|
general
Jun 18, 2005 15:28:45 GMT -5
Post by John Zeger on Jun 18, 2005 15:28:45 GMT -5
Cathy, if you give me your IP number again I will remove the ban on that number. Incidentally, you also thought that asking you about your age and schooling was an invasion of privacy but subsequently provided that information. As previously stated participation in this forum is a privilege extented to those who follow the rules set out by CRCP.
|
|
|
general
Jun 23, 2005 8:29:52 GMT -5
Post by Rick Shea on Jun 23, 2005 8:29:52 GMT -5
On page A3 of Wednesday's Capital News, John Walter of the CSA says this about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s speech to the CSA AGM:
"He spoke to what he saw as polluters of the world (polluting) for their own monetary benefit and therefore pushing their bad practices onto the rest of society so that we pay for their choices."
This sounds very similar to what many have been saying about most developers in this world as well, so I propose that, rather that calling them "developers," let's call them what they are - growth polluters.
|
|
|
general
Aug 8, 2005 10:30:33 GMT -5
Post by John Zeger on Aug 8, 2005 10:30:33 GMT -5
On August 7, 2005 the Sunday Okanagan featured Jim Taylor's excellent article entitled "Growth for growth's sake a recipe for disaster." In the article Taylor quotes the Penguin Dictionary of Human Geography which states, "As urban growth takes place, the net benefits associated with concentration of population vary. ... Up to a point -- the optimum size of a city -- the benefits outweigh the costs imposed by growth, but beyond that point ... the city becomes a less efficient and less desirable place in which to live and carry on economic activities." (What do you think the optimum population size is for Kelowna?) Further, Taylor quotes urban planner and architecht Constantinos Doxiadis who said, "Small cities preserve human values which are generally being lost within big cities ... If small cities ... try to imitate big ones (as many of them try to do today) then they are doomed to decline, and this will be harmful to everybody."Taylor concludes with his personal observations. "Sooner or later, we will have to face the terrifying reality -- there are too many of us. If there aren't too many already, there soon will be. Life will not get continuously better."
|
|
|
general
Sept 8, 2007 11:11:24 GMT -5
Post by John Zeger on Sept 8, 2007 11:11:24 GMT -5
Adrian Nieoczym has once again written an outstanding column, “The boom you hear is people falling behind” (Capital News, Sept 2), which challenges the long held conventional wisdom that our paramount goal should be greater economic growth. Nieoczym argues that a better quality of life for everyone should replace the former goal which is the principle measure of progress of some local organizations such as the Economic Development Commission. He further states that we should aim for a more equitable distribution of wealth and move away from our preoccupation with promoting growth seeking instead economic stabilization and using our resources more efficiently and equitably. Although these ideas may be considered novel locally, they are hardly new. For decades, economist Herman Daly has been calling for a steady-state economy which recognizes the finite nature of our natural resources and the limited capacity of our ecosystem to absorb an increasing amount of wastes. More recently, Australian think tank leader Clive Hamilton has reasoned that our overriding social goal should be an increase in individual and collective well-being and that our obsession with economic growth actually comes at the expense of that well-being. In his book Growth Fetish Hamilton makes the case for a post-growth society the goals of which are an improved individual and collective well-being and the promotion of the full realization of human potential. He argues that our contemporary fixation with economic growth keeps us on a consumptive treadmill that lines the pockets of a few while not meaningfully increasing the happiness of the average person.
I think that the time has come to move towards a post-growth society both globally and locally. In regard to the latter, Kelowna is presently enjoying a degree of prosperity unprecedented in its history providing us with an opportunity to consolidate our gains and direct our energies towards creating a sustainable and equitable community. To ask for even greater economic prosperity now would go beyond greed and actually be self-defeating in that we would lose more in terms of our quality of life than we will gain from the additional material benefit that accrues as a result of further growth.
|
|