Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Rural vs Urban Costs & Benefits

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Rural vs Urban Costs & Benefits

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Sun 23 Oct 2016, 14:58:21

Ibon wrote:-snip-

You got only this one shot to live so why just poke along? Many traditions pay homage to death as a reminder to live each day at its fullest. Death sitting on your shoulder whispering in your ear every morning. This is far better than caffeine !


Apologies for the rude question, Ibon. Are you in fact living "each day at its fullest" at Mt. Totumas, or are you retreating from the hustle and bustle and modern complexity?

Earlier this week in another thread, I wished I could hide in the jungle from the cacophony of the last few weeks of political frenzy, or the months of lawsuits soon to follow over poll results. In fact, the wife finished up the business tax filings this week and took off for a week in Baja, in the company of three other women 60+ years of age. That's just not an appropriate vacation for me, and shopping at a Mexican marketplace full of Chinese-made counterfeit merchandise holds no fascination either.

Besides, I import my beloved coffee beans from Papua New Guinea, via a roaster in Georgia (the state, not the country)and Amazon. I'm considering a second triple espresso versus a 20-ounce bottle of chilled carbonated water right now.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Truth about IPCC model global warming projections

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 23 Oct 2016, 16:54:14

pstarr wrote:
Ibon wrote:
KaiserJeep wrote: I would prefer to marinate in the angst of fossil fuel depletion, particularly petroleum depletion, which I view as a real and imminent form of Doom. This is the central theme of PO.com, which most of you ignore in favor of off-topic AGW/CC angst and Doom hysteria, which I believe is overblown reaction to natural changes in surface temperatures, caused by a complex relationship between such temperatures and the solar radiation which varies over centuries due to reasons of orbital mechanics, called Milankovitch cycles.


You seem to enjoy marinating in the AGW/CC debate actually. AGW is not off topic to peak oil because
AGW has always been a consequence of human overshoot enabled by the over consumption of fossil fuels.

Here we have an inkling of the truth. The AGW/CC Doomer Fanclub is organized around that mission statement, to put an end to the "over consumption of fossil fuels." Here's a clue: we have little choice, we consume what we need to live. All that driving around, however frantic and unfortunate, was baked into the suburban model 100 years ago. There is no getting out of it. Too late to implement local light rail, intercity electric passenger trains and long-haul electric freight. We can't even fix our rotting water and sewer systems.

So you fanboys and fangirls can just relax and stop trying to prove to everyone that we have a choice. Or that our choice matters. Or that the results matter. You and it doesn't matter. There is no avoiding dieoff. Which incidentally will have little or nothing to do with AGW.


While I agree that mitigations are limited even if we would all find consensus to take actions against AGW I no longer state our conundrum in quite such stark and hopeless terms. This does not serve to enlighten really, it is quite depressing. If we were high priests we would whisper this truth among ourselves but not disseminate this information out to the flock. It serves no function.

Remember that in the beginning we will suffer the consequences of human overshoot. Somewhere on that downward slope of corrections is when human agency might get activated and no one here can predict the pathway industrial civilization will take from there. How varied will be human response and adaptation across the planets continents. We cannot predict this. Neither the severity of climate change itself nor the human response is entirely known beforehand. A suite of responses from primitive and horrific to enlightened or a combination of both in the same region is the safest way to forecast since this most closely resembles history, a mixed bag as always.

For that reason one lives with the truth as you state it but one does not abandon the message that mankind needs to learn to self regulate, it is not entirely futile for we know not precisely the pathway that will unfold as we descend into the consequences of correction.

I like to remind myself as well that there is an awful lot of waste out there and a huge number of humans capable of human labor, capable of physical tasks they are not even aware of.

And yes of course, the frail and obese and sick and deranged who will perish at the first breeze of hardships. Whatever reserves are available can be allocated to make their passage into the night less painful and when the reserves are lacking they will be plowed under the wave of consequences. This is not collapse by the way, this is simple correction of human overshoot.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 23 Oct 2016, 19:30:58

Ibon wrote:
Newfie wrote:But that is the way of humanity. If you think about it it's the rare person who makes or initiates some change. The vast majority of us just poke along, self included.


You got only this one shot to live so why just poke along? Many traditions pay homage to death as a reminder to live each day at its fullest. Death sitting on your shoulder whispering in your ear every morning. This is far better than caffeine !


