Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - Re: [Livingontheland] We have a lot farther to fall than Cuba

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "E. E. Mitchamore Jr" <emitch@att.net>
  • To: "TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net>, <livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] We have a lot farther to fall than Cuba
  • Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:19:04 -0600

Yeah, the "tiny fraction of all who need it" is depressing.  I participate in a number of Permaculture forums, and "preaching to the choir" is a constant theme.  For me, surviving while all around me suffer is not very palatable - probably not very realistic, either.  So I continue to (very uncomfortably) bounce around in the middle, doing what helps globally, reducing the consumption of my family, and trying to remain a voice of reason to those who would take either extreme.
 
Take a look at what the rest of the nation is hearing: December Money magazine, page 106.
 
E. E. "Mitch" Mitchamore
www.hillcountrynatives.biz
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Livingontheland] We have a lot farther to fall than Cuba


I think we understand. Study and appropriate technology must happen; that's
why we have this list and others and books and magazines on the subject.
But realistically, all the people we reach through all media is a tiny
fraction of all who need it and likely don't know it.

paul tradingpost@lobo.net

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.
--Henry David Thoreau

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 11/29/2006 at 5:51 PM E. E. Mitchamore Jr wrote:

>So we should just sit down on the land and wait for it to save us?  I
>doubt that's what you meant.
>
>I believe that understanding what Nature demands or will allow will
>require all that our innovative minds can deliver.  Study and work will be
>required, and it's foolish to leave anything out.  Application of
>appropriate technology is one of the trickiest areas, and it's
>inappropriate to label ALL technology as evil.
>
>>From Wikipedia: "In economics, the Jevons Paradox is an observation made
>by William Stanley Jevons who stated that as technological improvements
>increase the efficiency with which a resource is used, total consumption
>of that resource may increase, rather than decrease. It is historically
>called the Jevons Paradox since it ran counter to Jevons's own intuition,
>but it is not a paradox at all and is well understood by modern economic
>theory which shows that improved resource efficiency may trigger a change
>in the overall consumption of that resource, but the direction of that
>change depends on other economic variables."
>
>Note that it doesn't say "..always means faster depletion of a given
>resource."  For the end user, improved efficiency does not increase
>consumption.
>
>I agree that the answers are in the land, but our innovative minds are the
>key to finding those answers.
>
>E. E. "Mitch" Mitchamore
>www.hillcountrynatives.biz
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: Mark Nagel





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page