I have serious problems with using the State of Oregon as a focus for intercourse.
States, like Nation-States have arbitrary borders and are mostly irrelevant, military/police entities created often long ago by aristocracies dividing up someone else's land among their friends and military partners.
The neighborhood needs to be the focus of Planning and Economic Re-development, and inter-community relations need to be built, understood, and maintained. The Planning Region should be some combination of metropolitan areas and watersheds, and the largest sphere of consideration, the planet earth.
Currently states and municipalities are important with respect to a most important consideration, education. But, that needs to change, as well.
Showing posts with label Neighborhood Planning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Neighborhood Planning. Show all posts
Monday, January 5, 2009
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Everywhere Men
(adapted from John Lennon’s “Nowhere Man”)
We are real everywhere men
Workin’ in our everywhere lands
Making all our everywhere plans for everybuddy
We all have our point of view
But people where are we going to
Everywhere men ain’t we a bit like me and you
Everywhere men don’t worry
Give your love don’t scurry
Everywhere men the world needs your helping hands
We are real everywhere men
Working in our everywhere lands
Making all our everywhere plans for everybuddy
We all have our point of view
But children where are we going to
Everywhere men ain’t they a bit like me and you
Everywhere men don’t worry
Work real hard don’t hurry
Give it all
‘til sumbuddy else lends you a hand
We are real everywhere men
Workin’ in our everywhere lands
Making all our everywhere plans
For everybuddy
Making all our everywhere plans for everybuddy…
(adapted from John Lennon’s “Nowhere Man”)
We are real everywhere men
Workin’ in our everywhere lands
Making all our everywhere plans for everybuddy
We all have our point of view
But people where are we going to
Everywhere men ain’t we a bit like me and you
Everywhere men don’t worry
Give your love don’t scurry
Everywhere men the world needs your helping hands
We are real everywhere men
Working in our everywhere lands
Making all our everywhere plans for everybuddy
We all have our point of view
But children where are we going to
Everywhere men ain’t they a bit like me and you
Everywhere men don’t worry
Work real hard don’t hurry
Give it all
‘til sumbuddy else lends you a hand
We are real everywhere men
Workin’ in our everywhere lands
Making all our everywhere plans
For everybuddy
Making all our everywhere plans for everybuddy…
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Communications
With respect to the very large issue of the communications industry, again, the issue is the control of economic resources.
We need to start in all neighborhoods/local communities and build, or acquire and renovate, community centers that would serve to facilitate public meetings, intra and inter-community communications (internet-access, inter and intra-community radio and tele-conferencing, community television (associated with educational programming to be discussed later) and distribution space to facilitate the distribution of essential goods and services to walkable neighborhoods (whenever possible - meaning that rural communities would be very difficult to impossible to make "walkable" - although clustering of farmsteads would consitute a walkable neighborhood) as a very important focus of all our plans and further economic activity.
As the master of understatement, I assert that there is almost unlimited growth potential for the improvement in educational, and secondarily entertainment, media. A Communications Committee, working in concert with other economic sectors within the context of a highly principled ecological economic plan could request and receive non or not-for-profit "investments" from the Peoples' Equity Union. Neighborhood/Community allocations would be controlled by associated "branches", metropolitan and regional decisions controlled by appropriate administrative units, and matters of world-wide scope be decided by an appropriate Committee.
By the way, that is how I would propose all Peoples' Equity Union funds be allocated to all sectors of the economy. The decision-making process has to be primarily from the bottom to top. By that I mean, control of resources within a community and to a community begins with the community. Of course there will be transition issues as the current competitive advantage in the Capitalist economy is held by an inter-regional elite. All decisions of fund allocations will be subject to adherance to the mission, principles, strategies, and tactics of the Plan.
Classroom education needs to be reformed accordingly, as well. I'd like to discuss this in more detail at a later time or date.
I most certainly welcome and look forward to discussion on these and all related matters.
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
(541) 343-3808
We need to start in all neighborhoods/local communities and build, or acquire and renovate, community centers that would serve to facilitate public meetings, intra and inter-community communications (internet-access, inter and intra-community radio and tele-conferencing, community television (associated with educational programming to be discussed later) and distribution space to facilitate the distribution of essential goods and services to walkable neighborhoods (whenever possible - meaning that rural communities would be very difficult to impossible to make "walkable" - although clustering of farmsteads would consitute a walkable neighborhood) as a very important focus of all our plans and further economic activity.
As the master of understatement, I assert that there is almost unlimited growth potential for the improvement in educational, and secondarily entertainment, media. A Communications Committee, working in concert with other economic sectors within the context of a highly principled ecological economic plan could request and receive non or not-for-profit "investments" from the Peoples' Equity Union. Neighborhood/Community allocations would be controlled by associated "branches", metropolitan and regional decisions controlled by appropriate administrative units, and matters of world-wide scope be decided by an appropriate Committee.
