Happy National Day?

In China, government and citizens are celebrating the 60th anniversary of communism there.

President Hu Jintao told the masses, "The development and progress of the new China over the past 60 years fully proved that only socialism can save China, and only reform and opening up can ensure the development of China, socialism and Marxism."

However, my thinking is that socialism should not be completely credited for China's recent developments. Too much control over an economy weakens it, just as too much freedom is dangerous. The question is, where in the middle do we strike the best balance?

As a nation that, by nature, falls on the capitalist side of the spectrum, it should be interesting to see how countries like China fare using a different system. Clearly, the socialism vs. capitalism debate is far from over.

Tragic Natural Disaster

My heart goes out to all the earthquake victims in Indonesia and Samoa:

Illegal Immigrants Fired

Apparently the Obama way of dealing with illegal immigrant workers is to fire them, rather than bursting into factories and rounding them up.

I suppose, in one regard, this makes sense. Many immigrants come to the United States to find work, so if you take away their jobs, maybe less will immigrate.

On the other hand, this seems like a temporary solution to a long-term problem. It simply isn't efficient of our government to go around forcing individual companies to fire their workers. And especially in difficult economic times, forcing more layoffs just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. The root cause of this is the relationship between employer and employee. Immigrants get work opportunities here, and employers get cheap labor.

What long-term solution can address this complicated part of our economic system?

Iran Exposed

Iran has gotten itself between a rock and a hard place.

Seemingly caught in a lie about the country's use of nuclear power, Iran has offered to let the International Atomic Energy Agency inspect the power plant, but they have not specified when or in how much detail.

Iran seems to be trying to calm international fears while at the same time not slowing or stopping any significant part of the operation. Good luck with that.



Eyes and ears around the world are now on Iran. I'm not sure how they will handle the situation, but I will be watching to find out.

Swine Flu Vaccinations

In addition to the usual flu vaccinations, a vaccine for the swine flu is available this year, and people are lining up to get it. Many are still confused and scared as a result of the hype back when swine flu first appeared. Turns out, it isn't any more dangerous than the regular flu is, though neither is a picnic to catch.

I'm playing it safe, with regards to both illnesses. See you in the vaccination clinic.

This Spells Trouble

Any time an article like this one starts talking about messing with synthetic life, especially altering human evolution, all sorts of red flags start popping up in my mind.

We can't even control the life there is on this planet! What makes people think things would be any different if we started altering nature? The current design of life is intricate, interconnected, and relatively efficient. If we tried to change anything, the odds are vastly in favor of things going wrong, as opposed to improving.

In addition, as with any new technology, there is the possibility of it getting into the wrong hands. If this technology was developed, it would be used-- that's human nature. It would also most likely be misused.

Is there any reason to risk such drastic consequences? I don't think "because we can" cuts it.

Gay Marriage Advocates Aren't Giving Up

This article describes the Los Angeles group Love Honor Cherish, which is proposing a state constitution repealing the gay marriage ban.


It still surprises and saddens me that the citizens of California, known for being socially liberal, would pass a vote that takes rights away from people because of their sexual orientation. To me, this seems like a step backwards in terms of progress in society.

Now, all we can do is hope that those who are fighting for equal marriage rights are successful.

Dollar 1, Gold 0

According to this article, the value of gold relative to the dollar is dropping rapidly. Investing in precious metals is not looking like such a safe bet. However, this could mean good news for the dollar--it's getting stronger. Is this another sign of a rebound from the recession?

Give Reform a Chance

I realized that, so far, I have yet to take a position on the all-present health care debate in this blog. Videos like this one, that clearly outline each side of the debate, really help me realize where I stand:



I think aspects of each side here are right. Jon Stewart is right when he says that anything relating to the "death panel" idea is ridiculous, and Betsy McCaughey has a good point when she wonders where the money is going to come from.

However, finding things in this bill to argue about, simply for the sake of slowing or stopping the bill from being passed, is counterproductive to the direction that our nation needs to take. No, the money to fund this program will most likely not all come from existing sources. Yes, we should give it a chance anyway. Although the transition will take some adjusting, the money we will save in the long run will be worth it, as well as the social reform, if you want to argue that point. Older folks will still be able to get their hip replacements, and the rest of us will have access to affordable health care...if the government is able to overcome efforts to sabotage this plan, that is.

Friedman Says It's Getting Hot, Flat, and Crowded

The three most pressing areas of concern presented in Thomas Friedman's Hot, Flat, and Crowded are worldwide exponential population growth, high per capita consumption in developed countries, and the use of non-renewable resources.

The rate of population growth is straining the natural balance of the world to the point where, if circumstances do not change, the earth will no longer be able to support us. A United Nations Population Division report said that "the world population will likely increase by 2.5 billion over the next 43 years, passing from the current 6.7 billion to 9.2 billion in 2050. This increase is equivalent to the total size of the world population in 1950." With this many people competing for a finite amount of resources, something is going to give. Most of this growth will take place in developing countries, so the people who live there will be most affected (at least at first). Michael V. Hayden, director of the CIA, explains that, "if their basic freedoms and basic needs--food, housing, education, employment--are not met, they could be easily attracted to violence, civil unrest, and extremism." Thus, the scarcity of resources will begin to take effect in a very noticeable way if the population continues to surge. In looking for solutions for the problem of population growth, we have two choices: we either slow population growth peacefully out of our own decisions, or the natural processes of earth cause the death toll to be higher than the number of births. Since the fastest growth occurs in places where people live in poverty and cannot, in reality, support multiple children, one way to address this problem is to educate and provide birth control in those places. In addition, government intervention may be needed, since it is unlikely that people will make the decision to have fewer children without incentives. Although this is a very controversial idea, it might be the only way to ensure that the children we do have will be able to live in the world we have grown to love. Leadership is needed to keep people from continuing to act in their own self-interest, and instead think about the world as a whole.

Even assuming it is possible to curtail population growth sufficiently before we set ourselves into a deadly downward spiral, there remains a second problem: wasteful per capita consumption. More and more of the world's population are becoming consumers and using more resources. As Friedman points out, if everyone has a vision and desire for the "American dream", it creates a "huge new demand for 'things,' all of which devour lots of energy, natural resources, land, and water and emit lots of climate-changing greenhouse gases from the time they are produced to when they are discarded." We tend to think of more people being able to have more things as positive change. However, our planet cannot support anywhere near U.S. consumption levels worldwide. Arguing that people need to be kept in poverty to keep society sustainable is controversial, to say the least. What we really need is a change of mindset and a new economic system. Our current economy, which is based on growth, does not take the effects of using a finite amount of resources into account. Instead of gearing our culture toward consumption, we need to spread awareness about the fragility of the natural balance and our impact on it. If we are able to curtail population growth and each person were aware of producing less waste, we would have a shot at being a sustainable society.

The third issue is our excessive use of non-renewable resources. From the time of the Industrial Revolution, we have become dependent on what Rochelle Lefkowitz, president of Pro-Media Communications, calls "fuels from hell." These resources (such as coal and oil) come from underground, are non-renewable, and emit pollutants. It does not matter how much we are able to reduce our population and consumption--we will run out of these resources eventually if we continue to use them, especially at our current rate. We need to utilize what Lefkowitz calls "fuels from heaven," such as wind and solar power, that are endlessly renewable and produce no harmful emissions. However, as things stand now, consumers have no incentives other than ethics to switch to green technology. Solar panels, for example, are too expensive relative to the amount of money that would be saved on electric and gas bills by installing these panels. In order to make the switch to sustainable energy sources, green technology needs to continue to be developed to the point where it is more efficient and inexpensive. In addition, a tax on environmentally unfriendly products would help drastically, such as the carbon dioxide tax that the people of Denmark see on their electricity bill.

