tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3712291801064010036.post2023244558409786316..comments2023-11-19T19:10:02.041-05:00Comments on Back Yard Organic Vegetables: A Welcome Need for a Second Expanded Reply.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3712291801064010036.post-92098087531440411982011-08-04T14:20:02.612-04:002011-08-04T14:20:02.612-04:00foodgardenkitchen,I agree with you that the conver...foodgardenkitchen,I agree with you that the conversation is complicated. I too, don't think that we as a people, effecting changes in the way we live would lead to some communist state. The point is that the government's view of what is good and right for the earth is different than what the people's view of good and right is for the earth.<br /><br />All the actions of federal, state and local governments are well documented and openly push toward the goal of sustainable development. There is no gray area for misinterpretation there. <br /><br />The government by design has made this a "nation of consumers" as evidenced by "The Story of Stuff" which can be viewed at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GorqroigqM<br /><br />We have consumed vast amounts of resources to the detriment of mother earth, and most of it is turned right around and goes to landfills as waste or is incinerated poisoning the air we breathe. However, I don't think that it's too late to turn this around and redirect the policies that have been implemented into sustainable freedom initiatives. Sustainable freedom is a long-lasting, viable solution. A sustainable development dictatorship as the world governments would have it will get us right back to where we are now in just a few decades down the road. The PEOPLE need to make the decision for sustainable freedom and go forward with it on an individual basis. Not have it imposed on us by politicians. <br /><br />We each need to ask ourselves what we are doing this very day to help the goal of saving the earth through using sustainable freedom. Then we need to step up the pace of whatever we are doing. <br /><br />In closing, I would simply like to restate my opinion that the most important point I am calling attention to is the trajectory toward even broader overregulation by a government that is ineffective in managing its current responsibilities.<br /><br />Thank you for your in-depth comments. It's my hope that more and more people will ponder the issue of sustainability as you have. Hopefully they will seek out how they can give it a shot in the arm by their active participation in it. <br /><br />Have a wonderful vegetable gardening day!<br />Veggie PAKVeggie PAKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13250455377130668508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3712291801064010036.post-73446406260411652962011-08-03T10:26:39.880-04:002011-08-03T10:26:39.880-04:00Has everyone been reading "Atlas Shrugged&quo...Has everyone been reading "Atlas Shrugged" lately and getting riled up about objectivism and collectivism? Probably not because it's a rather long, tedious novel so most people read some Cliff's Notes version or glean something off the internet and run with it. I sometimes wonder if people who seem to staunchly subscribe to Ayn Rand's objectivism philosophy ever extrapolate out what the likely result(s) of actually fully implementing said philosophy would be. In my extrapolation, it wouldn't be pretty and it probably wouldn't be the happy outcome some people think it would be as the economic condition between the haves and the have-nots would ultimately lead to the end of civilzation as we know it. (Explantion of how that would occur is too long to post here).<br /><br />Ultimately, I believe that everything in life is a balance, including human (and all other species) population. It seems intuitive to me that the Earth has a carrying capacity and that technological advancements cannot infinitely increase the carrying capacity, but can merely extend it only so far. I also believe that if everyone on Earth lived as we in America now do, we'd all be in trouble. So that leads me to the thought that the current American way of life is unsustainable. I don't think that making changes in the way we live leads to some communist state. To continue as we have been is basically saying that we'll piss on the rest of the world and they all need to continue to have a lower standard of living than us.<br /><br />But of course, it's complicated. Because I also think that selfishness and greed are basic human instincts (this is one of the reasons we must train children to become civilized and do things like not hit the child with the toy they covet and take it away). So it's also valid to argue that the hufe human populations in China and India are operating only in their self-interests as they attempt to raise their standards of living to either (or both) the detriment of Americans' standard of living and the long-term viability of human population on Earth.<br /><br />I certainly don't have all of the answers (and no one else does either because of all the competing philosophies), but I'm not willing to piss on the rest of the world's population just so I can drive some SUV that gets 8 mpg while some guy in some other part of the world is riding a donkey. The conversation is complicated and it's unlikely to be solved because we will never all agree on some basic philosophies. It kind of goes against human nature of selfishness.<br /><br />Just 2 more cents :)foodgardenkitchenhttp://foodgardenkitchen.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com