A word on consideration

A~ had her shoulder surgery today. She has a very hard time with medications, particularly narcodic ones. We try not to take drugs here other than the occasional ibuprophren or Acetomeniphen for the standard aches and pains so she's very sensitive to them. She came through the surgery alright, they found a bone spur, scarring and tissue inflamation and her joint was "loose" and they "tightened" it (don't ask... it's kinda gross.). The hardest part was waking and being able to eat/drink. She made it and I love her for how she pushed through it in her own time.

I have to ask as a result of today though, "What has happened to consideration?" I can understand the other patience in a room being a little loud or loopy, they're on God knows what kind of drugs. But while A~ tried to deal with nausea and falling in and out of sleep, she was jerked awake more than once, or thrice for that matter, by loud laughter and talking. And I'm not just being sensitive because it was my sweetheart. It was ridiculous. People talk and laughed behind the curtains like they were in their own rooms! And here's the kicker; the nurses and doctors were the loudest. I know all about where one doctor likes to vacation with his family down in southern Utah, and where another nurse used to live on the east side of the valley. Oh yes, and let us not overlook the nurse who felt the need to sing happy birthday to some other nurse over the PA system! Yep, that was one of the times A~ jerked awake and looked at me like I'd just shaken her bed.

I'm sorry to have to subject you all to this rant but honestly, I just had to get it off my chest. I'm so tired of the prevalence of inconsiderate people! It's a sad commentary... isn't it? Or am I just a whiner who's over reacting? Are people more and more inconsiderate of others around them or is it just me? Maybe I'm just out of the loop because I don't use a cell phone normally so I'm not used to thinking I'm always in a "private" conversation. Who knows?

In the end, I just thank the lord my wife is well, I pray she heals quickly and I thank you for letting me vent!

Peace all...
P~

Overhauling the Dow Jones

I read today about a debate that’s been going on about whether or not the Dow Jones Industrial average should be overhauled to show a more “accurate” picture of the nation’s economy. As far as I can tell, the argument is that since the long established names like GE, GM and Alcoa are all having such a miserable time, the analysts feel as though they may no longer be good indicators of the market as a whole. This may in fact be the case or it may not be, but either way it leads me to think. Is this a “slippery slope”?

One of the reasons that we establish indexes in the first place is so that we have a free-standing measure to gauge things by. The companies that are a part of the DOW are companies that, when you really think about it, represent a broad sector of the greater economy. For instance, in addition to the aforementioned three which are in the electronics, automotive and Aluminum fields, there are banks like B-of-A and Citigroup, the oil and gas companies Chevron and Exxon, technology companies like Microsoft and Intel and miscellaneous food, entertainment and retail companies like Kraft, Disney and Wal-Mart. (You can find the entire listing here). So you can see it pretty much covers all the big components of our economic picture. So here’s the 10 million dollar question (Read: 800 billion dollar question.) Is the Dow outdated, or are we really just that bad off right now?

I submit that I think it's no more logical to “overhaul”, “revamp” or “update” the Dow Jones Industrial average than it is for one of my kids teachers decide to re-define course requirements because too many of the students are failing. (This is something I’ve seen as a matter of fact and thought to be incredibly shortsighted.) The poor performance, whether it is students or economic entities, is not due to the measure being used it is due to some systemic problem that has revealed itself by way of that measure. The grades and the stock ticker numbers are only indices. They don’t make the problem, they only report it. To take away or change the method that the index is pulled from immediately weakens the entire process. How are we supposed to have confidence that the market is really getting better in the future if we know that when it got really bad the powers that be decided to “tweak” the numbers. Who’s to say that in another ten years Google (which is one of the companies being tossed around as a new member of the index) won’t be defunct and irrelevant?

Now I’m no great economic thinker mind you; in fact I’m novice at best. The thing that gets me so spun up about this stuff is that we seem to be continually moving in this direction and with so many things. I don’t know where it can lead us but to ruin. The facts as I see them are irrefutable and constant. We can’t have a gain without a loss like we can’t have light without dark; the higher the gain, the greater the equivalent loss. If you look at the history of our money with respect to the Dow Jones you’ll see something interesting. For the 39 yr period from Jan. 1930 thru Jan. 1969 the Dow rose from 286 to 935, a gain of over 300%. Great right? Now look at the period from Jan. 1969 to Jan. 2007. In that period the Dow soared from that 935 number to 12,354, a gain of over 1300%! How? Did we suddenly have more money? Did we enter a golden age of phenomenal wealth building? Well yeah, kind of, we changed the way we counted our money in 1971 when we completely pulled it off the gold standard. Once that pesky physical limitation was lifted we were only dealing with numbers. Credit use soared, personal savings dwindled and the market went through the roof.

