A Note to Dr. Mike Ellis on 08/06/2010
Mike,
We need a new paradigm of economic development. Given the existing crises and impending otherwise in resource constraints and the lack of equitable allocation, I know that many reject the politics of the G-20, the G-8, the G-1 (the USA) and the Capitalist Plutocracy and concomitant Military Industrial Complex that has been riding centuries of history based on economic Lordism/serfdom, substituted with the Capitalist profit paradigm or requirement of "risk and return".
We need to cut the Gordian knot and reject such servitude and replace it with an ethos and modus operandi and intentional evolution to Homa Ecologica Cooperativo. Practical translation of such involves much education, particularly with respect to the goals of community organization, cooperation, and solidarity, and eventual direct action of the taking of Treasuries resources for direct, non-usurious, allocation to individuals and communities (in the form of community betterment organizations) based on need. The mission is One of ecological economic redevelopment inculcated on the principles of inclusion, humanity, equity, altruism, well-being and quality of life, sustainability, and peace. This is a cooperative communitarian/socialist economic democracy paradigm of "plan and implement".
Being that most calls for socialism only clamor against the offending parties, and make weak attempts to organize within the political constraints and organizational and media domination, some with an impossible and misguided agenda of electoral victory and others with the misguided and premature agenda of revolution. What the political reformers and the cheerleaders of revolution have in common is a complete lack of understanding of the resource concerns and fundamental economic reorganization that is necessary.
I think that it is necessary to mitigate the inhumanities of the progressions of the industrial revolution and phase back more of an industrious ethic that goes along with relocalized artisanry, human ecology, agroecology (including urban agroecology) and an ethic of peace, cooperation, and solidarity.
Given that I feel much alone, although it is completely eclectic, in the enunciation of this paradigm, I call upon you for expressions of solidarity and commitment to aid in the furtherance of this mission. Please do not tarry with respect to a response, particularly related to how we can progress.
In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity,
Mike Morin
512 W. 10th Avenue, #2
Eugene, OR 97401
1-541-343-3808
www.peoplesequityunion.blogspot.com
Showing posts with label Relocalization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Relocalization. Show all posts
Friday, August 6, 2010
Monday, October 12, 2009
Response To Transportation (Trucking) Industry Publication Communicating Gary Locke’s (Obama’s Secretary of Commerce) Downplaying of “Climate Change”
I tend to believe that the greenhouse effect and global/warming climate change is real. We have had evidence for more than 40 years and the overwhelming geophysical evidence presented by scientists almost seems to be at consensus these days.
An associated problem, which will prove to be just as large, if not significantly larger, is the problem related to post-peak oil. It is a well-accepted belief, if not fact, that we have probably passed the peak of oil resources available for our squanderous consumption. After all, it is a finite planet and it takes millions of years under special geologic conditions to form an oil field. The effort, though considerable; to find, extract, transport, refine, transport, and exhaust (yes, poof - gone FOREVER) is but a relative flash in the pan in human history.
The world uses about 80 million barrels a day of oil. Fully 25% of that (approximately 20 million barrels a day) are consumed by the people of the continental United States, 14 million of those barrels used in the transportation sector alone.
If we want to conserve precious fossil fuels for priority uses such as solar assisted heating, cooking, electricity generation, cooling, agricultural inputs, durable products, necessary industrial processes, inter-community and inter-regional transport within a paradigm of relocalization for all communities and regions (moving towards self-sufficiency), and preserve the luxury and convenience of occasional automobile and airplane travel in a manner that explicitly adjusts for economic disruption, then we must plan and implement, allocate our resources accordingly.
We are currently on a linear projection into oblivion. We must reassess the role of the automobile and airplane in our society/economy. A huge job creations program could be realized by rebuilding our sprawled neighborhoods and reallocating production and distribution resources, so that almost all have the quality of life advantages of having their needs and reasonable wants, and the capability of making a living, available within walking distance of their homes. Such a relocalization (towards self-sufficiency) program will have the effect of reducing personal automobile use by 80% in the next 20 to 40 years, freeing up precious, yet finite fossil fuels for priority uses.
There will always be a need for long-range transport, as few if any regions could realize total self-sufficiency and comparative advantages do exist. However, the transportation industry can do their part for the youth and children, the survival of the species, by considering their role and the adjustments that will need to be made (in shifting to a more regional and inter-community/within regions economy).
Please consider the policies, programs, strategies, and actions that you can take to cooperate.
