A new study of urban transport finds that most commuters globally are getting to work by car, fueling pollution, particularly in wealthier regions. Worldwide 51 percent of commutes are made by car, while 26 percent are made by public transit, 16 percent by bike, and 6 percent on foot. That's a big change since my college days.
In USA, I read that 92% is by car. It's been that way for decades, so in USA it hasn't changed that much compared to worldwide.
According to an article I found, electric vehicles are growing in popularity, helping to curb tailpipe pollution, but a study warned that heavy reliance on cars still contributes to urban sprawl, road traffic, and particulate pollution from wear and tear on tires.
“The burden of cars in cities is huge and goes beyond the combustion of petrol,” said Prieto-Curiel. “It is also the parking space required, the driving infrastructure, the noise they produce, the toxic materials used in manufacturing and road pavement, the crashes they cause, and others.”
Interesting article that I excerpted from plus my own research about USA.
I'd like to see goals set for reducing car dependency. For instance in USA, maybe reducing car dependency to 70% from 92%. Just a small change could do a lot for relieving traffic congestion on I-5, for instance.
Goals like this at the local levels might mean more than setting worldwide targets for reducing carbon emissions. It seems like it doesn't matter where we set the carbon emission targets as they are not followed anyway. In USA, under Trump, the government has given up on carbon emission reduction goals anyway.
We need to figure out how to make these changes at our various grassroots levels in each part of the world. The various components which could add up to the large carbon emission number could be where the discussion needs to be focused.
Yale study I found at.
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/cars-commutes-study
E360 Digest, March 19, 2024, More Than Half of Commutes Globally Made by Car, Study Finds.
Wednesday, May 21, 2025
Saturday, May 17, 2025
Violence is a bad strategy for overcoming oppression because oppressors usually have the biggest weapons and will win in the end.
Violence is usually a bad strategy for overcoming oppression because those with the most powerful weapons are the one's who usually prevail. The violence that Hamas brought against Israel was met by a far more powerful response from Israel killing many times more people.
There are better strategies. New inventions and economic conditions can disrupt established orders and bring big changes.
The gradual change that the gay liberation movement and feminism has brought in American culture, over the past few decades, is another example. These things are sometimes thought of as subversive ways to gradually erode and change an existing order.
There are better strategies. New inventions and economic conditions can disrupt established orders and bring big changes.
The gradual change that the gay liberation movement and feminism has brought in American culture, over the past few decades, is another example. These things are sometimes thought of as subversive ways to gradually erode and change an existing order.
Wednesday, May 14, 2025
Things seem to be improving in Syria.
I'm hoping normalization of relations between US and Syria is a good idea. Things seem to be better in Syria since the brutal Assad Regime was overthrown a while back. My information just from following news.
Monday, May 12, 2025
Yes, population growth is a problem as most people in poor countries aspire to consume more; eventually becoming more like Americans.
Some people say that criticizing population growth is unfair to poorer countries as they think the main problem is over consumption in rich countries.
Problem is, it seems like most people, in poor countries, aspire to consume more. China is a good example. It now has a higher carbon footprint than USA due to 1.3 billion people industrializing, versus USA's 0.34 billion. Of course much of China's manufacturing is consumed in USA and other countries, however.
Still 1.3 billion has a big footprint even when the average Chinese citizen still consumes less than the average American. They do still have billionaires, in China, as do many other countries, in the world, including third world nations.
One big change that has happened in the last 50 years, since I entered college, is a huge rise in the consumption levels of people all over the world. Many folks have risen out of poverty in China and other places. This is a bigger change than the population growth, itself, though world population has doubled since then. Over the same time period, consumption has gone up far more.
Population growth is now slowing down, but it is still growing.
Even though many folks, in USA, feel guilty about our level of consumption, I don't see a huge trend toward voluntary simplicity. That can still happen and some folks embrace voluntary simplicity, but it doesn't seem to catch on in a big enough way.
These days, China may be doing more than USA to make it's economy greener. High speed rail, solar power, electric cars, even nuclear power. China has an easier time organizing on a big scale. In USA there are lots of citizen groups who fight changes.
I'd still rather live in USA in spite of democracy's inefficiencies, but it would be better if our self interests could bend a little more for common good.
Let us build that green infrastructure, for the most part at least. We are kind of gridlocked when it comes to making transformational changes. Trump wants to break the gridlock, but he and his supporters want to take us back in the wrong direction.
Problem is, it seems like most people, in poor countries, aspire to consume more. China is a good example. It now has a higher carbon footprint than USA due to 1.3 billion people industrializing, versus USA's 0.34 billion. Of course much of China's manufacturing is consumed in USA and other countries, however.
Still 1.3 billion has a big footprint even when the average Chinese citizen still consumes less than the average American. They do still have billionaires, in China, as do many other countries, in the world, including third world nations.
One big change that has happened in the last 50 years, since I entered college, is a huge rise in the consumption levels of people all over the world. Many folks have risen out of poverty in China and other places. This is a bigger change than the population growth, itself, though world population has doubled since then. Over the same time period, consumption has gone up far more.
Population growth is now slowing down, but it is still growing.
Even though many folks, in USA, feel guilty about our level of consumption, I don't see a huge trend toward voluntary simplicity. That can still happen and some folks embrace voluntary simplicity, but it doesn't seem to catch on in a big enough way.
These days, China may be doing more than USA to make it's economy greener. High speed rail, solar power, electric cars, even nuclear power. China has an easier time organizing on a big scale. In USA there are lots of citizen groups who fight changes.
I'd still rather live in USA in spite of democracy's inefficiencies, but it would be better if our self interests could bend a little more for common good.
Let us build that green infrastructure, for the most part at least. We are kind of gridlocked when it comes to making transformational changes. Trump wants to break the gridlock, but he and his supporters want to take us back in the wrong direction.
Saturday, May 10, 2025
What would my past self think of my life today?
If the Robert of my senior year in high school were to see how my life has turned out now, the first thought might be disappointment. I had visions of a career in radio. Possibly being a talk show host.
Comparing some high school visions to my life now is like comparing apples and oranges, however. The world and what they call the media landscape has changed dramatically. What they call social media didn't even exist back then.
Besides a tinge of disappointment, my high school self would also be fascinated in how the world and technology has changed. That self would be full of questions.
My big desire, back then, was to express my opinions and share of my authentic self; something that's done on social media. The ability to share thousands of my photos and observations, on a media channel that's worldwide at practically no cost, was inconceivable back then. I can pretty much say whatever I want without a boss looking over my shoulder, or the need for catering to a market. The audience is, most likely, a lot smaller, however. Again, it's a case of comparing apples to oranges.
Back in high school, I had visions of maybe someday being a talk show host, or a news commentator on a station like KGO, in San Francisco. It had an audience in the hundreds of thousands reaching up and down the entire west coast, at night, due to ionospheric skip.
Today, my signal can reach around the world, but do very many people tune in, given the millions and millions of other channels bombarding the world with their messages?
Transmitter power is no longer as relevant as it was back then; in fact, the entire AM radio band is almost fading into obscurity.
While I had some big dreams during my childhood, I also had lots of doubts and anxieties. I wasn't sure I would even make it through college. These days there are more terms for these conditions such as anxiety disorder and autism spectrum. Much of the time, during my childhood, I felt like I wouldn't be up to the task for great success anyway.
Since those days, I have seen many more flaws in the places I aspired to as well. Touring some radio / TV stations left me with a feeling that they can be stressful workplaces. With my mental condition, I probably couldn't work there anyway. Expressing one's authentic self would be difficult as well. Working one's way up from the bottom of a large organization was seen as a common route to more authentic self expression, after one gets closer to the top. I now have a somewhat more cynical view of the world around me.
Meanwhile, what happened to KGO Radio would be more of a dissapointment. It's kind of imploded, or at least it's not what it once was. It went to a sports gambling format that didn't last long. Last I saw, on news websites, it has new call letters and right wing talk from a national network. See article from my column in a small local publication called The Betty Pages about KGO.
Where I have ended up does make sense to me, given what I have learned along the way. Things don't necessarily turn out the way one expects, but I feel like excepting how the journey has been turning out is, at least, okay.
It has been an interesting journey so I'd hope that my high school self would be more full of questions and interest, in what the future has brought, than full of harsh judgements.
Besides a tinge of disappointment, my high school self would also be fascinated in how the world and technology has changed. That self would be full of questions.
My big desire, back then, was to express my opinions and share of my authentic self; something that's done on social media. The ability to share thousands of my photos and observations, on a media channel that's worldwide at practically no cost, was inconceivable back then. I can pretty much say whatever I want without a boss looking over my shoulder, or the need for catering to a market. The audience is, most likely, a lot smaller, however. Again, it's a case of comparing apples to oranges.
Back in high school, I had visions of maybe someday being a talk show host, or a news commentator on a station like KGO, in San Francisco. It had an audience in the hundreds of thousands reaching up and down the entire west coast, at night, due to ionospheric skip.
Today, my signal can reach around the world, but do very many people tune in, given the millions and millions of other channels bombarding the world with their messages?
Transmitter power is no longer as relevant as it was back then; in fact, the entire AM radio band is almost fading into obscurity.
While I had some big dreams during my childhood, I also had lots of doubts and anxieties. I wasn't sure I would even make it through college. These days there are more terms for these conditions such as anxiety disorder and autism spectrum. Much of the time, during my childhood, I felt like I wouldn't be up to the task for great success anyway.
Since those days, I have seen many more flaws in the places I aspired to as well. Touring some radio / TV stations left me with a feeling that they can be stressful workplaces. With my mental condition, I probably couldn't work there anyway. Expressing one's authentic self would be difficult as well. Working one's way up from the bottom of a large organization was seen as a common route to more authentic self expression, after one gets closer to the top. I now have a somewhat more cynical view of the world around me.
Meanwhile, what happened to KGO Radio would be more of a dissapointment. It's kind of imploded, or at least it's not what it once was. It went to a sports gambling format that didn't last long. Last I saw, on news websites, it has new call letters and right wing talk from a national network. See article from my column in a small local publication called The Betty Pages about KGO.
Where I have ended up does make sense to me, given what I have learned along the way. Things don't necessarily turn out the way one expects, but I feel like excepting how the journey has been turning out is, at least, okay.
It has been an interesting journey so I'd hope that my high school self would be more full of questions and interest, in what the future has brought, than full of harsh judgements.
Thursday, May 08, 2025
Supporting LGBTQ rights and other human rights might be the best way to boost your country's population. Talented workers will be seeking refuge in your country.
So many folks have been trying to get into Europe, Canada and USA that it's overwhelmed the borders.
On the otherhand, many countries, such as Russia, are trying to raise their birth rates. Who wants to live there? Not me, for sure. Talented people, who think outside the box, are trying to flee that country.
Some folks, like Elon Musk and Puin worry about low birthrates. They worry that there may not be enough young workers, being born, to pay for the social security and drive economic growth as world populations age.
My solution, to the so called problem of underpopulation, is to make one's country a place where people want to immigrate to.
There are certain countries, such as USA (before Trump) Canada, Australia and many European countries that have been overwhelmed by millions of folks trying to immigrate there. People don't want to immigrate to places like Russia in search of personal dignaty and human rights. It can be said that USA might never have a shortage of young workers because all it would have to do is open the borders and they will come. There is the phrase, "vote with your feet."
Ironically, many of the most desirable countries, to live in, are closing their borders, or at least they are restricting immigration. Are too many young folks wanting to live in these desirable countries? It's true, so many have been coming that it's overwhelmed the infrastructure and the affordable housing.
Rather than promoting births, I would rather see the nations of the world strive to become places where people want to live. Ironically, supporting LGBTQ rights might be the best way to increase one's population. Persecuted people are likely to be seeking refugee status in those countries.
I still think the environment would be in better shape if there were less people on the planet, but there is a legitimate worry that there may not be enough young workers, to pay for social security as populations age.
Making your country a desirable place to live is the solution. This should be the strategy for each nation on the national scale. On the global scale, the environment would still be easier to protet with less people on the planet as a whole.
The world would be better if, rather than a race to the bottom, countries competed with one another in creating desirable places to live. If there was ever a shortage of people, the most desirable countries would win in terms of attracting taleted workers to their economies.
Democracies would have an advantage if there was ever a shortage of people because they would have less shortage of people when people choose where they would prefer to live. Betty Pages article.
On the otherhand, many countries, such as Russia, are trying to raise their birth rates. Who wants to live there? Not me, for sure. Talented people, who think outside the box, are trying to flee that country.
Some folks, like Elon Musk and Puin worry about low birthrates. They worry that there may not be enough young workers, being born, to pay for the social security and drive economic growth as world populations age.
My solution, to the so called problem of underpopulation, is to make one's country a place where people want to immigrate to.
There are certain countries, such as USA (before Trump) Canada, Australia and many European countries that have been overwhelmed by millions of folks trying to immigrate there. People don't want to immigrate to places like Russia in search of personal dignaty and human rights. It can be said that USA might never have a shortage of young workers because all it would have to do is open the borders and they will come. There is the phrase, "vote with your feet."
Ironically, many of the most desirable countries, to live in, are closing their borders, or at least they are restricting immigration. Are too many young folks wanting to live in these desirable countries? It's true, so many have been coming that it's overwhelmed the infrastructure and the affordable housing.
Rather than promoting births, I would rather see the nations of the world strive to become places where people want to live. Ironically, supporting LGBTQ rights might be the best way to increase one's population. Persecuted people are likely to be seeking refugee status in those countries.
I still think the environment would be in better shape if there were less people on the planet, but there is a legitimate worry that there may not be enough young workers, to pay for social security as populations age.
Making your country a desirable place to live is the solution. This should be the strategy for each nation on the national scale. On the global scale, the environment would still be easier to protet with less people on the planet as a whole.
The world would be better if, rather than a race to the bottom, countries competed with one another in creating desirable places to live. If there was ever a shortage of people, the most desirable countries would win in terms of attracting taleted workers to their economies.
Democracies would have an advantage if there was ever a shortage of people because they would have less shortage of people when people choose where they would prefer to live. Betty Pages article.
Tuesday, April 29, 2025
Having a family is often given as an excuse for having a car.
I often tell people I have never driven or owned a car. They often say, "That is admirable for health and the environment." Then the next thing they say is, "But we have a family." "we have to get kids to soccer practice and so forth, so we can't live that way."
Friday, April 25, 2025
Neurodivergent possibly a better term than autism.
I haven't been diagnosed officially, but several people have said that I may be on the autism spectrum. I think that a better term to describe this is neurodivergent; someone who's brain works differently than average.
Autism is in the news with HHS Secretary Kennedy's wish to study it. I doubt that it's related to vaccines. My own assumption is that autism seems more prevalent, these days, due to more awareness. Back during my childhood, people weren't aware of it.
These days, it seems like lots more people are on that spectrum, probably because, in the past, it just wasn't articulated. Some folks have always been a bit strange and had some trouble plugging into mainstream jobs, schools and so forth, but describing it as autism wasn't done.
When I first started hearing about it, I thought that one could call it a "catchall disease." One can be different in many ways so just toss it into that category.
Thinking of it as a disease can be problematic though I hear there is a spectrum from high functioning to severely limited. In some cases it can even be a virtue given what mix of skills one might have, or not have.
The term neurodivergent seems to work better, in my opinion. There are lots of different kinds of people and there are many attempts, especially in recent times, to find ways for divergent people to connect with jobs, schooling and so forth. It takes some flexibility in things like school lessons, resumes and so forth.
Autism is in the news with HHS Secretary Kennedy's wish to study it. I doubt that it's related to vaccines. My own assumption is that autism seems more prevalent, these days, due to more awareness. Back during my childhood, people weren't aware of it.
These days, it seems like lots more people are on that spectrum, probably because, in the past, it just wasn't articulated. Some folks have always been a bit strange and had some trouble plugging into mainstream jobs, schools and so forth, but describing it as autism wasn't done.
When I first started hearing about it, I thought that one could call it a "catchall disease." One can be different in many ways so just toss it into that category.
Thinking of it as a disease can be problematic though I hear there is a spectrum from high functioning to severely limited. In some cases it can even be a virtue given what mix of skills one might have, or not have.
The term neurodivergent seems to work better, in my opinion. There are lots of different kinds of people and there are many attempts, especially in recent times, to find ways for divergent people to connect with jobs, schooling and so forth. It takes some flexibility in things like school lessons, resumes and so forth.
Thursday, April 24, 2025
The virtues and tradeoffs of local sourcing. Short term propserity is not one of them.
There are many values in life beyond things that are counted by money and prosperity. Things like free time, peace of mind, rest, health, friends, hobbies and interests.
The economy of money is important, but it's not the whole story. It does seem like today's prosperity relies on international trade and ironically, President Trump, in the name of increasing economic prosperity, has thrown a monkey wrench into trade and the economy. We are likely experiencing higher prices and an economic downturn.
Local sourcing for manufacturing is a virtue in itself, but not likely to bring short term prosperity. Voters, who want results quickly, are likely to be disappointed.
Local sourcing is something that a lot of people, on the left, have talked about also; for instance local sourcing of food. Many folks complain about foods shipped from thousands of miles; such as the opposition to the "thousand mile salad." They want "locally produced," such as, supposedly, at places like the Bellingham Farmer's Market. Then they buy some coffee; not grown locally. Ironically the wide variety of fresh vegies in salads need to be sourced from far places when it isn't the growing season for fresh things locally. We could rely more on canned goods, I guess.
Problem is, we can't have it all. American people are somewhat spoiled.
Local, community values, time and money are all factors we have to balance each day. I think in terms of things being tradeoffs rather than zero sum games.
The economy of money is important, but it's not the whole story. It does seem like today's prosperity relies on international trade and ironically, President Trump, in the name of increasing economic prosperity, has thrown a monkey wrench into trade and the economy. We are likely experiencing higher prices and an economic downturn.
Local sourcing for manufacturing is a virtue in itself, but not likely to bring short term prosperity. Voters, who want results quickly, are likely to be disappointed.
Local sourcing is something that a lot of people, on the left, have talked about also; for instance local sourcing of food. Many folks complain about foods shipped from thousands of miles; such as the opposition to the "thousand mile salad." They want "locally produced," such as, supposedly, at places like the Bellingham Farmer's Market. Then they buy some coffee; not grown locally. Ironically the wide variety of fresh vegies in salads need to be sourced from far places when it isn't the growing season for fresh things locally. We could rely more on canned goods, I guess.
Problem is, we can't have it all. American people are somewhat spoiled.
Local, community values, time and money are all factors we have to balance each day. I think in terms of things being tradeoffs rather than zero sum games.
Sunday, April 20, 2025
The job slashers at DOGE forget that many skilled people are on probation so they get fired while some of the dead wood is not on probation so it remains. That's not a strategy based on merit.
Elon Musk's DOGE government cuts seems like the Peter Principle to me. That principle about mediocracy rising to the top.
I hear only 4% of the budget is staff and they keep saying, "Laid off employees are put on administrative leave with pay;" I guess. They are not saving much money and still paying salaries just to not have the work done?
Then they are laying off new staff that is still on probation. This seems like seniority over skill. Why not layoff those deemed less competent and forget about seniority? Much as they talk about tearing things down and disliking unions, maybe that's a bridge too far? If it isn't politically easy to slash folks with highest pay and seniority, in favor of keeping new hires possibly based on merit, it's just the old order wielding a new meataxe.
I hear only 4% of the budget is staff and they keep saying, "Laid off employees are put on administrative leave with pay;" I guess. They are not saving much money and still paying salaries just to not have the work done?
Then they are laying off new staff that is still on probation. This seems like seniority over skill. Why not layoff those deemed less competent and forget about seniority? Much as they talk about tearing things down and disliking unions, maybe that's a bridge too far? If it isn't politically easy to slash folks with highest pay and seniority, in favor of keeping new hires possibly based on merit, it's just the old order wielding a new meataxe.
Thursday, April 10, 2025
The reaction against immigration is a reaction to overpopulation, but the reaction could even be worse than the problem itself.
The reaction against immigration, in much of the world including USA, is like a symptom of a disease. The disease is over population, but the symptom could be worse than the disease, itself. It's like an auto immune disease where the reaction is worse than the disease itself.
The world could accommodate it's 8+ billion people better than it does today, but the reaction against new arrivals is pretty strong. The reaction indicates that there is a problem of too many people, but the reaction, itself, is likely worse than the actual problem.
The world could accommodate it's 8+ billion people better than it does today, but the reaction against new arrivals is pretty strong. The reaction indicates that there is a problem of too many people, but the reaction, itself, is likely worse than the actual problem.
Republican Party brand is losing popularity.
A silver lining in all this world economic chaos is that the Republican Party brand is losing popularity.
It looks like Trump has painted himself in to a corner.
It looks like Trump has painted himself in to a corner.
Monday, April 07, 2025
April 5th protest in Bellingham.
The volitility of one person rule.
The Republican Congress has given the president too much power so he can be nearly a dictator via executive order.
World stock markets go up or down based on his actions and or rumors of his actions. He and his ideas drive much of the international news and happenings.
World stock markets go up or down based on his actions and or rumors of his actions. He and his ideas drive much of the international news and happenings.
Taxes, tariffs, revenue enhancements. All names for similar things.
Taxes, to pay for the government services that people use, are an unpopular concept. Often politicians will call them by a different name; for instance tariffs on imports.
Tariffs are basically taxes by a different name. They are more like consumption taxes; like sales taxes. They tend to be more regressive as focused on lower and middle income classes versus graduated income taxes which focus more on wealthy folks.
Right wing populism tends to shift taxes away from upper class people; possibly due to the law of unintended consequences. Don't believe all the rhetoric from right wing pundits.
Another phrase that is used instead of taxes is "Revenue Enhancements." After George Bush Sr. said "read my lips, no new taxes" he did sign some bills to help fund Social Security and so forth. They were called revenue enhancements.
Taxes are often needed to pay for the services that most people expect from government.
Tariffs are basically taxes by a different name. They are more like consumption taxes; like sales taxes. They tend to be more regressive as focused on lower and middle income classes versus graduated income taxes which focus more on wealthy folks.
Right wing populism tends to shift taxes away from upper class people; possibly due to the law of unintended consequences. Don't believe all the rhetoric from right wing pundits.
Another phrase that is used instead of taxes is "Revenue Enhancements." After George Bush Sr. said "read my lips, no new taxes" he did sign some bills to help fund Social Security and so forth. They were called revenue enhancements.
Taxes are often needed to pay for the services that most people expect from government.
When workers shot themselves in the foot, politically. Remembering when Reagan fired the PATCO Union that had endorsed him in 1980.
Auto workers union still supports the tariffs thinking it will shift work back to USA. If car sales drop and workers get laid off, they may change their minds.
I remember, during Ronald Reagan's Presidency, the union for air traffic controllers endorsed Reagan in 1980. Soon after that, they ask for improvements in their working conditions that Reagan refused, due to his promise to cut domestic spending. The air controllers went on strike and Reagan played hardball. They got fired.
The system continued as folks crossed the picket lines. This was seen as a turning point in Reagan breaking the unions.
I remember, during Ronald Reagan's Presidency, the union for air traffic controllers endorsed Reagan in 1980. Soon after that, they ask for improvements in their working conditions that Reagan refused, due to his promise to cut domestic spending. The air controllers went on strike and Reagan played hardball. They got fired.
The system continued as folks crossed the picket lines. This was seen as a turning point in Reagan breaking the unions.
Some comparisons between today and the 1960s.
Money is not that good of a measure for quality of life. No amount of money, millions, billions, or even trillions of dollars could have purchased a smartphone, in the 1960s, as its capabilities did not exist. If those capabilities were to even partially exist, back then, it would be worth millions, yet today, it could cost well a few hundred dollars; much less than one month's rent for most US apartments.
Today, we struggle to produce enough value, in goods and services, to pay the cost of living. With warning signs flashing, from climate change and / or the federal debt, anxiety is through the roof. Add to this, worry about the trade deficit.
In early childhood, I saw a movie, at the Cordova Theater in Pullman, called "Babes in Toyland." They figured out how to get the machine running faster and faster making more and more toys till the machine blew up. The lights went dark, as they hid outside the factory. Peering through a window, they saw the dead toy machine in eerie silence.
I remember being scared of the dark for a long time after that.
More recently, I watched that movie again on YouTube. It seemed to have a hidden political message about society, consumption and moneymaking that went over my head as a child.
One of the joys of my childhood was the transistor radio. Today I think of it as the smartphone of the 1960s. It was far, far less capable than so many of the products, we have today, but the feeling of wealth, that it provided, seemed comparable to what people feel today, if not greater.
In earlier decades, our expectations seemed lower, yet mundane things; like a place to call home and ability to see the dentist, were a given; if one was middle class at least.
Today, we are more aware of neighbors around us, in USA, with struggles for survival. Some of that trauma was more swept under the carpet, back then at least.
One difference between a portable radio and the smartphone is a smartphone's dependency on the network. Without elaborate systems of the internet and cell towers, the smartphone loses just about all it's capability. On the other hand, the radio is more independent with it's own battery for power. It works without a phone network, or subscription to cellphone service.
Radios can still be a dream product for independent minded survivalists. They work off the grid, but they still rely on civilization to function. There needs to be radio stations for radios to pick up the signal and the programming. Without radio stations, the radio only gets static which might be useful on the AM band for warning if a thunderstorm is nearby. The crackle of distant lightning has a characteristic sound on AM radios.
Still, radio stations are important for radios to work. Aside from so many people's low opinions about the fabric of community that we share, our devices and riches are still pretty much dependent on community. Even the transistor radio, which could be king of the toolbox for survivalists, needs radio stations equipped with auxiliary generators to power the station in an emergency.
Wealth, measured in money, is dependent on what the market will price things at. Perception of well being is more than just GDP, as measured in money, and we really can't detach ourselves from community and the world.
Today, we struggle to produce enough value, in goods and services, to pay the cost of living. With warning signs flashing, from climate change and / or the federal debt, anxiety is through the roof. Add to this, worry about the trade deficit.
In early childhood, I saw a movie, at the Cordova Theater in Pullman, called "Babes in Toyland." They figured out how to get the machine running faster and faster making more and more toys till the machine blew up. The lights went dark, as they hid outside the factory. Peering through a window, they saw the dead toy machine in eerie silence.
I remember being scared of the dark for a long time after that.
More recently, I watched that movie again on YouTube. It seemed to have a hidden political message about society, consumption and moneymaking that went over my head as a child.
One of the joys of my childhood was the transistor radio. Today I think of it as the smartphone of the 1960s. It was far, far less capable than so many of the products, we have today, but the feeling of wealth, that it provided, seemed comparable to what people feel today, if not greater.
In earlier decades, our expectations seemed lower, yet mundane things; like a place to call home and ability to see the dentist, were a given; if one was middle class at least.
Today, we are more aware of neighbors around us, in USA, with struggles for survival. Some of that trauma was more swept under the carpet, back then at least.
One difference between a portable radio and the smartphone is a smartphone's dependency on the network. Without elaborate systems of the internet and cell towers, the smartphone loses just about all it's capability. On the other hand, the radio is more independent with it's own battery for power. It works without a phone network, or subscription to cellphone service.
Radios can still be a dream product for independent minded survivalists. They work off the grid, but they still rely on civilization to function. There needs to be radio stations for radios to pick up the signal and the programming. Without radio stations, the radio only gets static which might be useful on the AM band for warning if a thunderstorm is nearby. The crackle of distant lightning has a characteristic sound on AM radios.
Still, radio stations are important for radios to work. Aside from so many people's low opinions about the fabric of community that we share, our devices and riches are still pretty much dependent on community. Even the transistor radio, which could be king of the toolbox for survivalists, needs radio stations equipped with auxiliary generators to power the station in an emergency.
Wealth, measured in money, is dependent on what the market will price things at. Perception of well being is more than just GDP, as measured in money, and we really can't detach ourselves from community and the world.
Friday, April 04, 2025
Schumer dodged the bullet of blame on government shutdown and then let the Republicans fall on their own tariff sword.
Senate Minority Leader Schumer (D) dodged a bullet of blame when he voted to along with Republicans to raise the debt ceiling and avert a government shutdown.
Now Trump and the Republicans are crashing the stock market with extreme tariffs. This is likely leading us into inflation and recession. The pottery barn rule applies to Republicans who are likely to be in full path of blame. "You break it, you own it."
Now Trump and the Republicans are crashing the stock market with extreme tariffs. This is likely leading us into inflation and recession. The pottery barn rule applies to Republicans who are likely to be in full path of blame. "You break it, you own it."
Why so many people have more stuff, than in past decades, but feel like they are in more poverty?
I'm old enough to remember the 1960s though I was a child. In many ways, it was a more spartan time than today. Compare the transistor radio, which could only pick up a few stations, to the smartphone of today.
At the same time, there was more of a feeling of prosperity. Why is this the case? One thing is that among the large middle class, there was more security about basics such as housing and health insurance. Yes, the luxuries were spartan, but something we didn't look forward to was more assured; going to the dentist.
Expectations were lower so I think there was a bit less of comparing one's lot in life with others. Yes, there was the phrase, "keeping up with the Joneses," but it seemed like less of a zero sum game for survival, or at least to avoid homelessness.
As we face big worries, from the left over climate change and from the right over the deficit, it seems like austerity is likely to be shoved upon the bulk of people; except as always, most of the super rich. Bad politics will likely keep people unhappy, but in an ideal world we ought to figure out how to measure our progress in less financial ways.
All the money, in the world, could not have bought the smartphone, back in the 1960s, yet today it's vast capabilities are, basically, taken for granted.
Measuring everything in financial terms is very limited. Multi million dollar computers of decades past have little capability, or portability, that so much less expensive things have today, yet measuring these gifts in money seems to be a broken paradigm.
What is the true worth of an experience, of friendships of community, safety and the environment? Money doesn't even provide an absolute measure of something like a smartphone. In 1960s it would be almost like having pure magic. Today, it's value pales compared to one month's rent in a cheap apartment.
Expectations were lower so I think there was a bit less of comparing one's lot in life with others. Yes, there was the phrase, "keeping up with the Joneses," but it seemed like less of a zero sum game for survival, or at least to avoid homelessness.
As we face big worries, from the left over climate change and from the right over the deficit, it seems like austerity is likely to be shoved upon the bulk of people; except as always, most of the super rich. Bad politics will likely keep people unhappy, but in an ideal world we ought to figure out how to measure our progress in less financial ways.
All the money, in the world, could not have bought the smartphone, back in the 1960s, yet today it's vast capabilities are, basically, taken for granted.
Measuring everything in financial terms is very limited. Multi million dollar computers of decades past have little capability, or portability, that so much less expensive things have today, yet measuring these gifts in money seems to be a broken paradigm.
What is the true worth of an experience, of friendships of community, safety and the environment? Money doesn't even provide an absolute measure of something like a smartphone. In 1960s it would be almost like having pure magic. Today, it's value pales compared to one month's rent in a cheap apartment.
A silver lining is the discrediting of the Republican Party.
Due to the law of unintended consequences, Trump and the Republican Party, I think we are headed into a period of austerity and much less material prosperity for most people.
A silver lining is the discrediting of the Republican Party.
Tuesday, April 01, 2025
Trump's bait and switch. Now it's get used to sacrifice. Since we are ask to do it anyway, it's better to sacrifice consumption for the environment, however.
Concern over inflation is one thing that powered Trump's campaign. Now it looks like "bait and switch" as tariffs are likely to add to inflation.
So there's a new promise? Short term sacrifice for long term gain; localizing production. Is that even worth it? Manufacturing doesn't create lots of jobs given automation.
It may be a case of making lemonade out of lemons; the lemonade is reduced consumption.
I know it will hurt a lot of people, but my thought is that reducing consumption can be a good thing overall for the environment and the long term human condition. You're given lemons, you make lemonade. This is not what most Trump supporters had in mind, but there is the law of unintended consequences.
Maybe most cars are lemons anyway. Trump only won by a very thin margin. Economic angst can turn popular opinion and elections on a dime.
So there's a new promise? Short term sacrifice for long term gain; localizing production. Is that even worth it? Manufacturing doesn't create lots of jobs given automation.
It may be a case of making lemonade out of lemons; the lemonade is reduced consumption.
I know it will hurt a lot of people, but my thought is that reducing consumption can be a good thing overall for the environment and the long term human condition. You're given lemons, you make lemonade. This is not what most Trump supporters had in mind, but there is the law of unintended consequences.
Maybe most cars are lemons anyway. Trump only won by a very thin margin. Economic angst can turn popular opinion and elections on a dime.
Sunday, March 30, 2025
Can 8 billion plus people on this planet live the American Dream as currently defined by many?
8 billion plus people, on this planet, can't all live the so called "American Dream" as it's currently defined in much of popular opinion. The carbon footprint is too high, there isn't enough space for all the cars.
Now I see, in the news, that many immigrants to richer countries are starting the realize that the welcome mat is frayed. Realizing the dream is impractical, they are sometimes making do and learning to appreciate their own countries. Hopefully some of the oppressive governments, in those countries, can be reformed.
The whole world, including USA, may have to learn different and less consumptive ways of living. Hopefully cultural and technological advance, miniaturization and so forth, can help people along the way.
I heard this segment of NPR Sunday Morning Edition this morning. Toward the end it talks about people possibly making the best of things and appreciating, to some extent, the countries, the beaches, the families, communities and the lives that they left as they find themselves unwelcome many of the places they have tried to migrate to.
Now I see, in the news, that many immigrants to richer countries are starting the realize that the welcome mat is frayed. Realizing the dream is impractical, they are sometimes making do and learning to appreciate their own countries. Hopefully some of the oppressive governments, in those countries, can be reformed.
The whole world, including USA, may have to learn different and less consumptive ways of living. Hopefully cultural and technological advance, miniaturization and so forth, can help people along the way.
I heard this segment of NPR Sunday Morning Edition this morning. Toward the end it talks about people possibly making the best of things and appreciating, to some extent, the countries, the beaches, the families, communities and the lives that they left as they find themselves unwelcome many of the places they have tried to migrate to.
Friday, March 28, 2025
Relocalizing manufacturing may not create that many jobs as manufacturing automates more and more as time goes on.
Much of Trump's thin margin in the popular vote was due to promises to reduce inflation and increase prosperity. Now his rhetoric has shifted toward short term sacrifice for long term gain; supposedly tariffs will bring short term hardship for a future of greater prosperity. Manufacturing jobs relocating to USA.
Problem is, manufacturing is becoming so automated that it doesn't create as many jobs as in the smokestack past. Tariffs are likely to bring down prosperity instead. As I've been thinking all along, USA needs to consume less. Less cars, for instance.
Unfortunately, that burden of sacrifice is borne by the majority of folks, while a wealthy elite continue to benefit from wider income inequality. Automated manufacturing can increase wealth inequality as owners profit while few workers benefit.
What we need is a society that is less focused on materialistic gains. We need a culture that flourishes in other ways. We have much of that now as it flourishes in the arts, learning, human connection and volunteerism. Life is about more than just money.
Trumpism seems to be trying to take us in another direction.
Problem is, manufacturing is becoming so automated that it doesn't create as many jobs as in the smokestack past. Tariffs are likely to bring down prosperity instead. As I've been thinking all along, USA needs to consume less. Less cars, for instance.
Unfortunately, that burden of sacrifice is borne by the majority of folks, while a wealthy elite continue to benefit from wider income inequality. Automated manufacturing can increase wealth inequality as owners profit while few workers benefit.
What we need is a society that is less focused on materialistic gains. We need a culture that flourishes in other ways. We have much of that now as it flourishes in the arts, learning, human connection and volunteerism. Life is about more than just money.
Trumpism seems to be trying to take us in another direction.
The ways I would hope we could have avoided to reduce consumption.
Family Planning, like Planned Parenthood does, is a better way to deal with an overwhelming number of mouths to feed than starvation. Today's news is talking about rising hunger, in the world, related to cuts in USAID.
On another topic, I sometimes think there are too many cars. Today, I hear news about tariffs on imported cars. Well, I guess cars will go up in price waiting for US production to ramp up. There are better ways to reduce car dependency than tariffs on cars and car parts. The auto industry straddles borders.
Reduce dependency on imported cars from bicycles and transit.
On another topic, I sometimes think there are too many cars. Today, I hear news about tariffs on imported cars. Well, I guess cars will go up in price waiting for US production to ramp up. There are better ways to reduce car dependency than tariffs on cars and car parts. The auto industry straddles borders.
Reduce dependency on imported cars from bicycles and transit.
Thursday, March 27, 2025
Is US becoming one party state allowing one autocrat to rule by executive order?
This president is basically doing everything with executive orders. Congress is supposed to have a say, but the Republican majority, in Congress, tends to back the president so Congress has basically become irrelevant.
Only some US court judges stand in the way of these executive orders. About the only big decision, in Congress was to raise the debt ceiling. If the Democrats would have blocked that, it might have just put them in the path of blame for government shutdown.
Who knows, maybe this president would have just raised the debt ceiling by executive order? I wouldn't put it past him and who would have stopped it, except for some judges?
Our system of checks and balances looks like it's only being held together by a thin line of judges and who knows how long that can last given appeals to the mostly Republican Supreme Court. Also who enforces the rules that any of the Federal judges make?
Fortunately Supreme Court justices don't always vote "party line," but the federal government does seem to be evolving into a one party / one person (Donald Trump) system. Without the judges, are we sliding into an autocracy?
There are other checks, however. There are the opinions of American people, who only put Trump back in the White House with a very thin margin. That margin can easily erode given economic problems, such as the cost of living which no president seems to be able to bring down.
There's also still the media and it's influence on public opinion.
There are state and local governments which still have quite a bit of power.
There is also the private sector; businesses, corporations, unions, non profits and so forth that still have power and influence.
There's the influence of world opinion, including the allies that once trusted us in Europe, Canada and so forth. That respect is quickly vanishing as former allies are working on plans to deal with the US as an unreliable partner these days.
The economy could be the ultimate check; the stock market and so forth. Do most of the American people feel happy and secure, or is the cost of living and economic uncertainty continuing to ravage public opinion? This can turn against the Republicans in power.
Only some US court judges stand in the way of these executive orders. About the only big decision, in Congress was to raise the debt ceiling. If the Democrats would have blocked that, it might have just put them in the path of blame for government shutdown.
Who knows, maybe this president would have just raised the debt ceiling by executive order? I wouldn't put it past him and who would have stopped it, except for some judges?
Our system of checks and balances looks like it's only being held together by a thin line of judges and who knows how long that can last given appeals to the mostly Republican Supreme Court. Also who enforces the rules that any of the Federal judges make?
Fortunately Supreme Court justices don't always vote "party line," but the federal government does seem to be evolving into a one party / one person (Donald Trump) system. Without the judges, are we sliding into an autocracy?
There are other checks, however. There are the opinions of American people, who only put Trump back in the White House with a very thin margin. That margin can easily erode given economic problems, such as the cost of living which no president seems to be able to bring down.
There's also still the media and it's influence on public opinion.
There are state and local governments which still have quite a bit of power.
There is also the private sector; businesses, corporations, unions, non profits and so forth that still have power and influence.
There's the influence of world opinion, including the allies that once trusted us in Europe, Canada and so forth. That respect is quickly vanishing as former allies are working on plans to deal with the US as an unreliable partner these days.
The economy could be the ultimate check; the stock market and so forth. Do most of the American people feel happy and secure, or is the cost of living and economic uncertainty continuing to ravage public opinion? This can turn against the Republicans in power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)