<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Economic downturn and falling oil push green off the priority list, yet again]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by Jon Rynn</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:27:51 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>There may be an opening developing<p>Dave, I'm glad you keep pounding on this question, keep us informed about the intellectual (and other) comments on this. &nbsp;But I think you should also look at another trend I see: advocacy for public works projects as a necessary stimulant to get us out of the recession/depression that is coming. &nbsp;Exhibit A is part of an article by Nouriel Roubini, NYU economist, long-time bear, and generally looked to now as one of the best analysts of the present situation.<p>
Part of his set of solutions, from his <a href="http://www.rgemonitor.com/roubini-monitor/253973/the_world_is_at_severe_risk_of_a_global_systemic_financial_meltdown_and_a_severe_global_depression" rel="nofollow">article -- which I suggest everyone read in any case -- is the following:a massive direct government fiscal stimulus packages that includes public works, infrastructure spending, unemployment benefits, tax rebates to lower income households and provision of grants to strapped and crunched state and local government<p>
For "infrastructure spending" and "public works" read classic green collar jobs like retrofitting (efficiency!), as well as building train networks, installing PV, fill-in-the-blanks.<p>
This takes the environmental issues from being a "problem", or cost, to being an "opportunity", or solution to the coming downturn.<p>
Otherwise, to answer you're question ("I won't answer that question"), I think the main problem is that people are focused on saving the economy that we have now, warts and all, battening down the hatches, etc. -- in other words, just defending the current standard of living. &nbsp;We know that that standard of living is totally under threat from global warming, but that's a long-term problem. &nbsp;So we can hook up the long-term problem with the short-term problem by moving towards green public works.</p></p></p></a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>There may be an opening developing<p>Dave, I'm glad you keep pounding on this question, keep us informed about the intellectual (and other) comments on this. &nbsp;But I think you should also look at another trend I see: advocacy for public works projects as a necessary stimulant to get us out of the recession/depression that is coming. &nbsp;Exhibit A is part of an article by Nouriel Roubini, NYU economist, long-time bear, and generally looked to now as one of the best analysts of the present situation.<p>
Part of his set of solutions, from his <a href="http://www.rgemonitor.com/roubini-monitor/253973/the_world_is_at_severe_risk_of_a_global_systemic_financial_meltdown_and_a_severe_global_depression" rel="nofollow">article -- which I suggest everyone read in any case -- is the following:a massive direct government fiscal stimulus packages that includes public works, infrastructure spending, unemployment benefits, tax rebates to lower income households and provision of grants to strapped and crunched state and local government<p>
For "infrastructure spending" and "public works" read classic green collar jobs like retrofitting (efficiency!), as well as building train networks, installing PV, fill-in-the-blanks.<p>
This takes the environmental issues from being a "problem", or cost, to being an "opportunity", or solution to the coming downturn.<p>
Otherwise, to answer you're question ("I won't answer that question"), I think the main problem is that people are focused on saving the economy that we have now, warts and all, battening down the hatches, etc. -- in other words, just defending the current standard of living. &nbsp;We know that that standard of living is totally under threat from global warming, but that's a long-term problem. &nbsp;So we can hook up the long-term problem with the short-term problem by moving towards green public works.</p></p></p></a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by stevenearlsalmony</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:25:57 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>No such thing as a successful economy........<p>.....without natural resources and ecosystem services only the Earth can provide.<p>
Inasmuch as our children already understand that the real human economy is supported by the Earth in the sense that the economy and living things depend upon the Earth for existence, perhaps we can also agree that the human species depends upon the Earth for its survival, too. There cannot be a healthy economy without available natural resources and adequately functioning ecosystem services of Earth.<p>
If there can be no such thing as a rationally functioning economy without the Earth, then more economic investment in the preservation of natural resources and the protection of adequately functioning ecosystems makes good sense. Let us invite the powerbrokers in big-business, the captains of economic globalization, politicians and high government officials to make much larger and many more direct investments that promote the overall health of the small planet we inhabit so Earth and its environs are properly maintained as a fit place for human habitation by our children and coming generations. <p>
Steven Earl Salmony<br>
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population,<br>
established 2001<br>
<a href="http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php" rel="nofollow">http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php</a></br></br></br></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>No such thing as a successful economy........<p>.....without natural resources and ecosystem services only the Earth can provide.<p>