Mike Morin
Eugene, OR, USA
wiserunion@earthlink.net
(541) 343-3808
An associated problem, which will prove to be just as large, if not significantly larger, is the problem related to post-peak oil. It is a well-accepted belief, if not fact, that we have probably passed the peak of oil resources available for our squanderous consumption. After all, it is a finite planet and it takes millions of years under special geologic conditions to form an oil field. The effort, though considerable; to find, extract, transport, refine, transport, and exhaust (yes, poof - gone FOREVER) is but a relative flash in the pan in human history.
The world uses about 80 million barrels a day of oil. Fully 25% of that (approximately 20 million barrels a day) are consumed by the people of the continental United States, 14 million of those barrels used in the transportation sector alone.
If we want to conserve precious fossil fuels for priority uses such as solar assisted heating, cooking, electricity generation, cooling, agricultural inputs, durable products, necessary industrial processes, inter-community and inter-regional transport within a paradigm of relocalization for all communities and regions (moving towards self-sufficiency), and preserve the luxury and convenience of occasional automobile and airplane travel in a manner that explicitly adjusts for economic disruption, then we must plan and implement, allocate our resources accordingly.
We are currently on a linear projection into oblivion. We must reassess the role of the automobile and airplane in our society/economy. A huge job creations program could be realized by rebuilding our sprawled neighborhoods and reallocating production and distribution resources, so that almost all have the quality of life advantages of having their needs and reasonable wants, and the capability of making a living, available within walking distance of their homes. Such a relocalization (towards self-sufficiency) program will have the effect of reducing personal automobile use by 80% in the next 20 to 40 years, freeing up precious, yet finite fossil fuels for priority uses.
There will always be a need for long-range transport, as few if any regions could realize total self-sufficiency and comparative advantages do exist. However, the transportation industry can do their part for the youth and children, the survival of the species, by considering their role and the adjustments that will need to be made (in shifting to a more regional and inter-community/within regions economy).
Please consider the policies, programs, strategies, and actions that you can take to cooperate.
Mike Morin
Eugene, OR, USA
wiserunion@earthlink.net
(541) 343-3808
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Expanded "Community Supported Agriculture"
Expanded "Community Supported Agriculture"
I am really, for the most part, borrowing the name Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) (or maybe I'm lifting it).
Maybe it would be better to come up with a new name like, Locally and Regionally and Inter-regionally Community Supported Agriculture (LARIRCSA) ;-) .
"Conventional" CSAs are well intentioned in that they strive to have community members share the risks associated with farming with the farmers. Fair enough, and my plan shares that objective. However, the problem with CSAs and buying your food by the pound is that early in the season, you'd probably get more strawberries than you can eat (unless you have the luxury time and resources to make jam), there are varieties of tomatoes so those can be stretched out over at least part of the growing season, but most crops tend to come to fruition in relative batches, so the variety in food boxes probably is not optimal. I'm not a farmer, and have limited experience with gardening, so correct me if I'm wrong.
Secondly, mixed cropping implies more labor intensive farming, really extended gardening. While such a system would be much more healthy from many perspectives, it would be difficult for farmers employing such methods to compete with conventional farms.
Third, there are distribution issues. Who is responsible for getting the food box from the farmer to the "member"? It would be uneconomical for the farmer(s) to be responsible for the distribution, and it defeats the purpose of demand-side management relative to "consumer" activity to have the members drive all the way to the farm. Now, if members live in close proximity, then this would not be a concern.
Fourth, in places like Oregon, and even more northern climes, the harvest season is very short. It, like the growing season can be extended slightly, perhaps, by building hot houses, but only slightly.
Fifth, the extra planning involved would probably be too cumbersome for farmers.
I envision, and it may be happening (I don't know), farmers within regions and from different regions forming unions to gain control over the distribution of their products, working with cooperating truckers, warehouse handlers and associated cooperating retail outlets (perhaps incorporating pre-order systems (wouldn't electronic systems be helpful)), in a system of community/worker hybrid cooperative associations.
Similarly, relationships could be built relative to the recycling of organic wastes (of course, the objective would be to minimize such, as it would be to minimize packaging).
Now, the issue of seasonal farm workers needs to be dealt with. Migrant farm-working should be eliminated. Seasonal workers need to be accommodated to their needs during the off-seasons, so that they can have the quality of life of a sedentary community. Again, I don't know the status of such a proposal. Maybe it is already happening... Certainly, a year-round living wage, equity inclusion, and educational programs so that the young can assume more progressively responsible and more highly compensated roles in the food system will need to occur.
I am really, for the most part, borrowing the name Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) (or maybe I'm lifting it).
Maybe it would be better to come up with a new name like, Locally and Regionally and Inter-regionally Community Supported Agriculture (LARIRCSA) ;-) .