I'm working on that Ibon! :)
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 12718
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 23 Oct 2016, 19:49:34

KaiserJeep wrote:Apologies for the rude question, Ibon. Are you in fact living "each day at its fullest" at Mt. Totumas, or are you retreating from the hustle and bustle and modern complexity?


Being in this remote location and having social interaction with locals and guests and a wilderness at our doorstep is pretty fulfilling. On top of that a long list of projects only a fraction of which we will be able to realize keeps things from ever getting boring. In the low season we have periods of total solitude, in the high season its like running a hotel, lots of work that includes the humble acts of serving folks, washing dishes, even helping staff with house keeping one minute and then guiding folks on trails the next. The emphasis on others, ensuring that they are taken care of and have a great experience, is the part of service that is spiritually rewarding, the practice of giving yourself to others. Of course they pay us at the end of their stay and frankly tourism enables us to live a homesteading life. All of the living off the land and generating our own power and raising cattle and coffee is only economically viable because of the income generated by the tourism. Without that we would not be economically sustainable.

The wilderness ever present flavors the experience here. There are over a million acres bordering our 400 acres. There are tapirs and jaguars and four other species of cats, three species of monkeys and a rich biodiversity of insects and plants so that you walk the same trails over and over and always see new stuff.

My wife and I are two Americans living on the fringe of society here, sometimes at night with the wind howling and all alone we feel at the mercy of the elements and the vast infinity of night full of stars with no light pollution....it is awe inspiring, often blissful, sometimes overwhelming, sometimes scary.

We do not own any fire arms, we are at the mercy of the good will of the rural neighbors, the criminal element so far has not ever wandered up 6 miles of rough 4wd road to harm us.

What can I say, there are few who would choose this remote life, few who have the resources to make it happen. We chose this, it is a bit crazy. Who knows for how long. Can we still do this if we keep our health when we are 70? 75? I don't think about that. Maybe this is not our last chapter, but I often think walking the trails that it would be a blessing if a jaguar took me down and had me for dinner.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 23 Oct 2016, 19:52:25

pstarr wrote:
Ibon wrote:"I like to remind myself as well that there is an awful lot of waste out there and a huge number of humans capable of human labor, capable of physical tasks they are not even aware of. "

Don't mean to be Debbie Downer here . . . but for sake of argument I stand by what I said above. There is no waste, not in a thermodynamic sense or as a matter of industrial efficiency. We are turning our natural capital (the forests, arable land, potable war, etc.) and industrial infrastructure into CO2 and rust just as quickly and efficiently as possible. When we are done I would be surprised if there is enough arable ground in between the parking lots, filling stations and strip malls to bury the dead.


It's so hard to embrace this when I am surrounded by over a million acres of wilderness. Yes you are right, we are pillaging the planet, but isn't your world view tainted by all this knowledge of how much we are destroying? What about the viability of that which remains intact. And an eventual population of humans once we pass through the bottleneck of overshoot. I don't see a wasteland on the otherside, I am reminded of this everytime I see weeds growing out from cracks in the concrete.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 23 Oct 2016, 22:14:12

pstarr wrote:Ibon, we are in agreement as to the post-peak post-AGW world: few humans and more lovely landscapes. Most alive today will never have the opportunity to see such a thing. You and I live among such beauty now.

But for sake of proportion, let's be clear: one million square acres is 1562.5 square miles, an area not much larger than a Central American City. That city now contain millions of people. How many can live in a cloud forest? How much maize can be grown on a mountain slope? I am pretty sure my retreat is too remote to be over-run. How about yours?


I am here because I love the cloud forest and the remote wilderness, I am not here for any illusion that this place represents a safer bet than any other place in the unlikely scenario of all out social chaos. Doomstead orientation is the fearful mouse in a hole mentality, I find such an orientation undignified and do not practice this nor do I associate with folks that do.

By the way, urban dwellers generally are horrified of wilderness and they prefer to stay in the city and eat each other rather than entering forests. :)
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby dohboi » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 06:30:14

Nicely put on doomstead orientation.

Some of us, though, who happen to live in an urban setting actually love the forest, too, and would be happy to live there.

