http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
In my view, the municipality acts of Ontario are somewhat lacking and instead of leading to good governance, they are leading to the self destruction of communities and bad governance. Reformation of the parliamentary system may indeed be needed because larger governing bodies may suffer from the same weaknesses as the municipalities. The whole province may harbour pockets of communities that may be governed corruptly.
Having lived in Quebec during the time of Duplessis, It would not be the first time governing bodies abused their electorate and the whole system was fundamentally deficient.
It seems that even if the majority of people are against some thing in Grand Bend, they can be forced to accept it, because they live within Lambton Shores, a municipality that has more authority. Yes, quite! And, it has more scope for bad government, or corrupt government.
The issue of sewerage systems is an environmental issue, but the identity of those being forced to change to an environmentally inferior system is at risk. It's like a city closing down a forest because it does not like trees. Yes! You my reader can understand that a city that closes down a forest because it does not like trees is not good for the forest.
In Grand Bend, a community within a city is being force into making changes that will alter the character of the village. Just the process of change will destroy a struggling community spirit of the village, pitting people against each other, and will cut into the forest to make changes that it claims are an improvement, but which village says it does not need, nor want. The city also says that the village must pay for these unwanted changes. In essence, the city is a bully, is environmentally destructive and fails to meet the challenges of good governance.
An earlier comment in my blog pages was that sewage systems engineers can come to govern a community. This notion was taken from someone with long experience in fighting an ineffective sewerage system. This person, a lawyer, claimed that no one else knew more about sewer systems.
The identity crisis facing Grand Bend is happening because of the linear thinking process that governs the projections into the future of trends that cannot continue without fundamentally altering the character of the Ontario environment.
When villages should be villages, the community has now to behave like a city. This is a recipe for disaster. A village needs to be a village if the community is to pull together.
One could be forgiven if one thinks that the shit methods of the city and it's problems are being foisted on an innocent village community and a sewer of a problem is destroying it's spirit.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
http://www.google.com/mobile/voice/
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
Some feel that their elected representatives went beyond their civil roles when they made the choice of sewer system for Grand Bend based on the recommendations of a third party, namely the Dillon Corp. Others complained that the company assigned to research alternatives did not really consider very deeply the choices available, and especially the choice that the community had already made historically which favored septic systems.
In the future, the community will have to make choices, and it is a big question whether households will be given the opportunity to participate in those choices and take them on board. It really does matter in Canada that people have the freedom to choose for themselves. It is a cultural value that people here will fight vigorously for.
That the issue of which sewer system revolves around choice is quite apparent to me because of the discussions I have had with a number of very bright people of different cultural backgrounds.
Please view the following TED talk and see whether you might alter your view as regards the political process affecting which sewer system is chosen in Grand Bend.
http://blog.singhanuvrat.com/miscel/ted-talks-sheena-iyengar-on-the-art-of-choosing
Now having viewed the video on your computer or iPad, you may feel as I do that what has happened in Grand Bend is a matter of how different people might view the question of choosing which sewer systems and where. The fact is that there are many choices wrapped up in this single choice.
Overall, I am convinced that individual households need to have the freedom to make their choice whether or not it is the correct choice. Thus, I am in favor of the septic system since it is my choice. However, I do realize that there are authors who say that the government should decide for me which system to implement. My response to that is that it is too radical a departure from my original understanding of what would be my choices in the future. It is so radical a departure that I would feel greatly justified in pursuing the matter in a Court of Justice.
The issue then becomes one of whether the Court would decide in my favor given that it is the Government that is limiting my choice. In response, I would feel that it is the government 's role to respect my choices in matters that represent radical departures from what I am expecting when I engage in a long term commitment to manage my property in a reasonable citizen like way. As a citizen, it is my responsibility to make choices that do not detract greatly from other peoples enjoyment of living close to me. Thus, as a good citizen, I would not do anything to endanger them like having a large bonfire in the back garden which could get out of control and start a serious forest fire.
Thus, it is that the choices a government might wish to make are limited just as my own choices are limited. Both I and the government have the moral responsibility of not departing too radically from what would endanger the people of e community. I would argue that it is the government's responsibility to refrain from taking choices away from households where they can make effective decisions and ones that protect the community.
Where governments go wrong is where they assume they can make choices for citizens beyond what is expected by the citizenry. Thus, to take away environmental responsibility from households would be a bad step and would open up the destruction of the role at citizens play in researching choices and in making them based on their role as good citizens.
We are not a dictatorship in Canada and we honor our citizenry and the education system we have that enables that citizenry to make good and wise choices, household by household.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
http://mila-loveology.blogspot.com/
And, if world travel is your thing!
http://www.poshgirlpeasantgirl.com/
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
What we are seeing is a shift from a world driven by linear thinking into one that is modestly non-linear. What this means is that the resolution of many problems is finally being tackled in the international arena. This is potentially the period of take-off in which the many non-)participant economies around the globe begin to participate more and more effectively. However, it is a period in which the forces against change will be enormous. There are many vested interests in the old linear orders.
Rather than allow the change to advance, those against change will press for order and regimentation. The fear of change is such that many will force the issue of keeping things the way they are against their own best interests. This could produce nasty conflict.
The thing to understand about a non-linear world is that it creates natural variety and moves increasingly away from homogeneity. It is the rainbowing of culture that will strike most people the hardest. As cultures increasingly intermingle, those vested interests within cultures will battle against the variety of options that will allow people to substitute away from regimentation and regulation.
The old norms will be replaced by variegated strains of wonderful opportunities for those that have been held back artificially and who did not see their future as within the world community. Global forces will add to the change process given greater scope for creativity in more and more arrangements.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
What brought down the British Empire was it's debts to America.
What brought down the German Empire was it's debts to France which led to the greatest recession the world has even known.
What is bringing down America is it's debt.
The writing is on the wall, you United States. Your civilization is doomed because you are so much in debt and you don't even change your ways.
Doomed, I say! Doomed!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/business/22gret.html?src=me&ref=business
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
If governments such as those influenced by Bush and Brown use housing as a way to gain popularity and political muscle, they will again sow the seeds of financial disaster. The value of houses needs to grow in line with the ability of income growth to sustain mortgage payments that actually wind down individual debt over time. Thus, we can see that it is beneficial that within a lifetime a household pays off the mortgage.
It's very easy to raise house prices by artificially creating a market with excessive growth in money supply. One simply engineers a money based demand ahead of what would occur naturally over time with a moderate demographic expansion and normal growth of incomes. Moderate and normal can be estimated. We can all see when peoples purchases of property are pushed forward in time because they panic that they will not be able to afford a home. It is sheer nonsense that this should have happened in the United States and Britain. It is sheer economic incompetence! It is the fault of the FED and the Bank of England and other regulatory entities. Don't blame the banks. They always are predictable in their behavior. What happened was regulatory failure!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/business/economy/23decline.html?src=me&ref=general
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
Having said that one would think that it is a good idea to tax the rich very heavily and not worry too much about the growth consequences. After all if the rich benefit the most from growth why do you want to grow. It's not that the rich benefit the most it's that the rich benefit alone and the middle and lower people scarcely benefit at all.
In fact, it is probably the case that balancing the budget should be the very least that is achieved. Often by taxing the rich one creates scope for the nouveau rich, those who aspire to become rich but whose progress is hampered by very rich. The rich can slow down the rate of economic development, buy out promising technologies and close down competition. It's important thus to tax the rich the most, not just a little bit, but a lot!
What does the American economist Paul Krugman have to say about America's taxing of the rich?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/opinion/23krugman.html?src=me&ref=general
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
Suzi Malin has my sympathy if she indeed looses the light in her studio. I have, however, some difficulty in understanding why the light coming into her studio is so much superior to light in other locations. Maybe existing structures and buildings creat a special effect on the light falling into her studio. If that is the case, maybe she should pay the owners of these structures and buildings a fee for the service that she receives through the light bounces. Do not be angry at me, I am only trying the say that all situations have two sides. The school could refrain from its expansion plans or Suzi could move her studio to another location.
All over the world people are facing situations like Suzi's and most adjust to a new situation without complaining too much.
I myself together with six neighbours were apset about another neighbour who set up a small open saw mill among us. We complained to the authorities and even took a lawyer. We did not get anywhere and certaily did not get any compensation. I moved with my family as My daughter developed astma because of the sawdust that blew to our house.
L
Arthur, life is not fair and just because Suzi happens to be a known artist, why should she be given a special treatment. Let her fight her own fight and do not call the artists of the world to unite in her favour. Your call goes against my sense of fairness.