"Conventional" CSAs are well intentioned in that they strive to have community members share the risks associated with farming with the farmers. Fair enough, and my plan shares that objective. However, the problem with CSAs and buying your food by the pound is that early in the season, you'd probably get more strawberries than you can eat (unless you have the luxury time and resources to make jam), there are varieties of tomatoes so those can be stretched out over at least part of the growing season, but most crops tend to come to fruition in relative batches, so the variety in food boxes probably is not optimal. I'm not a farmer, and have limited experience with gardening, so correct me if I'm wrong.
Secondly, mixed cropping implies more labor intensive farming, really extended gardening. While such a system would be much more healthy from many perspectives, it would be difficult for farmers employing such methods to compete with conventional farms.
Third, there are distribution issues. Who is responsible for getting the food box from the farmer to the "member"? It would be uneconomical for the farmer(s) to be responsible for the distribution, and it defeats the purpose of demand-side management relative to "consumer" activity to have the members drive all the way to the farm. Now, if members live in close proximity, then this would not be a concern.
Fourth, in places like Oregon, and even more northern climes, the harvest season is very short. It, like the growing season can be extended slightly, perhaps, by building hot houses, but only slightly.
Fifth, the extra planning involved would probably be too cumbersome for farmers.
I envision, and it may be happening (I don't know), farmers within regions and from different regions forming unions to gain control over the distribution of their products, working with cooperating truckers, warehouse handlers and associated cooperating retail outlets (perhaps incorporating pre-order systems (wouldn't electronic systems be helpful)), in a system of community/worker hybrid cooperative associations.
Similarly, relationships could be built relative to the recycling of organic wastes (of course, the objective would be to minimize such, as it would be to minimize packaging).
Now, the issue of seasonal farm workers needs to be dealt with. Migrant farm-working should be eliminated. Seasonal workers need to be accommodated to their needs during the off-seasons, so that they can have the quality of life of a sedentary community. Again, I don't know the status of such a proposal. Maybe it is already happening... Certainly, a year-round living wage, equity inclusion, and educational programs so that the young can assume more progressively responsible and more highly compensated roles in the food system will need to occur.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Agriculture and Food Issues
Agriculture and Food Issues
Hi Folks,
Since being the catalyst and one of the principal organizers of a four day conference, "Towards Self-Sufficiency", on local, regional and world food issues in 1976 (in the Amherst, MA area), I have had an interest in what you are now calling "food security".
I expand the concept of Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) to the idea of regional/local community/worker hybrid cooperatives or at very least cooperating independent businesses. We need to vertically and horizontally integrate all down the line and across business sectors, with respect to growing, distribution, recycling organic wastes and educating about the need and benefits of relocalization, including equity and humanity with respect to workers and humanity with respect to animals, and responsibility with respect to the environment, with respect to eating healthily, and with respect to minimizing packaging. We also need to diversify risks relative to other necessities and our overall plans to rebuild our neighborhoods to make them walkable.
If we can't get direct cooperation and friendly participation from Capitalists who can be arrogant, self-serving, and dishonest about their historic and their perception and presumption of continuing "competitive advantage", then we surely need to be aware just how severe the competition will be, and we all better pull together with great solidarity, one way or another.
With regards to rice, are you aware that by flooding and farming wetlands to grow rice, we destroy the areas where FISH, birds and other critters spawn and sometimes make their home? Food for thought (pun intended)!
Also think about the use of planting/harvesting greasy machinery or defecating beasts and the use of any sort of fertilizer and competitive species control, be it non-organic or mythically organic, and their effects on the wetlands and associated riparian and ocean environments.
If you're one of these "back to human power" warners or advocates, think about just how hard that labor is/would be...
I suggest that we advocate the ingestion of "dryland" grasses (e.g. wheat, corn, rye), excluding alcohol products, minimizing processing, and packaging, and IF we make all the other necessary demand side management and transition away from tobacco and alcohol and corn syrup beverages THEN we should consider the use of biofuels as a small part of our supply side energy program.
Hi Folks,
Since being the catalyst and one of the principal organizers of a four day conference, "Towards Self-Sufficiency", on local, regional and world food issues in 1976 (in the Amherst, MA area), I have had an interest in what you are now calling "food security".
I expand the concept of Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) to the idea of regional/local community/worker hybrid cooperatives or at very least cooperating independent businesses. We need to vertically and horizontally integrate all down the line and across business sectors, with respect to growing, distribution, recycling organic wastes and educating about the need and benefits of relocalization, including equity and humanity with respect to workers and humanity with respect to animals, and responsibility with respect to the environment, with respect to eating healthily, and with respect to minimizing packaging. We also need to diversify risks relative to other necessities and our overall plans to rebuild our neighborhoods to make them walkable.
