Healthy soil and sustainable growing

[tradingpost <tradingpost@lobo.net>]

Some interesting points there & some I haven't thought much about - 
"Debt is a promise to consume future resources". Yet after a lifetime of 
study I concluded that no system is worth defining or debating if it 
can't be implemented. A constitution is only as good as the government 
implementing it.  And economics can't be separated out of the power 
politics. My own practical approach is to opt out of consumerism where 
feasible, buy secondhand everything, & find some income in retirement by 
producing one of the necessities of life - food. Most people like to eat 
frequently. Plus I only grow & sell locally. So I walk the walk. No 
matter what comes, this skill will be in demand so long as people 
survive in some fashion.

Climate? Problem is food production has long been talked about without 
context of climate, phosphate, freshwater, economy, fossil fuels, etc. 
All tied together. We're just starting to see some context articles with 
the extreme drought in California's central valley, & the waste of water 
by fracking. We do know the most vulnerable populations are a billion or 
so of the planet's poorest, which happens to fall largely on coastal 
cities & villages. Think Bangladesh. Or Miami for that matter. Global 
warming, peak energy, economic decline - all interdependent - won't be 
prevented or mitigated. Our kids & grandkids keep planning for the 
future. But not for the most certain kind of future.


On 2/7/2014 3:49 PM, Dan Conine wrote:
> John D'hondt wrote:
>
> > Now take a situation that you see a small child fall in one meter deep water 
> > where it is drowning.
> > Are you a capitalist who does not want to make his pants wet when there is no 
> > profit in it for you?
> > Or are you a communist who has the ability to save that child (in need of 
> > help) and you do so without a second thought?
> >
> > I think it is high time that we define these loaded words, anarchy, communism 
> > and capitalism from time to time so that we keep understanding one another. 
> > Maybe the NSA can learn something from it.
> > John
> I could go on this topic all day, John.
> My latest concern is that what is being promoted as "capitalism" (using
> money to determine demand/value) is really not. What we have for the
> most part is something else; the basis of Imperialism, which is
> Consumerism. Consumerism is a belief that the act of consumption is
> regulated by the Invisible Hand (capitalism at least gives a nod to the
> production of the money by government as a regulating mechanism), but
> even that belief is flawed, and we end up with unfettered rapacity
> because the Invisible Hand is only a myth.
>
> I think that what you defined as communism is really socialism (the good
> of the society over the individual), where communism "from each
> according to ability, to each according to need" is a flawed idea that
> doesn't consider the needs of our future selves, only the present.
> Socialism is Humanism writ large, and as such, is also flawed (the
> belief that the needs of people overrides everything else). Humanism is
> flawed because people are dependent on their environment, and cannot
> survive for long if humans are allowed to consume the resources that
> their future selves will need (unmoderated activities). A true
> capitalist would save the drowning child because the child is a future
> resource to be exploited economically (an investment), whereas a
> socialist might think the child is one more mouth for the community to
> feed. I guess it depends on my attitude today, because I can argue the
> opposite, too.
> A true environmentalist would rescue the child as another servant of the
> environment (assuming it is a community of real environmentalists, not
> the capitalist-parasite kind we usually see).
>
> In the long run, it is our generosity toward the environment which will
> determine if we persist or go extinct. We can even apply capitalism
> toward that goal, but the bullies who own the means of production will
> not go quietly. The opposite of capitalism isn't communism or socialism,
> though. The opposite of capitalism is a a sales tax. In the U.S., the
> majority of campaign and lobby levers have set their fulcrum upon the
> income tax code. The FairTax proposal attempts to eliminate the income
> tax and replace it with a 23% sales tax, and a "prebate" that pays
> everyone for the tax cost of basic living expenses. This is not to be
> confused with the Flat Tax plan, that is just another income tax break
> for the rich.
> The sensible thing for socialists and communists to do is to adopt the
> FairTax plan and raise the rate until the air and water are clean
> (reduce consumerism) and raise the prebate until everyone has enough for
> basic living expenses.
> As long as we are living in a capitalized democracy (one dollar, one
> vote), then the voters should be paid ALL of their dollars and given the
> real costs of the goods they buy. The main alternative to sales taxes is
> the black market, which is a more localized economic model than the
> corporate/military market we have now.
> When the sales tax on things is 50% or so, then people will think a
> little more about whether to buy those "safe" foods from a corporation
> or to grow their own (or barter with a neighbor).
> The rich get richer and the poor get poorer because the rich have the
> tools to convince the poor to work for them and buy their stuff. The
> government follows the money, which is telling the economists that
> people WANT to be poorer and work for the rich.
> It really is pretty bizarre, especially when all of the pro-economic
> systems we use are designed to destroy our own future. Debt is a promise
> to consume future resources. Income tax breaks encourage more debt. The
> vicious circle is accelerating as government uses debt to increase
> resource consumption ("grow the economy").
> Meanwhile, the climate seems to be telling us to become nomads and give
> up on fixed farming except maybe in the tropics. We've already consumed
> a critical resource that was taken for granted: stability.
>
> Dan C.
> Belgium, WI
>
> _______________________________________________
> Livingontheland mailing list
> Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland