Pangloss.

"Again, I repeat, only an immigrnant"

You must have met some pleasant immigrants. Ever met any recent ones with a decent brain? There must be one or two. By the way, you don't need the qualifier, "...coming from much worse conditions" because they all come from worse conditions because this is the best place on Earth. Remember?

Prosperity and Growth will save the planet. You really should read Matt Ridley.

http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/prosperity-friend-wildlife

I've met lots of them and read lots of idiot optimists...

Just like Dr Pangloss.

And I've seen some of them write this sort of thing:

We are all better off than ever before...

Which was, since it seems to have failed to register, the whole point of the debate.

Prosperity and growth will not 'save' the planet - they will wreck it - having gone, as it were, very long way in that direction already.

The constant quest for a higher GDP is simply a race to oblivion...

I don't blame immigrants for being happy they're better off here than they were in their 'home countries'...I do expect them to have enough sense to realize that we're going backwards now.

It's not their fault - but they'd do well not to pretend that there are not a lot of people here who aren't very pleased with the ignorance of the policies the politicians and stupid corporate kleptocracy which have gotten this country into this mess.

Things are NOT IMPROVING HERE - they are getting worse with every passing year.

The fact some supporters of the current robber barons don't understand this is hardly news.

I've met lots of immigrants with a decent brain, and most of them agree with me. They acknowledge and thank Canada and Canadians for what they've found here but they freely admit this is not the same country (nor as equitable and full of opportunity) as it was when they came here...They are as shocked as I am at what a mess Canada is making of its promise.

And they would never suggest that things are better now than they have ever been - because thy know it SIMPLY ISN"T TRUE.

R/M old man....

Too bad you haven't factored in the twice as many people now to more than offset your "better"......hmmm?

realisticman

I think your missing the point. The fact is if we were to move to a local economy the model of unlimited capitalism would have to go sure we would have to cut into forests and mine for certain things but we already exploit our land base as it is correct? There is another way to live within our land base the indigenous peoples of North America had been doing it for thousands of years before us "Civilized" folk christen them with the gift of linear progress.

As for the man who wrote the article I find it incredible idiotic. One North Korea as suffered ecological disasters coupled with the lack of international aid (they relied of the Soviets alot) and spending the majority of it's GDP on it's armed forces coupled with corruption from the party ranks it's pretty obvious even to the most simple minded why people are starving in North Korea.

R/M old man....PS as it were

The fact that the Themes and the Seine will support fish once more is more a sign that heavy industry no longer dumps into these rivers - because it's all been shipped off to China, where they do indeed dump into their rivers and lakes. That's one of the reasons the Chinese have every intention of shipping Tibetan water into China. Wait until India & Pakistan "wake up"
http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/2008/world/china-tibet-and-the-strategic-power-of-water/