Inasmuch as our children already understand that the real human economy is supported by the Earth in the sense that the economy and living things depend upon the Earth for existence, perhaps we can also agree that the human species depends upon the Earth for its survival, too. There cannot be a healthy economy without available natural resources and adequately functioning ecosystem services of Earth.<p>
If there can be no such thing as a rationally functioning economy without the Earth, then more economic investment in the preservation of natural resources and the protection of adequately functioning ecosystems makes good sense. Let us invite the powerbrokers in big-business, the captains of economic globalization, politicians and high government officials to make much larger and many more direct investments that promote the overall health of the small planet we inhabit so Earth and its environs are properly maintained as a fit place for human habitation by our children and coming generations. <p>
Steven Earl Salmony<br>
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population,<br>
established 2001<br>
<a href="http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php" rel="nofollow">http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php</a></br></br></br></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #3 by Delay And Deny</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:12:24 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/3</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Think 21 </strong></p><p><br>
21 is an economy BASED on Green.</p><p>
We need to get away from thinking of Green as an appendage to the smokestack industries, and think of Green as a total economy.</p><p>
We need to think of Green as Wealth -- a wealthy lifestyle with clean air, clean land and healthy food.</p><p>
We need to think of technology as good in and of itself...not as a crutch to prop up the Old Ways, but communications, service oriented architecture, open source, nanotechnology, hydrogen.</p><p>
In short -- decouple yourselfs. &nbsp;Be Green and Prosper.<br>
</br></br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Think 21 </strong></p><p><br>
21 is an economy BASED on Green.</p><p>
We need to get away from thinking of Green as an appendage to the smokestack industries, and think of Green as a total economy.</p><p>
We need to think of Green as Wealth -- a wealthy lifestyle with clean air, clean land and healthy food.</p><p>
We need to think of technology as good in and of itself...not as a crutch to prop up the Old Ways, but communications, service oriented architecture, open source, nanotechnology, hydrogen.</p><p>
In short -- decouple yourselfs. &nbsp;Be Green and Prosper.<br>
</br></br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #4 by Earl Killian</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:35:15 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/4</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>why first to go</strong></p><p>What's your explanation for why green is always the first to go?</p><p>
We live in a plutocracy with the dressed up as a democracy. &nbsp;The status quo has power, and does not relinquish willingly. It uses Madison Ave techniques to keep people voting against their own interests. Mostly that works. Green is not the status quo, and is out of power, so it is fighting against Titans. Green may yet win because the Titans are fouling things up so badly that it may become apparent to the people despite the propaganda to the contrary. The only question is when it finally is apparent to the people, will it be too late?</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>why first to go</strong></p><p>What's your explanation for why green is always the first to go?</p><p>
We live in a plutocracy with the dressed up as a democracy. &nbsp;The status quo has power, and does not relinquish willingly. It uses Madison Ave techniques to keep people voting against their own interests. Mostly that works. Green is not the status quo, and is out of power, so it is fighting against Titans. Green may yet win because the Titans are fouling things up so badly that it may become apparent to the people despite the propaganda to the contrary. The only question is when it finally is apparent to the people, will it be too late?</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #5 by stevenearlsalmony</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 22:39:02 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/5</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Leviathan-like, ever-expanding economy crashes<p>..........into the biophysical limitations imposed by a finite planet with the size and make-up of Earth?<p>
It appears the predominant culture in the world today and its unbridled global economy are precipitating pernicious impacts on biodiversity, the environment and Earth's body. If the leaders of this culture choose to keep relentlessly growing the gigantic world economy as they are doing now, and the family of humanity keeps getting what it is getting now, then life as we know it and the integrity of Earth could eventually become jeopardized.<p>
The current organization of the predominant culture and its worldwide big-business expansion, one that results from the rampant economic globalization we see today, also appears to give rise to something else that is potentially ruinous.<p>
If you will, please consider how conspicuous consumption of resources and hoarding of wealth by millions of people leave billions of people in the family of humanity hungry and in extreme poverty.<p>
For a tiny minority of people with a lion's share of the world's riches to ravenously consume limited resources while millions of less fortunate people go without adequate food to eat, is an economic system in need of modification with all deliberate speed. Perhaps a time will come when such grotesque inequity will not be tolerated.<p>
If the predominant culture modifies the soon to become unsustainable way the global economy grows as well as the careless way that economy distributes resources, then perhaps we will choose more reasonable and sensible ways to distribute wealth and super-abundant food harvests.<p>