By the way, that is how I would propose all Peoples' Equity Union funds be allocated to all sectors of the economy. The decision-making process has to be primarily from the bottom to top. By that I mean, control of resources within a community and to a community begins with the community. Of course there will be transition issues as the current competitive advantage in the Capitalist economy is held by an inter-regional elite. All decisions of fund allocations will be subject to adherance to the mission, principles, strategies, and tactics of the Plan.
Classroom education needs to be reformed accordingly, as well. I'd like to discuss this in more detail at a later time or date.
I most certainly welcome and look forward to discussion on these and all related matters.
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
(541) 343-3808
Friday, December 26, 2008
Demand Side Management, Energy, and Reform
I would like to address the supply side scenario for energy production based on assumptions of economic growth requiring an increase in the use of energy.
The trouble with focusing on supply side economics and energy is that they both ignore demand. In relation to economics, the lack of effective demand for the plethora of consumer products will prove to be the downfall of this past generation’s experiment with supply side economics. With respect to energy, we must recognize that demand side management is critical to any possibility of a sustainable future. Liberal economics (laissez faire, the so-called free market) can not deal with the problem(s). We need a planned economy to effectively retrofit the infrastructure and to rebuild our communities to be walkable, therefore eliminating the terrible daily waste of oil/energy resources for transportation purposes.
I have to differ with rosy scenarios regarding the contribution that photovoltaics can make. I’m not an electrical engineer or an electrician, but it is my understanding that PVs don’t have the oomph (be it voltage, amperage, and/or wattage) to contribute very significantly to the current and recommended increased usage of electricity. Sure, PVs and wind might be able to contribute to lighting applications and a few very high efficiency appliances, but they can not power our transportation, industrial, business, and home heating and air conditioning, hot water, agricultural inputs, refrigeration, drying, and cooking needs.
We could go full throttle to the building of nuclear power plants, but I am highly leery of their toxicity and safety issues. Even if we pursued the path of electrification with the maximization of nuclear power, it will require a tremendous overhaul of our transportation infrastructure, and other applications currently met by oil products, coal, and natural gas.
First of all, nuclear is not a “free market” technology. Government programs paid for most of the resources for development of such. Then, there is the waste issue. Is it not the Federal Government who is going to or proposing to pay for the waste depository at Yucca Mountain (Nevada)? Also, there is the issue of bringing back the so-called Price-Anderson legislation. This was legislation in which the Federal Government provided insurance for nuclear power plants and related operations. No private insurer would underwrite the risks, thus the Feds had to step in.
Perhaps a better scenario could be realized if we started very soon with a planned economy that focused first on economic and energy demand side management and also retrofitted infrastructures with respect to very scarce and relatively clean (I view carbon resources, if appropriately used, to be cleaner than nuclear) energy applications.
The potential for solar thermal hot water is immense, especially with such hot water heaters equipped with concave magnifying lenses to concentrate the rays of the sun. Imagine all hot water demanding properties on the planet equipped with such devices. Imagine all the (community/worker owned) jobs involved with the production, installation, and distribution of these units. I list distribution last, because all efforts need to be made to maximize the localization of such production and installation, as well as any other products for which going towards relocalization may be possible (e.g. food).
Relocalization is part of the plan (and not just for food). Instead of reversalism, the term that the author Staniford has coined as being emblematic of the relocalization paradigm, let me offer the following "re" words that imply a gradual evolution to a future which incorporates the best of the past, for your consideration, response, and action.
Reformation
Little to no beneficial change will occur without an almost religious change from the paradigm of economic growth and standard of living to one that emphasizes community redevelopment and quality of life. This is an important educational component of an alternative ecological economic plan.
Reorganization
If we can be successful and realize the educational/reform component, the next (concurrent) step is to reorganize to one of cooperative (or at least partially so – we will probably need to compromise on the divide between one dollar/one vote and one person/one vote as the dominant paradigm of economic organization) communitarian local and regional economic entities, at least until the day that we are all nearly equal in terms of ownership of the means and goods of production and distribution. How to assure the transition from inequality is problematic. However, as the entire economic system begins and proceeds to fail, those wealthy seeking to avoid total financial ruin will welcome the opportunity to accept the quality of life paradigm, foregoing their opulent, ostentatious, enslaving, ecocidal, genocidal, and suicidal "standard of living" modus operandi.