If we can't get direct cooperation and friendly participation from Capitalists who can be arrogant, self-serving, and dishonest about their historic and their perception and presumption of continuing "competitive advantage", then we surely need to be aware just how severe the competition will be, and we all better pull together with great solidarity, one way or another.
With regards to rice, are you aware that by flooding and farming wetlands to grow rice, we destroy the areas where FISH, birds and other critters spawn and sometimes make their home? Food for thought (pun intended)!
Also think about the use of planting/harvesting greasy machinery or defecating beasts and the use of any sort of fertilizer and competitive species control, be it non-organic or mythically organic, and their effects on the wetlands and associated riparian and ocean environments.
If you're one of these "back to human power" warners or advocates, think about just how hard that labor is/would be...
I suggest that we advocate the ingestion of "dryland" grasses (e.g. wheat, corn, rye), excluding alcohol products, minimizing processing, and packaging, and IF we make all the other necessary demand side management and transition away from tobacco and alcohol and corn syrup beverages THEN we should consider the use of biofuels as a small part of our supply side energy program.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Relocalization
Relocalization is an important part of a strategy towards equitable/sustainable quality of life communities. It will take a long time to realize such especially with respect to production. The one area that people seem to be focusing on is food production.
In an area like the Eugene-Springfiled, OR/Willamette River Valley such a strategy of "towards self-sufficiency" in food production is more feasible than let's say New York City, in which they would have to define their region/hinterlands much more extensively. (the imperialistic fingers of NYC stretch much more widely than the do fo a place like, let's say Des Moines, IA.
Every region has what Economists call a "Comparative" Advantage. The Central Valley in California is the best agricultural land on the planet. Saudi Arabia and the surrounds has oil. New York City has the knowledge and structural base to dominate the financial system., etc. The Comparative Region plays into how resources are used and/or exploited in an area. I can not an envision an economy where this completely goes away. What we have to do when planning inter-community development is recognize the comparative advantage (or disadvantage) of our neighborhood, and the comparative advantage of our larger bio-region (carving up the world into bio-regions will be problematic, but it makes more sense than the totally arbitrary State). We also have to recognize the comparative advantage of other regions, particularly those closest to us and come up with mutually trading schemes that will optimize both the comparative advantage and relocalization paradigms in an equitable and sustainabe manner . It will need to be a slow, methodical, planned transition. It will take much understanding, much communication, a committment to fair trade, and a committment to cooperation.
Perhaps the biggest obstacle for such beneficial change lies in what Economists call "Competitive" Advantage. Simply put, it's "I own the resources and you don't!" There are international, regional, and local financial elites, large business holders and investors, lnadlords, etc. The Plan of an Equity Union is to pull all ownership equity into one large resource and re-allocate it to communities based on needs of sustainable living, equity concerns (especialy for the poor) and to transition to a quality of life paradigm as opposed to one that emphasizes "standard of living" (he with the most and most expensive toys, wins).
Inter-community and inter-regional equity is a major goal.
In an area like the Eugene-Springfiled, OR/Willamette River Valley such a strategy of "towards self-sufficiency" in food production is more feasible than let's say New York City, in which they would have to define their region/hinterlands much more extensively. (the imperialistic fingers of NYC stretch much more widely than the do fo a place like, let's say Des Moines, IA.
Every region has what Economists call a "Comparative" Advantage. The Central Valley in California is the best agricultural land on the planet. Saudi Arabia and the surrounds has oil. New York City has the knowledge and structural base to dominate the financial system., etc. The Comparative Region plays into how resources are used and/or exploited in an area. I can not an envision an economy where this completely goes away. What we have to do when planning inter-community development is recognize the comparative advantage (or disadvantage) of our neighborhood, and the comparative advantage of our larger bio-region (carving up the world into bio-regions will be problematic, but it makes more sense than the totally arbitrary State). We also have to recognize the comparative advantage of other regions, particularly those closest to us and come up with mutually trading schemes that will optimize both the comparative advantage and relocalization paradigms in an equitable and sustainabe manner . It will need to be a slow, methodical, planned transition. It will take much understanding, much communication, a committment to fair trade, and a committment to cooperation.
Perhaps the biggest obstacle for such beneficial change lies in what Economists call "Competitive" Advantage. Simply put, it's "I own the resources and you don't!" There are international, regional, and local financial elites, large business holders and investors, lnadlords, etc. The Plan of an Equity Union is to pull all ownership equity into one large resource and re-allocate it to communities based on needs of sustainable living, equity concerns (especialy for the poor) and to transition to a quality of life paradigm as opposed to one that emphasizes "standard of living" (he with the most and most expensive toys, wins).
Inter-community and inter-regional equity is a major goal.
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)