I am assuming that we can agree that the endlessly expanding scale of the world's manmade economy in a finite planetary home with the make-up and size of Earth will eventually reach a point in space-time when this artificially designed, colossal economic leviathan becomes patently unsustainable.<p>
Steven Earl Salmony<br>
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population,<br>
established 2001<br>
<a href="http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php" rel="nofollow">http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php<br>
</br></a></br></br></br></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Leviathan-like, ever-expanding economy crashes<p>..........into the biophysical limitations imposed by a finite planet with the size and make-up of Earth?<p>
It appears the predominant culture in the world today and its unbridled global economy are precipitating pernicious impacts on biodiversity, the environment and Earth's body. If the leaders of this culture choose to keep relentlessly growing the gigantic world economy as they are doing now, and the family of humanity keeps getting what it is getting now, then life as we know it and the integrity of Earth could eventually become jeopardized.<p>
The current organization of the predominant culture and its worldwide big-business expansion, one that results from the rampant economic globalization we see today, also appears to give rise to something else that is potentially ruinous.<p>
If you will, please consider how conspicuous consumption of resources and hoarding of wealth by millions of people leave billions of people in the family of humanity hungry and in extreme poverty.<p>
For a tiny minority of people with a lion's share of the world's riches to ravenously consume limited resources while millions of less fortunate people go without adequate food to eat, is an economic system in need of modification with all deliberate speed. Perhaps a time will come when such grotesque inequity will not be tolerated.<p>
If the predominant culture modifies the soon to become unsustainable way the global economy grows as well as the careless way that economy distributes resources, then perhaps we will choose more reasonable and sensible ways to distribute wealth and super-abundant food harvests.<p>
I am assuming that we can agree that the endlessly expanding scale of the world's manmade economy in a finite planetary home with the make-up and size of Earth will eventually reach a point in space-time when this artificially designed, colossal economic leviathan becomes patently unsustainable.<p>
Steven Earl Salmony<br>
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population,<br>
established 2001<br>
<a href="http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php" rel="nofollow">http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/index.php<br>
</br></a></br></br></br></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #6 by Green Granny</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:01:54 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/6</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Don't call it &quot;green&quot;</strong></p><p>Here in Ohio many people who perceive "green" as an expensive and trendy (liberal) luxury or some kind of hippie life-style choice are nevertheless making real changes that are in fact "green." &nbsp;People are planting gardens to "save money" rather than to be "green" (as they've done off and on for generations). &nbsp;People are looking for energy efficient appliances, replacing windows, adding home insulation, etc to "save money" on electric bills. &nbsp;They don't think of it in terms of saving the environment. &nbsp;People are carpooling or biking (I can't believe how many more bikers I see this year compared to last)or taking the bus because filling up the car is just too expensive. &nbsp;Thrift store purchases are up, library visits are up. &nbsp;Frugalality -- of necessity or choice -- is frequently "green." &nbsp;</p><p>
Many people I meet, who are doing tons of environmentally positive things, would never call themselves "green" (and might be offended should someone else call them "green"). &nbsp;In their minds they are being wise, conservative, and careful with their finances. &nbsp;They've never heard of Michael Pollan but they shop at the farmer's market and "pick your self orchards" for the seasonal bargains/value/fun of it. Others are yearning for some idealistic "simpler" and less hectic life-style that has little to do with global warming concerns. </p><p>
The average man on the street here perceives "green" to mean "$4 fair trade organic lattes" or $25 hemp shopping bags or baggy organic cotton clothes and "doing yoga". &nbsp;They think "green" is a brand, a style, a social statement that is the latest young liberal professional elite version of yuppies. &nbsp;</p><p>
There are many shades of green and many kinds of "greens." &nbsp;I heartily agree that we need to equate "green" with efficiency and frugality (waste not want not with resources of all kinds). &nbsp;Far too many people (including many who call themselves green) see "green" as a form of consumption -- it's what you buy that makes you green (from organic vegetable protien imitation hot dogs to bamboo flooring). To others green is some kind of psuedo religion. </p><p>
Perhaps we should stop calling it "green." &nbsp;Almost everybody thinks energy independence and lower energy costs, less pollution, economic stimulation, infra-structure improvements, savings from efficiency, clean water, etc are "good" things whether or not they believe in global warming or give two hoots about endangered species. &nbsp;Let's concentrate on the shared common ground. Let's show people how environmentally friendly initiatives benefit them where they feel it most -- in their pocket books and in their quality and quantity of life.

