|
Posted by on August 17, 2007, 1:27 am
If you belive, if you can live up to your claims, burn your home and
move into the woods. Live under a tree and eat wild berries. It's too
late for your parants to have an abortion, but you can limit your foot
print. It will mean giving up the computer you typed this on, the
power you used to run it. Life as you know it. Or did you mean OTHER
prople should change?
> Recently, there's been news about corrupt loans and bailouts, and it's
> important. But, from a sustainability standpoint, the true housing
> crisis is that more homes are BUILT all the time, far beyond
> replacement levels. This is happening daily at the expense of
> wilderness, farmland and general elbow room. Who decided this constant
> blight upon the land was natural or desirable? It's not just a matter
> of NIMBY, it's about respecting physical limits.
>
> NIMBY is a term used to distract from what's really going on. Nobody
> should be forced to endure constant crowding, especially of the type
> occurring in the American West. Many realize that the shrinkage of
> prime land has driven up housing costs, but they still act like it can
> go on forever. Money is treated as a resource unto itself, and
> literally being cloned in certain professions.
See:http://enough_already.tripod.com/money.htm
>
> The Earth is a finite mass and its surface gets more jammed each day.
> A lot of people are making money by charging for land that was once
> owned by nobody. The concept of permanent land ownership is purely a
> human one. Most species use what they need and pass on, rarely leaving
> permanent scars.
>
> Some will tell you that the "wasted" American desert should be filled
> with people; just because it might be feasible if enough water was
> diverted. The blight of Phoenix, Vegas and L.A. isn't enough for
> growth addicts seeking easy cash from land that was once free. A
> little smooth talking and they're loaded with false wealth, able to
> buy their own mansion in a transaction cycle that keeps on taking from
> nature. To hell with frontiers and unbroken vistas. A price tag must
> be placed on every piece of usable land that's not spoken for.
>
> Getting to the main point: the big reason these homes get built by the
> thousands each day is POPULATION GROWTH. In the U.S. this amounts to
> about 3 million more people annually. Worldwide it exceeds 70 million
> per year (net gain). If any other species tried to multiply at that
> rate, we'd declare a lock-down. But Man doesn't have to play by the
> rules of nature; so say the "conservatives."
>
> For comparison, deer are generally considered overpopulated (for
> hunting's sake) but they number only about 20 million in America vs.
> 300 million people, headed toward a possible 500 million by the end of
> the century. Each deer also has a much smaller "ecological footprint"
> compared to a person. You can barely tell that deer (or most other
> animals) exist in satellite views, while human habitation creates
> endless scars. Which species is truly overpopulated?
>
> Instead of harping on money and treating land as infinite, people
> should question the economic growthism and lack of global birth
> control that makes all these structures necessary. It seems that's too
> much to ask of the average person, though. They'd rather keep it
> shallow, ignore the root cause and whine about mortgages over
> cocktails.
>
> E.A.
>
> http://enough_already.tripod.com/
>
> Housing starts are a leading indicator of mindless population growth.
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap