jaywfitz's Blog

Re: econ 101

Um,

As I see it there's nothing wrong with fear or pain for that matter except that it sucks. Fear gives one a powerful survival motive--fear of death too--and is very useful as an evolutionary advantage. It's the ability to freak out and writhe like hell that separates us from plants. Where fear becomes destructive and useless is when one doesn't channel the emotive energy that it engenders into constructive "evasive" strategies and rather sits on one's butt and develops ulcers. Or one develops sophisticated delusions about the nature of reality to obscure the proper and sensible reasons to be scared shitless.

Yup, so for the record, dying scares the hell out of me. Being dead doesn't. It's about the getting there rather than the destination. . .

Re: Excellent Article on the Future of Oil and a rebuttal.

You know it's good satire if it's hard to tell if such a person is serious or not.

Re: econ 101

I think it's always good to look at the practical reality of the fact of the value of governance rather than to try to deal with the issue ideologically. For example, living in Fern Forest is "de facto" living in an anarchist state. There's no police presence, no fire protection, no road maintenance, no mail delivery, or anything else. There are, however, road fees and property taxes. I could easily see eliminating both of those as they achieve in fact, absolutely nothing. I don't care if the fees are considered low--they're actually infinately expensive, as what one gets in return is exactly zero. So, actually, I can pretty well speak with authority on what an anarchist society looks like, as, in fact, that's where I live. It's self regulating and really no big deal. The crime in this area is actually an to the suprise of many much much lower than it is, for example, in HPP. The reason for this is simple. If you break into someones house and get caught stealing someone's tools, you run a near certain chance of getting composted.

This isn't really that unusual of a state of affairs. In any large US city at this point there are areas that are complete ghettos that have no "services" either--in fact.

At the other side of the issue are areas such as the gated communities in very affluent areas. These are anarchist as well. While services and some security are provided by the state, only that is provided as what is requested. Within the communities most anything is legal as law enforcement "defers" to selective enforcement that the wealthy in such communities expect. Hence drugs of any sort are legal, building regulations are ignored, prostitution is legal, etc.

Governance thus has minimal influence on or even interest in either the economically deprived or the economically privileged. The first has no utility to extract tax revenue from, and the later simply has the power to not pay taxes at all. Where one finds the most regulatory pressure is precisely in areas and with an intent to target a demographic which both 1) has some capital to extract and 2) has no effective means of resisting.

Just an observation. It's an observation that might engender personal strategies.

Excellent Article on the Future of Oil and a rebuttal.

Good data here.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5979#more

In the interest of fairness, an opposing view.

Re: econ 101

Good luck on demonstrating in court that bankers knew anything about anything.

I think the reasons to "panic" are twofold.

1) Lots of people are/have/will panic. A lot of these panicking people are in positions of authority and can get talked into the most idiotic of random policy making with disastrous results--the multiple bailouts, cash for clunkers, retroactive tax credits for big homebuilders, busting local "cash" businesses, requiring by law everyone to carry health insurance, zero percent interest rates and on and on and on. I'm assuming that these legislators are merely idiots whose ears have been bent by unscrupulous interests--rather than complicit in the scam. I'm open on that one. Back to my bucket analogy, I'm panicking trying to bail water when others are boring holes in the boat. The next thing that will come along will be a tax on buckets or fines for owning un-approved ones.

A lot of the panic with manifest itself in mere incivility, some in hostility, and a lot in random violence. That's the strategy of the "disimpowered." Not any more effective.

2) By no means is there any guarantee that when the current system melts down that it won't be exactly the same interests running the show. Those who have profited by this destruction are also far and away the best equipped to weather it. I don't see a dawning of the age of Aquarius by any stretch with a Hollywood ending with the bank towers collapsing and people planting hemp in the broken pavement on Wall Street or whatever clique might come to mind. I see at the end of the day for the US a poverty stricken semi-agrarian state with a right wing facist oligarcy running the show.

By the way, none of this is anti-government froth. There is a right and proper place for government and it has a role in society. The legitimate role of government is to protect its honest citizens from assault by dangerous people and interests. So far from that today even at the local level--it's difficult to see government as anything but a crime syndicate that is a primary tool of dangerous people and interests in exploiting honest citizens.

Anyway, just some happy thoughts this morning. But look on the bright side! Gold continues its rally!

Re: econ 101

Here's another interesting take:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34067419/ns/business-businessweekcom//

Re: econ 101

LOL

I suppose it depends on how you panic. Maybe it's a personality thing but in a sinking boat I'm prone to grab a bucket and fling water at 400 percent of normal speed.

Re: econ 101

Actually I think flat out panic is completely reasonable.

Here's why: Far too many have such a vested interest in maintaining the status quo that near any half-brained strategy to prop up the failed system will be implemented by those in control. If we look especially at most of the state budgets across the country we'll see tax revenue shortfalls below projection of 10 to even 25 or more percent--and the level of desperation that state and municipal governments will face next year will make this year look silly. Of course there is a point in which money simply must be raised to keep the lights on at city hall and that point isn't far off. Only so much can be pared out of a budget and then what? Well, the tax hounds will be let loose, of course. Already this trend is underway. We can expect a deluge of new taxes and fees, and fines, and orders of compliance, and all sorts of stuff completely off the wall as money is attempted to be raised or individuals try to justify their jobs. The result of course the same as always--driving the economy further down and underground--it won't pay but we can be certain of it happening. There's been an extremely mean spiritied discussion on Punaweb about some guy who is composting mulch--I think some of you know the guy. Well, as far as I can see it under strict interpretation of current regs he's required to have at least a grub and grade permit to take on that project and it would be sorry if this attention got him busted for a fine and a cease and desist order to boot. Obviously there are those who would even enjoy seeing that happen. For those of us who live modestly on modest means such a intrusion could be disasterous, and not just financially. That is indeed something to be flat out scared of.

An example: I've been vocal in opposition of the Puna Community Development Plan and I don't think many understand why. I've no objections to the goals of the plan and in fact would wholeheartedly support the concept. The concern I've had from the start is that a piece of legislation would be created that creates yet another layer of legal invasiveness into one's life, a whole host of new rules and regs near indecipherable with out hired professional help--an abundance of new fees and fines suddenly appear and at the end of the day damn near every constructive part of the plan which it was founded on would be gutted--leaving only the part that acts as a revenue gathering mechanism for the state. And for certain it sure appears that exactly that is happening. Unfortunately for those eager to make rules for others to follow there's often a lot of hubris-- often unintended consequences are not duly considered and it's very easy to create a monster. Locally I hope that's not the case but it sure looks that way. The net effect is to further grease rails for big development(only they can afford the processing fees to complete projects and in essence enjoy the benefits of having all competion removed) and make small projects completely unviable because increased baseline cost of business. Meanwhile some manage to carve out new careers for themselves in government. But I'm getting off on a tangent here and the point is rapidly becoming moot anyhow. Much bigger fish to fry.

Anyway, a bit of venting this morning. . .

Re: econ 101

Actually the dollar has indeed continued its trend line of decline. I wouldn't say anyone was too far off. For the USDX to lose +/- 3 percent of its relative value is no small thing in 30 days.

http://quotes.ino.com/chart/?s=NYBOT_dx

I think nomans point is correct about there being a vested interest in maintaining a "gradual" policy of devaluation, at least in the short term. The difficulty however is as time progresses in the "greater fool's game" now consuming the currency markets at some point someone will get stuck with the "old maid." Everyone knows that and it's a destabilizing influence for once one player has an ensentive to jump they will and in essence all the rest will be forced to follow suit. When the dam breaks, it will do so very very rapidly. Or so it seems likely to me.

Re: econ 101

Re: Turkey Day! NEXT WEEK!! OMG!

Will do. Dug about 30 lbs a day ago. About a half pound a square foot if you were to count the culls now becoming chicken feed. Surprising, really, as wet as it's been.

Re: Turkey Day! NEXT WEEK!! OMG!

Sounds like fun! I hope to join you.