Unfortunately for us, I think we're in the hangover phase right now. The Dow has dropped something like 49% from October 2007. That's 3% per month. So should we change the way we measure it? No, I don't think so. What I do think may be good for us is to really take a hard look at the decisions we make, how we save our money and how we spend it. The Dow is just one of our indicators. It doesn't need to be changed with breezes it just needs to be seen for what it is. Our economy is not healthy right now and there's no reason to change things just to make us feel better, or worse yet to make us complacent enough so that we go out and spend again.

That's about all I have to say on the matter before I start rambling so I'll check out now. Hope you all have a great day tomorrow.
Namaste
P~

Hope and Change...

Big words huh? So what now? Most of you know that I'm a Conservative. I believe that for the most part we are a conservative nation as well. I don't mean Republican; putting party labels on things, in my opinion, serves no end but to pull people apart into opposing camps and as long as we're pointing fingers across isles we won't get anything meaningful done. I mean conservative as in I want to "conserve" family values, I want to "conserve" our environment and our resources and I want to "conserve" the stability of our economy. I voted, but I didn't vote for Obama, for that matter I didn't vote for McCain either. So now, I'm in the position of HOPING that CHANGE really is possible some how.

In his inauguration address, our new President Obama said these words,

"In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted — for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things — some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom."

I don't know how that strikes me to be honest. I believe it on the face of it, but somehow it just rings too... what's the word... naive perhaps? As I said, I agree with it on the face of it. There have been multitudes of people, as he said, that have laboured in obscurity. And our freedoms have come to us via no small loss. Is it still true in the majority though? Are we still willing to earn it?

Our journey has had shortcuts and settling for less. More and more of it of late as a matter of fact. I know I'm guilty of buying the cheaper items because while it may be lesser quality it is more affordable than either paying more or not getting the item. It has become a journey, in no small part, for those who prefer leisure and seek only riches and fame. If you're not sure of that look only to the selfish corruption in so many corporations and banks or to the vapid fame of the reality shows where anyone can sell themselves for a bit of spotlight.

Yeah, I'm all for hope and change, I guess I just need a little more "meat" to understand how we're going to get there.

I pray for President Obama, that he will have wisdom in these very trying times. That he will be able to prove to me that he is more than a slogan and that he can continue to find that elusive way to inspire the American people even when they get tired of the sacrifices and inconveniences that are facing many of them. I pray that we, the American people can live up to our own expectations and rather than follow an inspiring speaker, can lead the way to what is right and good for us in the long run not necessarily just today.

I have hope. Hope for change and hope for our future. I hope you do too.

Namaste.
P~

What do you think?

I was thinking to myself yesterday, as I checked in on the news about the potential bailout...err credit availability and liquidity security measures (my words, not theirs.) that are pending approval of the Congress currently, what would happen if they didn't bail them out?

Let me first say that this is a thought process, not an opinion piece. I haven't made up my mind on this whole thing yet, whether I think it's a good idea or not that is. My first instinct tells me to say no, don't do it. I believe in the power of the free-market and that it can correct itself and fill a vacuum when it exists. If a business doesn't manage itself well or provide a product that is in demand, it goes away. But can a single industry be so integral to a nation's survival that allowing it to dissolve would surely doom the nation itself to mass economic suffering or would it's failure merely set the nation on a new and different path - one that could benefit it in the long run?

As I said, I don't have the answers, I won't even pretend that I do, but I do have some ideas that I'm trying to weigh as I come to grips with things. For instance, let's say the big 3 don't get the billions they are asking for. Now we have potentially a million people out of work, what do they do? What did people in that part of the country do before cars came along? Could they potentially fill the labor shortage we keep hearing about? You know, the one that warrants all of the undocumented laborers coming into the country because "no-one else will do these jobs." Maybe. And maybe with that kind of mass labor pool available to us, we could start to get some of our farms in that part of the world producing actual food, since one of the big arguments against sustainable agriculture is that it takes too much labor to do.

But would they be able to live in such a way? Are we headed for a deflationary spiral, that's what the Great Depression was thought of as, where the cost of goods will "reset" itself to a low enough level that a person could live respectably on less? Or perhaps the changes and challenges facing us will bring us through to a new place, where we don't think we need as much to feel like we're living respectably?

Another thought, the one that really ruffles my feathers, is that even though I, as previously mentioned, believe in the free-market I don't know how long I can continue it? Is it still free? I mean have we gotten to a point where politicians need so much money to get into position that the only way they can get it is by getting in bed with big corporations which by default makes them beholden to them later? How skewed are the rules when the bigger a corporation is, the more it is potentially able to get bailed out by the gov? Mom and pop don't get bailed out if they can't compete with Big box "X". How is that free market?

What's your opinion of these bailouts, both past and potential? I'm still agnostic on them. There's too much to take into consideration. I guess I'm just glad to have a good job, and to have a great bunch of "sounding boards" like you all out there...

I guess I've rambled on enough for one night... till next time.

Addressing a comment

I got a comment posted today that I thought I would address. I don't do this to be confrontational, but I could see it being taken as such so I wanted to state for the record that that is not the intent. I had posted some time back about whether I was missing something in how we seemed to have skipped the entire Thanksgiving season. Today I got this post from a friend, neighbor and fellow blogger:

Happy "Native America Genocide Day!"
Sorry to be the wet sheet, many "American Indians" or "Native Americans" (such as myself) feel that if our forefathers hadn't held the first Thanksgiving, we might not have gone through the culling and near extermination that the settlers forced upon the native peoples.
Another common sentiment among native peoples is that our proverbial olive branch and welcoming gesture that was the First Thanksgiving was not reciprocated by the white settlers, and was answered with deceit and (despite what is force-fed to our children in public schools).
Anyhow, not trying to put a damper on anyone's holiday celebrations, just bringing up another point of view.
- http://www.joelevi.com/

To a point I know where he's coming from. I mean, our U.S. history is littered with the remnants of many cultures, not the least of which is the Native American Indians. They were in large part a trusting people when the visitors from overseas came to their shores and yes, they were mistreated, abused, killed and removed from their native lands in many cases. It is a black mark on American History.
It's not the only one though is it? What about slavery? How about the way that nearly every group of immigrants has been persecuted when they first arrived? Even the Irish were considered inferior to Anglo Americans and called unassimilatable into US culture once upon a time.

So what's my point, to ignore the plight on our Native American population because "hey, other groups had it hard too?" No. My point is that the greater promise of America, in my opinion, does not lie in rehashing our failures of the past. I wouldn't expect my children, who are of easily traceable Irish descent, to hold a grudge against their country because their ancestors were relegated to the worst jobs. I don't believe in allowing ones name, or race to hold them back either. The only boundaries we have in our way that can truly impede us are the ones we place there ourselves. No, I believe in fact that the greatest promise the America holds and the reason that day after day and year after year there are people from around the globe clamouring to get in here, is that we have the ability to admit our mistakes, do our best to correct them, and even more so, we have the unique gift of largely being able to decide for ourselves what it is that we will be able to attain.

The Irish, Italian and Asian communities (among others) have overcome the prejudices that were in their way. The children of black slaves have opportunities that their grandparents could only have dreamed of, to include of course the attaining of the highest office. And for myself, son of a poor kid who's Dad pushed him to do better for himself and, oh yeah, a direct descendant of Native Americans as well, I'm pretty proud of my country even with it's mistakes.

So just as Christmas has evolved from it's early Christian/pagan origins and became what it is today. (Minus of course the over-commercializing of it. That's another story.) So too has Thanksgiving evolved. Most people celebrate Thanksgiving today, with exception to the "token pilgrim/Indian decorations", not as a time of thanks for being welcomed to this continent, or celebration for the way the native population was wronged in the process, but rather as a time to give thanks to their God and their family for the blessings that they have. Thanks for the time we have to spend together, and to give to others of their time and their bounty.

So, that's my opinion on the matter. As stated, I don't mean to be confrontational, but it's my blog and while I will not edit (with obvious exception of spam or vulgarity) the comments left here, I can't say that I will agree with them all. Nor will I sit quietly all the time.
Thank you.
P~

End of Consumerism?

As I listened to Talk of the Nation this evening, I heard an interesting notion being thrown out there, that we may be seeing the end of “The age of consumerism”. Really? Have we really gotten to that point? I’ve talked many times about reducing consumption, and I do truly believe that somewhere therein lays our future economic model. A lot of people – bloggers, pundits, activists and ordinary folks alike – are out there touting the benefits of abandoning our consumerist ways. Back to the land, simple living, DIY’ers or whatever the reason, there is one thing that we need to keep in mind. Whether or not we like it, we need an economy in this world. If it should it be a global or a local one I don’t pretend to know, but it will mean that we are consumers to some point. Some kind of goods or services will be exchanged. As I said, I’ve talked about this before, and I stand by my general belief that we need to reduce what we consume. I don’t, however, think that we should try to eliminate consumption, or should hold as the ultimate goal, for that matter, the elimination of consumption. But I do think that we should take a look closely at how we’ve been doing it.

As I see it, the conundrum with the whole consumerist - vs. - non-consumerist argument is that the conventional wisdom holds that economic growth is the solution to our economic problems, and that more buying is at the root of our economy. Buy more…better economy…where’s the argument right? More people buy stuff, which means more money is floating around, which means that more people get hired to service the buyers, which puts more money back into the system; it’s trickle-down economics at its core. Well the argument is valid if we take it at face value, but we aren’t are we. We’re not actually buying things when we’re out shopping. Alright some of us are, but most folks have been out there charging it or financing it. Don’t mistake that for buying, it is not the same thing. It’s merely a promise to buy something a little at a time. If that person and oh…200,000 or so friends of his… default on their loans, debts, credit cards, homes and whatever else, the manufacturers are left holding the bag. They can’t then pay their debtors, who in return say “Screw this!! I’m just gonna hold on to my money before I lose more!” And then you reach the point at which we find ourselves today don’t you? It’s financial gridlock or, to coin a phrase, “Trickle-up economic crisis.”

Take a look at the past 35 years with me. In 1972-75 and again in 1980-82, we had two 2 year recessions that were caused primarily by “oil shocks” where our need outpaced what we produced or could import. In the late 80’s/early 90’s we had another recession mainly attributed to a decrease in Industrial production and manufacturing-trade sales (Read: Chrysler (Sound familiar?)) And then in the late 90’s we had the infamous “dot-com” bubble burst. All three, whether energy based, manufacturing based or investment based, caused a major glitch in our economic system at the time. Right now we’re looking at all of them at the same time. Our housing bubble has burst, energy prices though lower right now have just come down from historic highs and OPEC is trying to get them back up there soon and the “heart of our industrial and manufacturing base”, the auto industry, is poised for bankruptcy. Add to that the fact that our banks are flailing and looking for ever more of our taxpayer dollars which can only cause enormous inflation in the future and the downward spiraling stock market and we’re looking at some tough times ahead whether we like it or not; many are already feeling them.

So let’s revisit that notion of reduced consumerism shall we? Let’s say that we don’t buy as much stuff, but when we do buy stuff we actually do BUY it. (Meaning of course that we pay for it with real money at the time we purchase it.) So now, the money that is flowing into the system is real money, meaning that it has been spent and transferred in ownership and can now be invested, loaned, kept or used for other REAL purchases. Wouldn’t the economy still grow? Wouldn’t there still be the opportunity to build wealth and use a free market, albeit perhaps a more equitable one? I can’t help but believe that it would be a more stable one. What if we started to embrace the idea of a green economy, where we were employing people in the professions of building and maintaining our own power so that then the money that we were spending on power could stay here in our economy as well rather than to send it oversees. What if we looked at our homes, not as banks to pull money out of when we wanted a new toy or wanted to pay off the ones we already bought and where we don’t even know the neighbors name but can tell you what kind of car he drives, but rather saw them as long term commitments where we helped to build communities and raise our kids. What would that be like huh? How would it be if we saved some of our money and invested it in our local banks, banks that by the way are one of the only sectors of the banking industry to be still afloat on its own? Am I being “pie in the sky here?” Is it possible? I don’t know but I’m tired of living the other way. I will still consume. I have to, and so too do you most likely. But I do know that the way I consume is changing and that’s for sure.

And look on the bright side, if we handle this the right way, maybe we’ll see a much better foundation on the other side.

Here's to hope!!

P~

I wanted to clarify something from the article as well. It stated that “…President Bush's advice when asked, after the 9/11 attacks, what Americans should be doing. He urged Americans to keep shopping.” That isn’t actually completely accurate, although it does cut to the core of it. What he actually did say was “I ask your continued participation and confidence in the American economy.“ and at the time I think that that was good advice. We had been hit by something beyond our control, and we were scared. Our economy suffered then, but it could be healed by “business as usual”. He did however directly urge us to keep shopping in another speech, much more recently, when in a Dec. 2006 speech he stated, “A recent report on retail sales shows a strong beginning to the holiday shopping season across the country -- and I encourage you all to go shopping more.” Just holding the media to a modicum of accountability there.

You're a LIAR and a FOOL ... now, let's change the world.

Not really the best way to go about things is it? Supposing you and I were both after the same job; and say you and I argue for, let’s say a year and a half. We call each other liars, talk about how bad the other person would make things, explain why we are right and people ought to listen to OUR point of view and go to great lengths to point out to the world every stupid thing the other has ever said or done. The longer it goes on, the more our friends and allies start to polarize against each other because, now they think to themselves, “Geez, I thought that person was so smart, but they want THAT person to lead the way?” and quietly, and sometimes not so quietly, they start to bicker about things too. Then one day… *POOF*… argument settled! It’s been decided that one of us is the one that is going to lead the way and make the big decisions. Now let’s all come together and sing coombayah, and make the world a better place. What? You’re not still angry about all that “…you lied and you’ll ruin the world..” stuff are you? Come on, we have serious work to do here.
Well, that’s pretty much politics as usual and I’m sorry (not really), but I’m just not going to be a part of it. As I’ve spent a little of my precious time over the last couple of weeks watching and listening to the presidential convention speeches, I’ve thought a couple of times about making a post about one thing or another; I’ve heard things from both candidates that I’ve agreed with to a great extent. My issue with the whole process and particularly how it relates to my blog, is this. I have a pseudo mission statement for this blog that's been pretty plainly laid out in a few of the posts throughout it’s time online and is very succinctly stated in the title itself. “Possibility to Reality”. I spent a good number of years arguing about policies and politics and guess what? It really didn't change the country, and most certainly DID change me. The more I concentrated on what my position was on things, and even more so on why the people that had the opposing position were wrong, the more and more unhappier I became. Have you ever noticed that, regardless of what a candidate actually does once their elected, voters tend to be more apt to get out and vote FOR something, rather than AGAINST something. In other words, no matter how much one candidate tends to point out how bad the other person is, if they don't actually stand for something specific themselves, they generally lose. Why? Because I think people naturally want to think positively of things. They want to be a part of the future and a part of something greater than themselves.

My concern is this. If we buy into the partisanship that's peddled to us through all of the standard media outlets. If we just re wrap articles from the Times or Tribunes of the world filtered by our particular biases (whatever they are we can substantiate them, trust me!) and further perpetuate the divisions of our country, then we do a disservice, not only to ourselves and our readers, but an even greater disservice to our country and our future as a whole.

We, I believe, stand at a crossroads. We are at a time when not only are we facing economic woes or the possibility of peak oil and climate change, we have wars and power plays taking place in many places at once. We have a bankruptcy of not only capitol but of morality and self control and a culture of self gratification that demands more for less at a moments notice. These are things that are changing. Things that MUST change. Things that our government, regardless of who's elected, will not be able to change on it's own. They more than likely will not even consider that many of the problems need changing. So we need to come together and lead. To show our elected officials that they need to come together to make the big changes as well. How are they to do that, how are we to do that, if we have been trained to point at how wrong the other side is and vote solely on "party lines". In that case, we are too busy looking at the splinter in our neighbors eye than at the log in our own.

I've read a few other blogs this last week that I feel got a bit mired in this kind of partisanship. Some are ones that I read regularly, others are ones I visit only occasionally. I don't think less of any of them, I understand their passion for these things and for the changes that they hope for. I just hope that we in this "new media", with our overwhelming freedom to offer suggestions and solutions and our ability to lead the way to these changes through our own example, will look not to furthering the divisions in our greatest nation, but to healing them. I ask you to find the possible. Find it, embrace it, share it and make it the reality. We can do it!

Namaste...

P~

Cars suck!! So, What can we do?

They do! They suck-up gas, they suck-up time, they suck-up resources and they suck-up space. But what the heck are we supposed to do? You’ll have to forgive me, I had an “I hate cars” day today and it’s most likely of my own doing which is the most frustrating part. A~ called me this morning from the store while she was out running some errands to inform me that our Ford Focus was dead. This wasn’t necessarily a surprised since when we got it a few months ago we were told that the battery was the original and was getting a bit weak after 8 yrs. The frustrating part is that while we have been trying to nurse it along through the summer months I thought just last night, “I need to check that battery and make sure it’s good, I’d hate A~ to get stuck somewhere.” Sure as heck I didn’t, I got caught up in something else and forgot about it. (Yep…I’m human!!) So now I get this call from A~ and I’m at work not more than a couple miles up the road. But I ride my bike to work, so what good am I? I borrow my co-workers car and run down to jump her (the car that is, not A~ ;-)) and head back to work. By then she’s gotten home and calls me to say our other car, the one I normally drive, is also dead. No doubt from lack of use, since I’ve driven it so rarely in the last month that I haven’t had to fill its 10 gal tank since June 9th and still have half a tank left. (Hey, that’s like a gallon a week. Dang that’s pretty good!) Anyway, so now I have two dysfunctional vehicles taking up space in our garage, and a generally bad attitude. I’ll get a new battery for the Focus and that’ll fix that problem, and I can charge the Toyota to fix that one but geez, what a pain. How much time and money do we spend on these “conveniences”? And what other option do we have? It’s kind of a quandary isn’t it?
A lot of the people that read this blog have expressed a desire to get “back to the land” so to speak; to get a little piece of land somewhere and work it, to have a bigger garden and raise a few animals, and live more sustainably. To a great degree I put myself in that group. But what does/will that mean in the future? Land out in the country is, by its very nature, out in the country and being “in the country” means quick bike rides to the store are out, as are most of the professions that many of us are in. So now we are in the position of having to drive everywhere we need to go. Not the best of circumstances to either increase our sustainability or our independence. The other thing, as was mentioned by Meadowlark the other day in a comment on “The Times are Changin Tuesday”, is that many of us already own the dread gas sucking SUV. What are we supposed to do with them? She states, "It is a dream world to think we're going to melt down all the SUV's and they'll disappear from the world." and you know what, she's right. They're here, many of us own them, and it's not realistic to think that their just going to go away and everyone is going to ride bikes or drive prius's Not only that, but what kind of impact on the local landfills do you think it would have if they suddenly got filled with old SUV's? That's not even mentioning the impact to our already stretched pocketbooks but I'll get to that tomorrow when I continue this post. Be well folks.

P~

The Hunt / Selling America

Well as I said, I didn't get a deer this year. But as I also said, it wasn't for lack of trying. the photo to the left is a picture from near the apex of my hike last friday while I was trying to track my quarry. If you enlarge it you'll see the arrow that seems to point to the side of a hill, it's actually pointing to the valley beyond it. This is where I started my hike that day. All told it came out to be about 6 miles and a little over 1000 verticle feet, and still nothing. I can't say it was for nothing though, there's really not a better way of seeing this part of the country. I do have a little bitch though. While I was out hunting and walking my legs off, I came across a few others and learned that most of the area I was hunting had been recently sold off to a developer who was planning to divide it and sell it off into 10-20 acre "Ranchettes". I'm torn on this to a certain degree. On the one hand I believe that if a person works hard and can afford the luxuries that life affords then it is up to them to decide which of those they want to have. I am a strong believer in personal freedom and rights, and typically a very staunch opponent of governmental regulation. I can't however, get myself to a point where I think that it is OK for the goverment to sell off our country into ranchettes. My son in all his 12 yr old wisdom asked me, "What's the difference between that and where our house was built? It used to be farms right?" Yeah it did, and although that land was purchased from an individual, it originally was a possession to some degree of the government, probably homesteaded and claimed sometime along the way. So what is the difference? I guess time, and perspective. We are in a different time; we've moved beyond the point where we merely took and claimed land. As for perspective, the land that we live in is far less uncommon than the mountain lands that I'm talking about. I guess I see them as national treasures, things to be kept and maintained for posterity and shared by all. While spending time in the mountains over the last few years I see more and more private property areas. No trespassing signs are becoming the norm, and more and more the "common" man is being relegated to strips of land here and there where logging is common and hunting is scarce. It's a sad fact I guess. This being said, I would still like to have a small cabin of my own some day, not a Ranchette mind you but a small place where my family and I can be in and enjoy the woods, not necesarily own them. I learned to share when I was a kid and I don't have a problem with it today, but how do you justify selling just small portions and not large ones without regulation? See my quandry? What's your opinion?

P~

For the record (repost)

I was reading No Impact Man this morning, and again, was motivated by todays blog entry and decided to repost a previous writing of mine. It's a slightly different take on essentially the same thing that he was covering. I think it's an appropriate issue, and a legitimate one to address around Memorial day. We have a great number of fine men and women out there defending not only us, but our way of life. As long as we maintain the status quo, we will continue to have to fight for stability in a region that controls the majority of the resource that that way of life depends on; OIL.

Repost follows:
So, why not jump right in with one of my loves; alternative power. I have been reading an article about a new solar polymer foil that is being worked on by a Swiss company. good reading if one is so inclined. I want to state for reference and posterity some opinions of mine with regard to this, alternative energy and self sufficiency that is. Let's get a couple of things on the record. I am first of all conservative, nay not just conservative but A Conservative. Now don't take this too mean that I am a kool-aid drinking, bush can do no wrong, republicans are always right no matter what conservative. There are many issues that I will deal with in the future that I know I will disagree with many people on, I'll do this because I am irrepresibly stuck on myself and my opinions. I admit it, but I am also able to see two sides of a coin. This brings me to the alternative power debate. I do agree with seeking alternative feuls, and power generation sources. I think that we will be failing ourselves and our posterity if we do not. Where I diverge from many peoples argument is that I do not buy into the panic regarding the plight of earth. That's not to say that I deny that the world is getting warmer, but I am also not arrogant enough to think that we as humans are so advanced that we can begin to understand the way that the good Lord made our planet to function. I remember being told the globe would be well frozen by now back in the 80's. I look at the issue like this; we are consistantly paying ever increasing rates for fuel, and fighting wars in countries that control the oil. And no I don't believe the bush war for oil mantra of a lot of the protesters out there. But with so much of a vested interest in maintaining oil supply and fuel flow, how could our government, left or right, not fight for our interests there. Another reason for my advocacy of alternatives is best illustrated by the havok in the New Orleans floods, Seattle wind storms, and the frigid northeast recently. We have such a mindset of waiting to be done for, that when circumstances change, or are thrown into chaos, where are we left? For my part I look at the need for alternatives as both a fiscal and responsibility issue. Fiscal in that I will save in the future, and will be self sufficient as much as possible. Responsibility, because as a husband and parent I want to make sure that I 1.) provide as best I can for my family, 2.) take care of the environment and the resources that we have and 3.) help my country to achieve true independance by severing our dependance on foreign oil. That pretty much wraps that up. Quite a digression from a quick post about some new energy technology wasn't it? Til next time.
P~