Reallocation
We need coordinated regional planning agencies that agree on the fundamental mission of a global ecological economy that have the two basic pillars of sustainability and equity. These “planning” agencies would work together and with the local/regional economic entities to determine how resources are allocated to and within communities based on the relocalization paradigm and other governing principles. The vehicle, That I envision here is a Peoples’ Equity Union with “branches” in all communities/neighborhoods.
Restructuring
Communities will need to be physically rebuilt to make them walkable (i.e. new urbanism, retrofitting residential communities built in the oil/automobile age by building
community economic and cultural centers making necessities and other important quality of life amenities available to all within walking distance of their homes). Included in such a plan would be neighborhood work stations which would aid in the ability of office workers to telecommute in their occupations as we transition from a Capitalist economy to a Socialist one. Imagine all the jobs!
Reducing
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
To post a comment, either click on the title of this essay, or click on the small print on the bottom that says either, "0 comments", "1 comment", "2 comments", etc.
The trouble with focusing on supply side economics and energy is that they both ignore demand. In relation to economics, the lack of effective demand for the plethora of consumer products will prove to be the downfall of this past generation’s experiment with supply side economics. With respect to energy, we must recognize that demand side management is critical to any possibility of a sustainable future. Liberal economics (laissez faire, the so-called free market) can not deal with the problem(s). We need a planned economy to effectively retrofit the infrastructure and to rebuild our communities to be walkable, therefore eliminating the terrible daily waste of oil/energy resources for transportation purposes.
I have to differ with rosy scenarios regarding the contribution that photovoltaics can make. I’m not an electrical engineer or an electrician, but it is my understanding that PVs don’t have the oomph (be it voltage, amperage, and/or wattage) to contribute very significantly to the current and recommended increased usage of electricity. Sure, PVs and wind might be able to contribute to lighting applications and a few very high efficiency appliances, but they can not power our transportation, industrial, business, and home heating and air conditioning, hot water, agricultural inputs, refrigeration, drying, and cooking needs.
We could go full throttle to the building of nuclear power plants, but I am highly leery of their toxicity and safety issues. Even if we pursued the path of electrification with the maximization of nuclear power, it will require a tremendous overhaul of our transportation infrastructure, and other applications currently met by oil products, coal, and natural gas.
First of all, nuclear is not a “free market” technology. Government programs paid for most of the resources for development of such. Then, there is the waste issue. Is it not the Federal Government who is going to or proposing to pay for the waste depository at Yucca Mountain (Nevada)? Also, there is the issue of bringing back the so-called Price-Anderson legislation. This was legislation in which the Federal Government provided insurance for nuclear power plants and related operations. No private insurer would underwrite the risks, thus the Feds had to step in.
Perhaps a better scenario could be realized if we started very soon with a planned economy that focused first on economic and energy demand side management and also retrofitted infrastructures with respect to very scarce and relatively clean (I view carbon resources, if appropriately used, to be cleaner than nuclear) energy applications.
The potential for solar thermal hot water is immense, especially with such hot water heaters equipped with concave magnifying lenses to concentrate the rays of the sun. Imagine all hot water demanding properties on the planet equipped with such devices. Imagine all the (community/worker owned) jobs involved with the production, installation, and distribution of these units. I list distribution last, because all efforts need to be made to maximize the localization of such production and installation, as well as any other products for which going towards relocalization may be possible (e.g. food).
Relocalization is part of the plan (and not just for food). Instead of reversalism, the term that the author Staniford has coined as being emblematic of the relocalization paradigm, let me offer the following "re" words that imply a gradual evolution to a future which incorporates the best of the past, for your consideration, response, and action.
Reformation
Little to no beneficial change will occur without an almost religious change from the paradigm of economic growth and standard of living to one that emphasizes community redevelopment and quality of life. This is an important educational component of an alternative ecological economic plan.
Reorganization
If we can be successful and realize the educational/reform component, the next (concurrent) step is to reorganize to one of cooperative (or at least partially so – we will probably need to compromise on the divide between one dollar/one vote and one person/one vote as the dominant paradigm of economic organization) communitarian local and regional economic entities, at least until the day that we are all nearly equal in terms of ownership of the means and goods of production and distribution. How to assure the transition from inequality is problematic. However, as the entire economic system begins and proceeds to fail, those wealthy seeking to avoid total financial ruin will welcome the opportunity to accept the quality of life paradigm, foregoing their opulent, ostentatious, enslaving, ecocidal, genocidal, and suicidal "standard of living" modus operandi.
Reallocation
We need coordinated regional planning agencies that agree on the fundamental mission of a global ecological economy that have the two basic pillars of sustainability and equity. These “planning” agencies would work together and with the local/regional economic entities to determine how resources are allocated to and within communities based on the relocalization paradigm and other governing principles. The vehicle, That I envision here is a Peoples’ Equity Union with “branches” in all communities/neighborhoods.