Re: Where do you get your Taro starts?

Thanks but should be fine, it's a good rainy day project. LOL.

Re: Where do you get your Taro starts?

Sounds good. I'll plant them this week.

Re: Where do you get your Taro starts?

Ok, deal, I'll plant another propagation patch of about 40 or 50 to cope with the "forum demand." Over the rainy season those should produce about 6 to 8 keiki a piece. It's not that big of a deal hit or miss as they're of use to me too, and you get keiki regardless--it's simply a matter of whether you'd rather produce an abundance of keiki or corms. In any case one gets leaf and I eat that as much or more than anything else.

A buck a pop clean and delivered, if thats fair for others that's fair for me.

I've got a broody buffy at the moment as well--anybody need a chick or two?

Re: Candidate for Hawaii County Council District 5

I would not expect much from the county or the state as it seems that "denial" is the rule of policy for the day. The State of Hawaii is still projecting a recovery to pre-bubble levels of tax revenues. . .and is operating on a budget scaled to that assumption. May I suggest that's a bit unrealistically optimistic?

So, I guess, not holding my breath for visionary leadership really so much. Not expecting that, I believe most of us would be pleased as punch simply to remain mostly unmolested.

Re: Where do you get your Taro starts?

Ok, I'll put in another propagation cycle here in the next week or so, shooting to produce 500 or 600 keiki by March or so. Mixed types. Someone have an idea of what they're worth? I expect about a buck a piece, but haven't bought any. They can be hard to come by.

And since we're moving this direction as a group--it's inevitable and desirable that we start some community commerce. I've wanted to keep this site as not commercial as possible focusing on relationships first and business second. But, we're getting to that point and I thought I'd offer up a rule for the "group commerce" kind of postings like this one might be. Perhaps along the lines of "if you've both hosted and attended a work party" you can "advertise" the availability of services and items that fit within the context of the sustainable mission this site advocates. And even then, I'd rather people were discrete about it.

I'd appreciate input on that front.

Re: Where do you get your Taro starts?

I can be supplying those in about 30 varieties here here soon. I want to be in commercial production but I could plant another cycle(7 months or so) for keiki if there is a need for them--which there is, no doubt. It's useful to consider because my plants are disease free on virgin soil. I could probably produce 5000 keiki by July if the need existed. You plant differently for propagation rather than harvest.

In other words if someone would like to "order" 200 or so plants of a given type let me know. That's a good number to start with.

Re: Candidate for Hawaii County Council District 5

The problem with the precautionary principle in the context of sustainability is that the vast majority of people are unwilling to acknowledge the problem that we must provide precaution too. You can't offer solutions to those who refuse to acknowledge problems.

Still, I don't view the rampant denial as a cultural thing. As one involved in estate and funeral planning in the past the attitudes I encounter in the "mainstream" of society an attitude that comes across mostly as typical of a classic Kubler-Ross grief process. Rightly so, we're experiencing not a recession but a death of a culture fatally based on unsustainable economic assumptions. It's a useful metaphor to consider the attitudes following the appearance of a fatal condition brought on by years of ill health and/or addiction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model

If my observation here has any merit it assumes a couple of things--but foremost and perhaps surprisingly that many more than we assume are indeed aware of the state our country and our world are--and the attitude is reminiscent one of lifelong smoker who has perhaps just discovered a strange lump on their thyroid. We're a country putting on a bold face and by and large praying it "just goes away." A poor strategy for sure, and often a fatal one, but an all too common one. In society at large not a matter of lack of information but one of panic and raw fear. So, proactively, it's not so much a matter of countering stupidity with education in order to effect process, but rather helping others drop the facade of "willful ignorance" by providing examples of brave and successful adaptation to a is rightly a very frightening future.

So, progressive individuals and organizations to my mind have largely failed by and large in this process assuming wrongly that "education" was the way to the future. Nope, not as I see it. The way to a successful future is setting examples.

Still, I've got to say I'm worried about the forthcoming "anger" stage.

