"an inconvenient truth"
Dennis Mac Leod
dennismacleod at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 6 07:12:01 PDT 2006
Part of the problem is that in a lot of cases we don't pay the true costs of our economic decisions. Some costs are moved to society as a whole, or to government, or to future generations. This makes some products, services, or processes look cheaper than others, but in the end the less expensive choice ends up costing us all much more!
Dennis
Jo Clute <josepi at doitnow.com> wrote: v\:* { BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML) } o\:* { BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML) } w\:* { BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML) } .shape { BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML) } st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) } This so sounds like John Stossel's "Give me a break". One of my favorite books. I agree with you 100%. Until then lets just hope this movie actually effects normal people to just act within their own capabilities:, effecting the market by deciding where to spend their own money. (buying from local producers, not buying inneficient cars, buying the right lightbulb, buying the tankless waterheater..... free market moves a helluva lot quicker than politics. Walmart's are taking over the planet because we shop there 24/7
I do know that up until I saw it, my building decisions were based on economy and not morality. That has shifted. Its expensive to put dual cooling in. Now it just has to happen. And one can usually never recoup an investment of higher than average insulation in a home. But now, it just has to be done. The legacy of the structure can not contribute to, in theory or otherwise, the continued erosion of the earth's natural balance.
on PBS a few weeks ago, I saw, that during 911, when all the planes were grounded for those three days, climatologists measured the earth's average temperature and found that it actually rose three degrees during this time. The explanation is that the particulates and pollution emanating from all of the aircraft in the air actually refracted some of the sun's radiation-hence cooling the earth. So, ironically, it is the world's pollution that is keeping the temperature down. But on the flip side, decreasing pollution must coincide with decreasing green house gases otherwise, the "actual" temperature increases of the earths global temperature will show its true reading which would be even higher had the pollution not existed.
I always use to joke and say well, nothing really matters when it comes to the evolution of the human species a million years from now. But '50 years from now' is no inconceivable evolution., That is with in my lifetime. We will actually see this happen. The most devastating thing about this movie, in my opinion, is that we have the technology today to end it. and more irony?.......The American auto manufacturers are actually losing money and consequently doing huge layoffs (hurting our national economy) because they are acting "immorally" and using irresponsible technology AND maintaining our dependence on oil, foreign or otherwise. But for why? I mean,how much frickin money does one human being (i, e, a ceo of these conglomerates) need to where it costs a community their entire work force, the nation, a unbalance of trade, which pushes us to seek cheap labor from other countries to compensate, and more importantly our earth's very
stability. I am not a doomsday-er, I believe it can be fixed, but if not with little ol' us,then who? We just don't have time to sit and wait for policy, we need to act with our own pocket books starting now.
Please please go see this movie :-)
Clute
www.climatecrisis.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Wayne Murray
To: central-city-discuss at gcna.info
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 12:02 AM
Subject: RE: "an inconvenient truth"
The future is humans living in urban centers, and in energy efficient, environmentaly friendly sustainable high rises. The only way that it is going to happen is if developers are encouraged to move the US towards this lifestyle. It will not be easy and it may also take a generational adjustment. In a free country it is the developer and businessman who brings about this change in the most cost effective using market analysis to determine the desire and need. NOT the government.
At a recent meeting it was suggested that governmental incentive money be spent to bring in residential retail downtowm. The government will certainly get its money from the people who make profit. Why not leave the developer free to keep his profits and build the high-rises and fill downtown with people who live not visit for a game or ASU.
If there are govenmnetal incentives to build businesses, the kinds of businesses requiring people to make them successful will not be there, Remember the Mercado?
If left to the market the large number of people living downtown will be the incentive for business (the good kind) to open their doors and better yet to stay in business
hey and it didnt cost the government anything but the do gooder politicians who would have set up the incentive zones.
W
---------------------------------
From: central-city-discuss-bounces at gcna.info [mailto:central-city-discuss-bounces at gcna.info] On Behalf Of Jo Clute
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 8:37 AM
To: central-city-discuss at gcna.info
Cc: Sherilyn Orr
Subject: "an inconvenient truth"
I can honestly say-that in my own life-I have never been so altered, so overwrought-so permanently transitioned-and now, so inspired to change the way I live,, as I am after seeing this movie-An Inconvenient Truth.
Its a life changing experience, one that you can't recover from, --at all costs--.
It has created a new degree of intensity in my plight for urban living, building responsibly, buying local, riding bikes, just being home.....
Please PLEASE go see this movie.
www.climatecrisis.net
---------------------------------
_______________________________________________
--Note--
By replying to this email, you will be sending to the entire list.
Be sure to change the recipient of the email if you do not want to post
to the central-city-discuss list.
--Disclaimer--
The messages exchanged on this list in no way reflect the official
position of the Greater Coronado Neighborhood association. This e-mail
list is maintained by an outside source, with no financial tie, or
editorial directive from the Greater Coronado Neighborhood Association.
To maintain your subscription, visit http://www.gcna.info/list_______________________________________________
--Note--
By replying to this email, you will be sending to the entire list.
Be sure to change the recipient of the email if you do not want to post
to the central-city-discuss list.
--Disclaimer--
The messages exchanged on this list in no way reflect the official
position of the Greater Coronado Neighborhood association. This e-mail
list is maintained by an outside source, with no financial tie, or
editorial directive from the Greater Coronado Neighborhood Association.
To maintain your subscription, visit http://www.gcna.info/list
---------------------------------
Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically better.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/central-city-discuss_gcna.info/attachments/20060706/69b91cba/attachment.htm
More information about the central-city-discuss
mailing list