No Impact Man, green or gr$$n

A lot of the criticism around the "no impact man" project comes from the possibility of him earning a living off of it. Or in some way benefitting it. This is something that I have noticed in a lot of the different comments that have been made to his postings since I have been reading it. I particularly noticed a lot of it during the period right after his televisions appearances. Today it showed up again, in his posting about taking matters into your own hands, it was again brought up by a commenter to the site that;

"If you really care about the earth, then donate the profits of your upcoming book to a worthy charity. Otherwise, stop pretending that you care about the environment more than the almighty dollar."

I may be overestimating myself and my powers of perception, but I don't see what one has to do with the other. We have all heard the mantra about the evil corporate entities out there corrupting everything they touch. To the extent that there are businesses out there with no concern towards anyone or anything but the shareholders and the bottom line this is based in fact. I don't believe that Colin falls into that catagory. The thing I see as a common thread to a lot of the activists and/or very environmentally conscious persons out there is the idea that it is better to be poor and working only for "The Mission", than to be able to make money at the same time as taking a stand for causes that we believe in. So often it is a topic of conversation about companies that are environmentally conscious, or are trying to reduce there footprint on the earth, and these companies are held up as beakons of what is possible, and how things could be(Which I agree, should be the case.) . Even in the same comments section as the one I am referring to here, Patagonia was held up as a positive corporate role model. Are these companies expected to give back the money that they make, or even the money they may save for that matter in order to validate that they do in fact care about the planet? I don't think most of us would argue that point. I certainly would not. If fact, I would argue that by showing that these companies and individuals can make a living, at the same time as having a positive influence on the environment, we will encourage other companies to look to alternatives to the mainstream ways of doing things and could in fact have a still greater influence on the world than they are already.
Do I believe that Colin, the "No Impact Man", is deliberately trying to profit off the environment by drawing attention to his project? No. Do I think that it is beyond the scope of such a thing to happen today. Again, No. In this day and age we have to be discerning with the people or entities that we hold up as role models. Unfortunately I think a lot of people out there are far to fast to believe anything that they are told or see in a soundbite news media, and are far to influenced by what the world says they should care about. But I submit that if a person is genuinely doing something that can influence huge numbers of people to rethink there actions, or to begin to take steps to reduce their impact, and that person is able to make a buck at the same time while maintaining their integrity, good for them.
Please share your thoughts with me, I'd love to know if I am alone on this one?
P~

IKEA Madness

There is a new IKEA store opening today just south of Salt Lake City. I was born in Sweden; my mothers side is 100% Swede. I grew up with that sense of style and love for all things culturally swedish, so yeah I have to say I am a little excited to be able to pick up a Marabou chocolate bar, and some good meatballs. But the buzz that I have been hearing about this place has me stopped dead in my tracks. The city of Draper where the new store is located has actually been working on a traffic plan for the last 6 months because of the number of people they are expecting! Last night the news was talking about the number of people camping out there waiting for it to open. ??? Are we THAT deprived of shopping venues here? Like I said, I look forward to going there. But I just can never wrap my brain around waiting overnight for a store opening. I kept thinking, "We have really gotten to a new level of mad consumption habits when a new store is like a cultural phenomenon." I guess the best I can say is that at least from my understanding IKEA is a pretty responsible retailer. For my part I'll wait until the fervor dies down a bit and I need to go that way for something anyway.
P~

Reduce, Recyle, Reuse!

Take one pile of "unusable" concrete waste left over from trampling march of urban sprawl.

Break into manageable pieces, and transport to "refining" facility.

Once there, add two heaping helpings of manual labor. (And yes, I mean HEAPING HELPINGS!)

And Voila! Beautiful, garden edging, complete with "Rustic" cobblestone-like appearance for that quaint English garden look!

To me this is what Reduce, Reuse, Recycle is all about. Reduce what you consume, Reuse something in order to accomplish your goal, and Recycle because it saves resources and $$.

Get out there and see what you can find to reuse. It feels great to have something beautiful for nothing, and to get a good feeling for helping the environment to boot!

Positive outlook.