Dear Reader:
Thank you for your message and discussion of fairness! You obviously have a point about the way light behaves and I believe that the school does not provide secondary light other than what the students receive naturally from above.
My general point is that development is frequently negative and the costs are most frequently not quantified because economic science has no relationship to the real world other than through the price mechanism as exemplified by work of Stiglitz - micro and Friedman - macro.
Fairness represents a negotiated or mediated outcome between interested parties educated in the science of valuing externalities rather than a political process which relies on brute force. If the valuation of externalities were to become a proper economic science then I think real progress would be occurring in economic science.
Unfortunately, economics as developing cannot yet liberate itself from politics or the price mechanism.
Art can be much superior to economics because art can show the way.
Economics in my view has missed the point of engineering to make an environment cozy and loving instead of brutal and depersonalizing. It's not just education but education that is tolerant of art. Sure the kids of Camden who come from outside the locality will benefit, but it is local people who struggle to make a living in the here and now and for which the light is important to only a minority.
In the future, we will need to build churches, houses, educational centers and studios that meet environmental energy saving standards because the old standards have failed us miserably. We have no real pressure to art and quality. Our buildings are based on the profit motive rather than design for excellence and the technical arts. We leave out the values of the past and and future in an obsession with how the present fabric of our efforts can pay for themselves in the shortest space of time.
Proper respect for light is import and we don't appreciate how much dimming the light or shaping it through vegetation and tree canopy can improve our lives.
Can you think of a fair resolution of the conflict between art studio formally Quaker Meeting Hall and school development?
I think Suzi's artistic solution is the best, which is to design the school extension in such a way that it sets an example to the students of the best in cooperation and art and education. We should retain the canopy of trees and diffused light and let our kids explore natural phenomenon, which is why place matters so much in education. Putting kids through school in the concrete city jungle is not optimal!
Design and art, design and education, design and cooperation!!
Words an economist would rarely utter!
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
The economics of this are fairly simple. For the loss of light Suzi should be paid what is called a compensation due to a negative business externality coming from next door. In the case of Suzi Malin's potential contribution to the art world from the studio as is with the natural light and that without the natural light, we are looking not merely at potential, but capacity. Suzi has the capacity to produce masterpieces that would be essentially priceless. In other words, the cost would be more than the School could afford over many centuries. Such is what economists would argue!
Obviously, the school should not be expanded unless it can afford to pay Suzi a reasonable compensation, such as forty or fifty million pounds. David Hockney supports Suzi!
Suzi is a very reasonable person and she deserves her fair compensation, but the story continues as she is put in the position of having to fight for fair treatment.
http://www.camdennewjournal.com/news/2010/jul/lost-light-artist-suzi-malin-turns-developer
Suzi and I shared the studio for a few days in 2004. I would have to agree with her that a studio with such light is worth fighting for. The light in Suzi's studio is amazing.....artist to artist. I would not give it up.
Suzi, fight on! We support your battle for a fairness. Will the school see the light or just take it?
I will definitely follow up on this one.
http://www.thecnj.com/camden/2009/073009/news073009_05.html
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
It is a purpose that is available. Within such systems faith in the purpose of life which is living reinforces it's availability and reinforces it's generality. The parents of those living reinforce the purpose of life as living just by staying alive.
When death appears, the purpose of life is first questioned, then weakened by the fact of death. Without purpose the act of dying is easier and the purpose of living in order to die is reinforced. It is at such a time that faith needs life to reinforce purpose. Thus, a strong life force in any member of the social network creates a revision of purpose back to living and away from death.
We need to have strong life forces present in our social networks. The older person needs a younger person to take an interest in their life so that they can have purpose. Similarly, a young person needs an older person to reinforce their purpose of life, which is to live.
Should a society focus on the after life instead of living, or focus on death instead of living? Surely, there is a cost to a society that focuses on a purpose which is it's elimination from a living environment to one that is either dead or hypothetical.
Thus can Gurdieff speak of the living dead. Such are those whose purpose is focused on death rather than life.
Death will come. Premature death will come to some of us. For the living dead, premature death is a consequence of a weakening purpose in living. It seems ironic that some who want to die will live much longer productive lives than their purpose for living.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.