So, to put a fine point on Brian's last comment, we need to retool and find a better strategy to be effective in defeating the coming wave of micro-hydro projects.  The point I tried (and failed due to poor choice of words) to make a while back was that there is a coming wave of projects, and a new direction is needed to be successful defeating these initiatives.

Yes, there needs to be a balance.  On one side, we have a very free market society that allows for loosely regulated growth in many instances, always guided by the motivation of as much profit as possible.  That's fine, but for every yin there needs to be a yang, and in this example that is environmentalists, consumer groups, etc. that represent the interests of public health, sustainability, etc.  

AMEN!

Or... You could all just watch this, and think about how happy you feel afterwards.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=4450239


Edited by ashleygoesdisco - 06 Sep 2007 at 12:06pm

Brian, part of the reason we buy our water from a municipality/co-op/ or whatever is they have the means to assure us that the water is safe.  Epidemics like cholera and yellow fever were severly curtailed once we discovered they were a result of unsanitary water.  Yeah go ahead and clean your own water.  I'd rather have someone do it for me that knows what they are doing.  Incidentally, and speaking from experience, if you have your own well, you do not meter how you use water.  You need look no further than the Ogalla aquifer (largest in the US)that lies beneath Kansas, Nebraska and several other midwest states.  There are quotas in place now, but unfortunately too little too late.  The aquifer can not adequately replenish itself.  And if you think individuals are immune I'll use my family as an example.  My brother has his own well and runs the water whenever he feels like it.  As a result he has some of the greenest grass in one of the driest places in the northern Rockies.  Yep that's a good use of resources.

The sad fact is we are bad at self regulating our behavior, and unless someone does it for us, regardless of whether we agree or not, we'll screw ourselves in the end.  Damn I'm agreeing with Leif on this, and I'm not republican.  Anybody want to go wade down the Sky?
-N

I think that's a good point Leif.  The problem is not capatilism inherently, but rather the fact that capitalism has failed to assign values to certain things.  I'll take it a step farther and say that at this point, things are so lopsided, you and I will never reasses what a corporation assigns as the value of free flowing clean water.  The juggernaut is just so big at this point ....

Nick, great post.  You look at it from a systemic point of view though -- whereas my point is from a individual's perspective. While not everyone could clean their own water, I can.  I can also use my tap only for cooking, drinking, and bathing, and use rain runoff for watering my garden, for example.  It all helps.  I don't think rain of my roof is quite the sewage pit that promoted cholera epidemics though ... ;-)  I grew up on a well, and we didn't waste water, but again, that's a individual choice and not something that can be relied upon.

I don't think Leif is going to agree with you about regulation being needed, that's definitely outside most libertarian agendas.  

Unfortunately, we have this myth of truly free markets and interdependent free market capitalism and democracy.  Given that capitalsim is dominated not by small entrepenuers but by mutlinationals, I would argue that capitalism, at this point, is actually in opposition to democracy.

Ah, okay, I'll jump back in - since there is no water...

There was a great book written a few years ago called, "The Future of Freedom" by Fareed Zakaria.  He is no conservative and, if anything is left or center-left in his political leanings.  In fact, the book was recommended to me from a friend that is center-left on the political spectrum.  And, I'm not here to convince anyone of anything (that never happens on a forum).

But, he argues, in a very well written book that capitalism is absolutely primary in terms of making a democracy function and establishing a democracy in the first place.  The thrust of the argument is that when you have capitalism and a functioning middle class, only then do enough people have a stake in the system to make democracy work.  He would argue for (free) market reforms first, democracy second.

And, again, I don't want to convince anyone of anything, but he'd say the China model of opening the markets before opening the political process will ultimately lead to a better outcome than the other way around (as has happened in Russia and arguably Iraq).

So, Brian I think you and others interested in these ideas might find it thought provoking.

The Republican party, like all parties contains many people, many influencers, many perspectives.  The commonalities bind the party together, and unfortunatly, not all Republicans believe in small government, certainly not the one in the big office.

I actually really like these discussions.....


"I've left specific instructions that I do not want to be brought back during a Republican administration." - Leary

If you think pot is bad than don't turn on your radio, don't go to art museums, and throw away all your music because most of it, NOT ALL, was written sculpted painted and/or performed by someone who smokes and or smoked it.  (this is directed to those who think its bad mmmkay not to winkers)  Zappa is an exception along with Ted Nugent.

I believe that grass smoking is OK and maybe even good for some folks but not all.  I would recommend a heavier hallucenegen for Lief though.  He's way too smart for grass. 

Hallucenegens help you realize that everything you know is in fact learned and just because you were raised a certain way or have come to believe certain"truths" that doesn't necessarily make them right.  (5 dried grams should do)

Back to the earlier discussion:

I personally think that the real problem with any issue in this world is that when it comes down to it, MONEY isn't the biggest motivator, its the ONLY motivator for change.  Sustainable living will become commonplace when the people at the top stand to gain a FINANCIAL gain from it..period.

We can't stop making weapons and feeding our war machine because that would fuck up the economy! (plus, how would we ever kill the killers!)

We can't just stop burning oil and use wind, solar or other novel ideas because that would fuck up the economy.

We can't protect federal lands from road building, mining and logging because, you guessed it, that would fuck up the economy!

Peace would fuck up the economy.


If you can find a way for the folks at the top to continue to stay at the top while the world rids itself of the need for so much energy then I think you should run for president...

Love,
Good For Nothing Long-Haired

P.S.  Want to give the world and US economies a serious boost??  Legalize it!!





Edited by franzhorner - 06 Sep 2007 at 3:29pm

Dave,
Finding a website that doesn't like Reagan isn't difficult - but that doesn't mean that he isn't a fiscal conservative.  The debt held by the public is not a good way to judge whether someone was fiscally conservative or not.  A better judge is to look at federal spending as % of GDP and tax revenues as a % of GDP.  You can get both these numbers from the non-partisan CBO.  The debt can be viewed as a proxy for future taxation (or inflation if the government decides to turn on the printing presses).

Federal spending peaked (post WWII) in Reagan's 1st term and has been on a downward trend since then through Bush #1 and Clinton and rising somewhat during GWB's presidency though still lower than the start of Clinton's presidency (yes, even with the war spending). 

Federal revenue peaked (and in fact equaled the all time high set during WWII) at 20.9% of GDP during Clinton's last year in office.  Contrary to popular belief, our current federal revenue (even with the Bush tax cuts) is right now equal to the post WWII average and our budget deficit (even with the war spending) is de minimis compared to post WWII deficits.

Now then, you might not like who we are taxing and how we are spending the money and would rather spend the money on other things or tax someone else (who wouldn't).  And, we certainly have long term structural problems with the economy with respect to entitlements, but you need to look behind the headline numbers (and the various rants) to get a real view of where things are.




Edited by arnobarno - 06 Sep 2007 at 3:54pm

this particular forum is for "Non Boating Related Message" .... besides, where's the water? 

BTW Justin -- looks like we're Nahatlatch bound, we'll be at apocynum Fri and Sat nights if you're looking for a last blast up there.  If a second rig comes up, we might just make the push to get on the bridge if you're interested. 

I wish I could go this weekend.  I will be at the Tieton next weekend, though.