I was told by an old friend of mine recently with reference to politics that he wants "ANYONE but Bush!" in '08. This got me thinking that besides the obvious fact that it will be by default anyone but Bush, based solely on term limits (which is a topic for a whole other conversation), but that this was an incredibly pessimistic way of looking at our future. Let me get to the root of this phrase as I see it.
To me, saying "Anyone but Bush" is making far too simple a requirement of anyone hopeing to be the Commander and Chief of our great country. Our country was founded and rooted in hope, and possibilities. Our forefathers knew what was possible if men were left to be free to decide, and if they had hope for a better future for themselves and their families. To not look for a candidate, regardless one's political leaning, that offers hope and can outline the possibilities as they see them; to only look for someone that is the antithesis of the current administration, can only lead to disappointment. How hard is it to imagine a polititian that knows people are only looking for "Anyone but..." to tell you exactly what you are telling him you want to hear. They wouldn't be required to be a thinker, or to have any plan for the future, only to aspouse a disagreement with the current. If the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, do you just keep jumping the fence, or do you take a little time to find a good gardener to green up the side your on? Or better yet, get your hands dirty and work to green it up yourself!
I have made a decision to try my hardest to focus on the positive in this life. I get frustrated by things, and at times just plain hate the status quo. But I think one is always better served by looking for a positive solution than by complaining about the problem.
That's my opinion for what it's worth.
P~

Inspiring

Tonight I had a good friend of mine call unexpectedly and invite me to a lecture being given by David McCullough. This friend of mine obviously gets me as much as I thought he did, one of the few that do.
The speaker is not someone that I am familiar with, but was speaking primarily on American History. He is a pulitzer prize winning author and historian and well worth the time to listen to.
He brought up a lot of things that really made sense to me. Talking about our founding fathers and the struggles that they went through to get us to the point where we are now really made me reflect. We have things so easy for us now that we take for granted all of the sacrifices that have been made for us. Not just by our founding fathers, but by others in our lives. My own father grew up very modestly. My Grandfather had only the basic education, but knew the keys to success and he gifted them to his children. My dad worked hard, continued his education and set goals for himself. He learned to love and to share through fights and truces with his six siblings. His sacrifice, and his lessons allowed my life to be substantially easier that his. I appreciate this enormously. However, as illustrated by poor choices early in my adult life I failed to receive the lessons that he had. This was not for any lack of trying on my dads part. God knows we still tease him about the lectures. I believe the lack of sacrifice had not given me the opportunity to build the desire to push farther. I'm lucky to have weathered my trials later in life and come out for the better.
The lecture tonight brought me to think about our nation and its history of advancement. Our founders suffered tyrants and won their freedom, their children fought with each other and with others to protect our freedoms. They lived through famine, disease and economic depression. Today we've reaped the benefit of our fathers lessons and hard work. Our lives are simple and clean. I fear sometimes that we are doomed to make similar mistakes as a country that I made as a young man. I'll continue to try to make myself better, and give my children a sense of where they come from. It is our duty to our nation and it's future to make sure that we have given a sense of perspective and duty to our children. They will need it for their future. If they forget, or worse yet never learn about the sacrifices before this time, they are destined to learn them the hard way.

That's all for tonight.
P~

Children ??

I’ve been thinking today about my children. They are truly a blessing in my life. I know a few couples that have decided definitively not to have children, and some others that “plan” to but never seem to feel like they’re ready for them. I feel the need to pontificate on this topic, bear with me.
As I’ve said, I feel blessed to be able to have the children that I have. I currently have a very good relationship with three of my boys; my divorce from the mother of my oldest son has presented some significant road blocks to having one with him, but we do the best that we can. For the record, the road blocks are not all her fault. As his father there are a lot of things I could, or perhaps should, have done better. I point this out for the sole purpose of tempering my point of view. I can come off a bit “know it allish”.
I am somewhat torn on the idea of people not wanting to have children at all. One part of me thinks, “What’s wrong with you? How could you not want to?” while the other part argues back with,” You know, if someone doesn’t really want kids it’s better for them to not have any, than to do it out of some societal obligation.” I guess this is the point where I have to ask the follow up question “what is the reason for not wanting to have them?” I think it really just comes down to just three possible answers;

• I don’t like kids and I don’t want them
• I don’t want kids because they’ll get in the way of my goals, my social life
and the things I want to do
• I feel that the world/earth is in trouble and I can’t see bringing children into a place like this.

The first argument I can deal with. If someone just doesn’t like kids, I guess they have the right to choose not to bring any into the world. However, I think many people that don’t like them have either been the repeated victims of neglectful parents (i.e. the screaming kid in a restaurant, kids running up and down the movie theater isles, etc.) or really fall into the second group. This argument is propbably becoming more and more common these days, as so many kids are being raised by a day care, or Mtv and never get a chance to learn good social habits.
The second argument I think is the best reason to not have any children; it is honest and takes a good bit of guts to admit. Again, I think most fall into this category but don’t have the gumption to admit it.
Now the third argument; this is the one I balk at. If we accept the premise that the world/earth is in trouble; whether that be from impending drastic climate change, wars, or geo-political unrest (BTW I don’t subscribe to any of these, but to play Advocatus diaboli…) then I would argue that we have a duty to try to change that course. I’ll deal with this in the next installment of this thread.
-To Be Continued
P~