<p>"We must be the change we wish to see in the world."  -- Mahatma Ghandi</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Don't call it &quot;green&quot;</strong></p><p>Here in Ohio many people who perceive "green" as an expensive and trendy (liberal) luxury or some kind of hippie life-style choice are nevertheless making real changes that are in fact "green." &nbsp;People are planting gardens to "save money" rather than to be "green" (as they've done off and on for generations). &nbsp;People are looking for energy efficient appliances, replacing windows, adding home insulation, etc to "save money" on electric bills. &nbsp;They don't think of it in terms of saving the environment. &nbsp;People are carpooling or biking (I can't believe how many more bikers I see this year compared to last)or taking the bus because filling up the car is just too expensive. &nbsp;Thrift store purchases are up, library visits are up. &nbsp;Frugalality -- of necessity or choice -- is frequently "green." &nbsp;</p><p>
Many people I meet, who are doing tons of environmentally positive things, would never call themselves "green" (and might be offended should someone else call them "green"). &nbsp;In their minds they are being wise, conservative, and careful with their finances. &nbsp;They've never heard of Michael Pollan but they shop at the farmer's market and "pick your self orchards" for the seasonal bargains/value/fun of it. Others are yearning for some idealistic "simpler" and less hectic life-style that has little to do with global warming concerns. </p><p>
The average man on the street here perceives "green" to mean "$4 fair trade organic lattes" or $25 hemp shopping bags or baggy organic cotton clothes and "doing yoga". &nbsp;They think "green" is a brand, a style, a social statement that is the latest young liberal professional elite version of yuppies. &nbsp;</p><p>
There are many shades of green and many kinds of "greens." &nbsp;I heartily agree that we need to equate "green" with efficiency and frugality (waste not want not with resources of all kinds). &nbsp;Far too many people (including many who call themselves green) see "green" as a form of consumption -- it's what you buy that makes you green (from organic vegetable protien imitation hot dogs to bamboo flooring). To others green is some kind of psuedo religion. </p><p>
Perhaps we should stop calling it "green." &nbsp;Almost everybody thinks energy independence and lower energy costs, less pollution, economic stimulation, infra-structure improvements, savings from efficiency, clean water, etc are "good" things whether or not they believe in global warming or give two hoots about endangered species. &nbsp;Let's concentrate on the shared common ground. Let's show people how environmentally friendly initiatives benefit them where they feel it most -- in their pocket books and in their quality and quantity of life.