I believe it was John Muir who said that those afraid of the forest are afraid of their mother, since the forest is where we all came from. (Or something like that.)
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18315
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Ibon » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 07:06:44

dohboi wrote:Nicely put on doomstead orientation.

Some of us, though, who happen to live in an urban setting actually love the forest, too, and would be happy to live there.

I believe it was John Muir who said that those afraid of the forest are afraid of their mother, since the forest is where we all came from. (Or something like that.)


In 1980 I worked in the Division Street YMCA in the ghetto of CHicago. I was director of an after school day care program funded by the federal government that provided a place for kids to go when both parents were working (Reagan defunded this program when he became president) The kids in the program where primarily african americans, mexican and polish. I organized a weekend fieldtrip to a rural farm that had some forest habitat that was owned by a friend. These kids had never left the city, had never been in nature. It was spring and our first night we all walked into the forest holding hands and spring peeper frogs where singing in a chorus by a forest pond, stars were out, no city light pollution. The kids were spellbound, one mexican boy asked me if this is where Jesus lives he was so enchanted. To this day I remember the impact this field trip had on these urban children.

I was referring in my last post to those urban dwellers that could potentially do you harm, the criminal element. .. In their urban jungle they are formidable. Take them out their habitat and put them in a forest jungle and most will whimper in fear.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby dohboi » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 08:50:43

Yeah, my experience is that if you can get them before some critical age (probably varies a bit from person to person), you will get that enchantment response, rather than the fear response.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18315
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Tanada » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 11:02:28

Ibon wrote:
dohboi wrote:Nicely put on doomstead orientation.

Some of us, though, who happen to live in an urban setting actually love the forest, too, and would be happy to live there.

I believe it was John Muir who said that those afraid of the forest are afraid of their mother, since the forest is where we all came from. (Or something like that.)


In 1980 I worked in the Division Street YMCA in the ghetto of CHicago. I was director of an after school day care program funded by the federal government that provided a place for kids to go when both parents were working (Reagan defunded this program when he became president) The kids in the program where primarily african americans, mexican and polish. I organized a weekend fieldtrip to a rural farm that had some forest habitat that was owned by a friend. These kids had never left the city, had never been in nature. It was spring and our first night we all walked into the forest holding hands and spring peeper frogs where singing in a chorus by a forest pond, stars were out, no city light pollution. The kids were spellbound, one mexican boy asked me if this is where Jesus lives he was so enchanted. To this day I remember the impact this field trip had on these urban children.

I was referring in my last post to those urban dwellers that could potentially do you harm, the criminal element. .. In their urban jungle they are formidable. Take them out their habitat and put them in a forest jungle and most will whimper in fear.


Why was the Federal government funding a program for the Young Men's CHRISTIAN Association? The First Amendment forbids the Federal government from favoring any religious organization.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15449
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby yellowcanoe » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 11:20:36

Tanada wrote:
Why was the Federal government funding a program for the Young Men's CHRISTIAN Association? The First Amendment forbids the Federal government from favoring any religious organization.


The following comes from the Canadian YMCA site but I expect the same holds for the US organization.

"The YMCA in Canada is a non-denominational charitable organization where all people are welcome. When the organization was established in 1844 there was a link to the Christian faith, however this quickly changed and the Y welcomed people of all religious backgrounds to participate in a wide range of programs and services. Today, we are proud to be a socially inclusive and diverse place, serving people of all ages, genders, backgrounds and abilities through all stages of life."
yellowcanoe
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Fri 15 Nov 2013, 13:42:27
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Ibon » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 14:19:30

Tanada wrote:
Ibon wrote:
dohboi wrote:Nicely put on doomstead orientation.

Some of us, though, who happen to live in an urban setting actually love the forest, too, and would be happy to live there.

I believe it was John Muir who said that those afraid of the forest are afraid of their mother, since the forest is where we all came from. (Or something like that.)


In 1980 I worked in the Division Street YMCA in the ghetto of CHicago. I was director of an after school day care program funded by the federal government that provided a place for kids to go when both parents were working (Reagan defunded this program when he became president) The kids in the program where primarily african americans, mexican and polish. I organized a weekend fieldtrip to a rural farm that had some forest habitat that was owned by a friend. These kids had never left the city, had never been in nature. It was spring and our first night we all walked into the forest holding hands and spring peeper frogs where singing in a chorus by a forest pond, stars were out, no city light pollution. The kids were spellbound, one mexican boy asked me if this is where Jesus lives he was so enchanted. To this day I remember the impact this field trip had on these urban children.