Restructuring
Communities will need to be physically rebuilt to make them walkable (i.e. new urbanism, retrofitting residential communities built in the oil/automobile age by building
community economic and cultural centers making necessities and other important quality of life amenities available to all within walking distance of their homes). Included in such a plan would be neighborhood work stations which would aid in the ability of office workers to telecommute in their occupations as we transition from a Capitalist economy to a Socialist one. Imagine all the jobs!
Reducing
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
To post a comment, either click on the title of this essay, or click on the small print on the bottom that says either, "0 comments", "1 comment", "2 comments", etc.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Transportation and Related Planning
In response to a query about the role of electric vehicles. I answered as follows:
With respect to electric vehicles, my thoughts are that they may be a small part of a longer term solution and probably restricted to rebuilt/walkable urban and suburban neighborhoods for the use of the elderly and/or infirm. The top priority with respect to fossil fuels and other energy resources is demand side management. The chief priority in planning the role of the automobile is to reduce automobile use by 80% in the next 20 to 40 years. We are currently burdened by a terrible oversupply (including owned and overstocked inventories at factories and dealerships) of fuel inefficient and poorly designed internal combustion vehicles. If these vehicles weren't so poorly designed, there could be a significant opportunity to convert them to hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles. But they are very poorly designed. Perhaps the current population of vehicles should be deconstructed and parts reused or recycled. New vehicles should be exclusively, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric, except maybe for long-term transport and work vehicles.
There could be tremendous amounts of work generated by the reconstruction of neighborhoods and the rearrangement of production, distribution, and communication systems to make them neighborhood friendly. In addition, a great potential for work lies in the field of deconstruction of transportation and related infrastructure adaptation. Parking lots could be torn up and converted to community gardens. Streets (and rail systems) could be torn up and converted to walking and bike paths (and perhaps slow electric vehicles for the infirm) and others altered to be less wide, restoring the liveability of housing located on these very noisy busy passageways. Parking garages could be torn down and replaced by mixed use developments. Highways could be dedicated mostly to bus travel, long distance transport, and perhaps some, if not many, of them torn down and reclaimed as natural and agricultural land. For automobile and small truck usage, it would be optimal to encourage the development of vehicle-sharing cooperatives. All vehicles left in use must be quiet, and slower (with the exception of busses, work vehicles, and long range transport). With respect to transport and distribution systems (and production systems) relocalization and neighborhood telecommunications (including teleconferencing facilities) should be the major goal, greatly reducing the need for long-range travel, especially that which is not related to the long range transport of necessities.
Relocalization of production needs to be encouraged whenever feasible.
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
With respect to electric vehicles, my thoughts are that they may be a small part of a longer term solution and probably restricted to rebuilt/walkable urban and suburban neighborhoods for the use of the elderly and/or infirm. The top priority with respect to fossil fuels and other energy resources is demand side management. The chief priority in planning the role of the automobile is to reduce automobile use by 80% in the next 20 to 40 years. We are currently burdened by a terrible oversupply (including owned and overstocked inventories at factories and dealerships) of fuel inefficient and poorly designed internal combustion vehicles. If these vehicles weren't so poorly designed, there could be a significant opportunity to convert them to hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles. But they are very poorly designed. Perhaps the current population of vehicles should be deconstructed and parts reused or recycled. New vehicles should be exclusively, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric, except maybe for long-term transport and work vehicles.
There could be tremendous amounts of work generated by the reconstruction of neighborhoods and the rearrangement of production, distribution, and communication systems to make them neighborhood friendly. In addition, a great potential for work lies in the field of deconstruction of transportation and related infrastructure adaptation. Parking lots could be torn up and converted to community gardens. Streets (and rail systems) could be torn up and converted to walking and bike paths (and perhaps slow electric vehicles for the infirm) and others altered to be less wide, restoring the liveability of housing located on these very noisy busy passageways. Parking garages could be torn down and replaced by mixed use developments. Highways could be dedicated mostly to bus travel, long distance transport, and perhaps some, if not many, of them torn down and reclaimed as natural and agricultural land. For automobile and small truck usage, it would be optimal to encourage the development of vehicle-sharing cooperatives. All vehicles left in use must be quiet, and slower (with the exception of busses, work vehicles, and long range transport). With respect to transport and distribution systems (and production systems) relocalization and neighborhood telecommunications (including teleconferencing facilities) should be the major goal, greatly reducing the need for long-range travel, especially that which is not related to the long range transport of necessities.
Relocalization of production needs to be encouraged whenever feasible.
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