<p>"We must be the change we wish to see in the world."  -- Mahatma Ghandi</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #7 by Angelsnecropolis</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 06:43:17 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/7</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The Paycheck</strong></p><p>The reason most consumers see "green" as more expensive is that on a day-to-day basis the products they buy and use every day ARE more expensive. </p><p>
I buy as much natural and organic as I can afford. My budget is restricted and I like my fruit but I can't afford 5.99 per lb for grapes when regular grapes are 1.49 per lb. This is the "expensive" that I have to deal with on a daily basis. </p><p>
It's the up-front costs that people really notice and care about even if savings can be occurred over long periods of time.</p><p>
So this credit crisis that is occurring is taking priority since it is hurting families now as opposed to something that will hurt families (and millions of other people) in the future ei climate change. </p><p>
The problem is that climate change is the more serious of the two issues (something we all know here). But the government doesn't seem to take action until it's too late. Until there are Katrina-like catastrophes happening now and often then the environment (and ironically humanity as a whole) will take the back seat.<br>
</br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The Paycheck</strong></p><p>The reason most consumers see "green" as more expensive is that on a day-to-day basis the products they buy and use every day ARE more expensive. </p><p>
I buy as much natural and organic as I can afford. My budget is restricted and I like my fruit but I can't afford 5.99 per lb for grapes when regular grapes are 1.49 per lb. This is the "expensive" that I have to deal with on a daily basis. </p><p>
It's the up-front costs that people really notice and care about even if savings can be occurred over long periods of time.</p><p>
So this credit crisis that is occurring is taking priority since it is hurting families now as opposed to something that will hurt families (and millions of other people) in the future ei climate change. </p><p>
The problem is that climate change is the more serious of the two issues (something we all know here). But the government doesn't seem to take action until it's too late. Until there are Katrina-like catastrophes happening now and often then the environment (and ironically humanity as a whole) will take the back seat.<br>
</br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #8 by racje</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:40:39 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/first-against-the-wall/8</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A perfect time to create green jobs</strong></p><p>Jon, I'm with you on the use of green infrastructure creation as the way to rebuild prosperity from the bottom up.</p><p>
During the Great Depression of the 1930's, Franklin D Roosevelt's administration invested in building social infrastructure. We are still using libraries, schools, roads, and (oh yes) dams built during those years, and we have murals, records of life in slavery times, songs of America's regions, and photographs of America's industrializing landscape, because the Federal government employed people to do that work.<br>
We're about to elect a new administration that isn't totally clueless about how to build a prosperous and sustainable society from the bottom up. Soon we can start to build an environmentally responsible infrastructure: retrofitting our houses, building public transit, doing research and development on alternative energy, restoring wildlife habitat, and learning how to live in harmony with natural processes.</p><p>
It's a perfect time to put people to work doing things that are worth doing, and in seventy or eighty years our descendants will thank us.</p><p>
First we have to get through the next three months... without further tying up all our resources in war, Wall Street, and welfare for the wealthy. It's a challenge, but we can draw on a tradition of equality, responsibility, fairness, and community engagement. In recent years in the USA, we've slid away from our true national ideals. It's time to live them.

<p>-- 
Love doesn't just sit there like a stone; it has to be made, like bread, remade all the time, made new.  
   --Ursula LeGuin</p></br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A perfect time to create green jobs</strong></p><p>Jon, I'm with you on the use of green infrastructure creation as the way to rebuild prosperity from the bottom up.</p><p>
During the Great Depression of the 1930's, Franklin D Roosevelt's administration invested in building social infrastructure. We are still using libraries, schools, roads, and (oh yes) dams built during those years, and we have murals, records of life in slavery times, songs of America's regions, and photographs of America's industrializing landscape, because the Federal government employed people to do that work.<br>
We're about to elect a new administration that isn't totally clueless about how to build a prosperous and sustainable society from the bottom up. Soon we can start to build an environmentally responsible infrastructure: retrofitting our houses, building public transit, doing research and development on alternative energy, restoring wildlife habitat, and learning how to live in harmony with natural processes.</p><p>
It's a perfect time to put people to work doing things that are worth doing, and in seventy or eighty years our descendants will thank us.</p><p>
First we have to get through the next three months... without further tying up all our resources in war, Wall Street, and welfare for the wealthy. It's a challenge, but we can draw on a tradition of equality, responsibility, fairness, and community engagement. In recent years in the USA, we've slid away from our true national ideals. It's time to live them.

<p>-- 
Love doesn't just sit there like a stone; it has to be made, like bread, remade all the time, made new.  
   --Ursula LeGuin</p></br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>