Re: Candidate for Hawaii County Council District 5

I personally assume that sustainability is always measurable in a useful sense if one is willing to apply due rigor and accept the ramifications with integrity. And if one applies the conservativism necessary to such an important topic, even in cases of unclear conclusions one clearly has a responsibility to err on the side of caution.

Re: Candidate for Hawaii County Council District 5

Also Tim is dead right. A coherent definition of sustainability needs to be demanded of of any that claim to advocate for it.

Re: Candidate for Hawaii County Council District 5

I agree 100%. That language reminds me of the kind of stuff one would hear out of the forestry industry in the PNW as a kid. "Balance" to the forest industry meant "allowing all trees of any value whatsoever to be cut down," which in fact happened. If "balance" had been advocated in 1950 it might have been a sensible position. Today, not at all, and the efforts toward the real ends of sustainability will be required to be as "extreme" as the efforts hitherto applied towards profiteering and "unsustainability." A long long long way we would have to go to find that balance.

Re: MP3s

Fun, more my speed. Like the tone.

Re: Candidate for Hawaii County Council District 5

Here's an elephant in the room.

Hawaii in general and Puna in particular is a world leader and in fact a global destination for the study of progressive agriculture techniques, whether research in forest gardening, or organics, or in permaculture, or Fukoka style natural gardening. Why? In large part because the liaise faire attitude of past governence has tacitcly and knowledgably allowed such projects to experiment and grow without undue and frankly unnecessary impedence it what were obviously benign ventures. This has been the status quo, and the bounty of the farmers markets and the richness of the diveristy of our community reflects this--the "hands off attitude" has provided for a societal good. This good is now threated by those who, either due to a personal fetish or attempts at manipulating for personal gain find following the dot and tiddle of the law more satisfying than following principles of "good society." Almost always this is a ruse. It's very easy to sneak around a law. It's very difficult to sneak around a principle. If the principle of "sustainability" is of importance, the law must bow to it for sustainability to flourish. A principle can never bow to a law. As the pressure increases, and the current trend exists, laws are getting rammed down our throat--laws that serve no purpose or even bely such principles.

Our legislators need to embrace the responsibility of "unintended consequence" realizing that doing nothing may well be better than ill-thought out policy. Unfortunately, "the urge to craft policy" and "modesty" often are not packaged together.

As far as I see it, Hawaii will live sustainably. We can either get there in a progressive and sensible manner or we can have a turf battle. Either way our destination is on the charts. We can live in the future in a manner that would be seen as ecologically benign, minimalist, and sustainable, or we can botch the whole works by fighting about fringe issues and we'll live in poverty(which often resembles minimalism, but is less fun.)

Please excuse the typos, as I'm in a rush. . .

Re: Candidate for Hawaii County Council District 5

As I see it, the "government" need not provide leadership in "food and energy sustainability" because many many people in our community are already hard at that task, and effectively so. What we need from our representatives is an attitude and policies that encourage the efforts of those pioneers, and makes their laudable task and easier one, not a more burdensome one. As it is, the rails are greased for conventional development, and progress is considered begrudgingly advocating some token greenspin development. Of the "green" style architecture I've seen, it's version of "green" bears the same relationship to the ecology as "ranch" style architecture bears to cattle--which is none. A fashion statement only.

Sustainability will not be had unless our lifestyles change, and that change primarily is one of radical downsizing and markedly less consumption. And, of course, this involves less income. It is important that all policy directed towards "sustainability" ease personal costs(whether permits, fees, required professional services, taxes, or whatever) rather than increase them, or the policy is self-defeating. It's silliness to increase costs so one can live more minimally. Unfortunately, the trend runs opposite--and the answer seems to be more complexity and cost rather than less-- and the end result as I see it is one of effectively outlawing sustainable living--at least for those not backed by substantial financial means or personal access to policy makers.

Just as an interesting thought experiment to illustrate the point--can we find examples of legislative efforts that make living a low impact, sustainable, ecologically benign lifestyle easier rather than more difficult and costly? If we can find such policy it exists to inform the discussion. If it doesn't exist we should ask ourselves as to why.