Our current circumstances are dire--a population growing out of control, dependent on a high level of consumption based on non-renewable resources. However, if individuals are aware of the consequences of their actions, and if we work together as a world community to come up with solutions to these problems, we have the potential to enact the greatest positive change the world has ever seen. We need to begin making the right decisions, and fast--the earth's clock is ticking.

One Billion Lightbulbs

According to Thomas Friedman's novel Hot, Flat, and Crowded, the world's population is expected to swell by a billion people, many of whom will become producers and consumers, judging by the worldwide rise of the middle class. David Douglas, vice president for eco-responsibility for Sun Microsystems, talks about what would happen if we gave each of them a sixty-watt incandescent lightbulb.

"...a billion of them together weigh around 20,000 metric tons, or about the same as 15,000 Priuses. Now let's turn them on...(they) will only use their bulbs four hours per day, so we're down to 10,000 megawatts at any moment. Yikes! Looks like we'll still need twenty or so new...coal-burning power plants"

We tend to think of more people having more opportunities as a good thing. However, our planet simply cannot support this many people consuming this many resources per capita-- something is going to give.

There is no easy way to curtail the population explosion, and the quote above perfectly illustrates the law of large numbers. Each of us, when going about our daily activities that harm the planet, tends to think, I'm only one person, surely I couldn't make such a drastic difference. However, when we look at the population as a whole, the slightest change in habits could have a dramatic influence on our environment.

What we need to do now is stop using that kind of power for evil, and use it instead for good.

Frugality is Habit-Forming During Recession

The recession is not only changing people's temporary circumstances, it's changing lifestyles.

After economic conditions improve, this article predicts that many will continue to be frugal, spending at only 86% of their pre-recession rate. Habits have changed, and are unlikely to bounce back fully, even when conditions are more stable.

While this sounds disastrous for the economy, it could actually herald a positive turn of events for the environment. Americans consume more resources than we need, with worrying consequences as far as sustainability goes. If we were able to use less without a downturn in the economy, we could actually turn our current economic climate into a positive change. In addition to developing green technology, someone should come up with a new economic plan-- one that doesn't depend on growth.

Obama's Speech Perfectly Innocent

Obama's controversial speech to schoolchildren will take place tomorrow, and people are absolutely hysterical about its content, as shown in this video:

The text of the speech was released today, and I skimmed through it. It's getting children motivated to do well in school.

Oh, jeez. We may have grounds for impeachment here.

I've known kids who needed motivation. This is for our own good-- an education is important in terms of making a living, and if children achieve to their full potential, they will be happier and more successful later on.

Can someone please explain to me what the problem is here?

Cash for....Appliances?

The federal government is preparing a program similar to Cash for Clunkers, but this time the "clunkers" in question are energy inefficient household appliances (full story here).

Delaware, which is combining these federal funds with its own plan for a project, is getting more of a jump start than most other states. Hopefully, this will soon be available across the country. If this is as successful as Cash for Clunkers was, it will increase energy efficiency and stimulate the economy, particularly an industry that has been hit hard by the recession.

Senator Harris McDowell said it well: "A tough economy is exactly the right time to take aggressive action toward a sustainable energy future, and everyone can reap the benefits."

The Bigfoot of Carbon Footprints

Thomas Friedman's idea of a "dumb as we wanna be" mentality applies to our impact on the environment, too. While many people I know care about the environment, few are willing to fundamentally change their lifestyles to be more environmentally conscious. Convenience now is taking a toll on future generations.

According to this segment on NPR, "even the people in the U.S. with the lowest energy usage have a carbon footprint about twice as large as the average global citizen."

Frightening.

America needs to change the bad habits we've developed, which clearly won't be easy. However, we as a nation need to get out of denial fast, because time is running out. Soon, we won't be able to scramble out of the downward slope we've created for ourselves-- it will already be too late.