I was referring in my last post to those urban dwellers that could potentially do you harm, the criminal element. .. In their urban jungle they are formidable. Take them out their habitat and put them in a forest jungle and most will whimper in fear.


Why was the Federal government funding a program for the Young Men's CHRISTIAN Association? The First Amendment forbids the Federal government from favoring any religious organization.


Yellowcane is correct and the YMCA was just one of several facilities that received federal funding for setting up these after school day care that targeted low income families where both parents worked. If you are curious here is more information

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)

Instead, in two welfare reform bills, passed in 1962 and 1965, Congress linked federal support for child care to policies designed to encourage poor and low-income women to enter training programs or take employment outside the home. The goal was to reduce the number of Americans receiving “welfare” (Aid to Families with Dependent Children, or AFDC) and prevent women from becoming recipients in the first place. From 1969 to 1971, a coalition of feminists, labor leaders, civil rights leaders and early childhood advocates worked with Congress to legislate universal child care policy, but their efforts failed when President Nixon vetoed the Comprehensive Child Development Act of 1971. As a result, for the next three decades, direct federal support for child care was limited to policies “targeted” on low-income families. At the same time, however, the federal government offered several types of indirect support to middle- and upper-class families in the form of tax incentives for employer-sponsored child care and several ways of using child care costs to reduce personal income taxes.

The Reagan Era and Welfare Reform in the 1990s

In the 1980s, under the Reagan administration the balance of federal child care funding shifted, as expenditures for low-income families were dramatically reduced while those benefiting middle- and high-income families nearly doubled.; Such measures stimulated the growth of voluntary and for-profit child care, much of which was beyond the reach of low-income families. These families received some help from the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), passed in 1990, which allocated $825 million to individual states. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 replaced AFDC with time-limited public assistance coupled with stringent employment mandates. Acknowledging the need for expanded child care to support this welfare-to-work plan, Congress combined CCDBG, along with several smaller programs, into a single block grant—the Child Care and Development Fund.


http://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/pr ... n-history/
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7232
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)Thread (

Unread postby Tanada » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 15:37:18

That explains how the funding took place, it fails to explain why the FEDERAL government was paying for a program for a CITY. Cities should be self supporting, otherwise they are nothing but a drain on the system. Frequently claims are made about how much stronger a living system the urban environment is for humans and how the benefits far outweigh the costs. However the number of funding sources that originate outside the cities that keep them barely functional is frequently ignored, as if it doesn't actually exist.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15449
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Rural vs Urban Costs & Benefits

Unread postby GHung » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 15:53:16

Why did this thread morph into (by name) "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change "? Just askin'.

I grew up going to the "Y", and they never had any sort of religious indoctrination.
Why cities? More voters, maybe? Need? Squeaky wheel gets the grease? Here in rural land, we have to squeak pretty loudly to get much attention. Our representatives make all sorts of promises, but seem to forget those when they get to Raleigh or Washington, likely because their money comes from corporations and out-of-state PACs. Not many of those around here.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2858
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Rural vs Urban Costs & Benefits

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 16:12:48

Two different threads on widely differing topics appear to have been merged, with most of the messages in each thread missing. ????
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Rural vs Urban Costs & Benefits

Unread postby Tanada » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 17:48:33

KaiserJeep wrote:Two different threads on widely differing topics appear to have been merged, with most of the messages in each thread missing. ????


Actually one thread with a grossly divergent topic side chain has been split into two with the divergent topic given an appropriate name. The posts in the middle retain the name of the thread they were split off of, that is just how the forum software works.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15449
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Rural vs Urban Costs & Benefits

Unread postby Tanada » Mon 24 Oct 2016, 17:50:06

GHung wrote:Why did this thread morph into (by name) "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change "? Just askin'.

I grew up going to the "Y", and they never had any sort of religious indoctrination.
Why cities? More voters, maybe? Need? Squeaky wheel gets the grease? Here in rural land, we have to squeak pretty loudly to get much attention. Our representatives make all sorts of promises, but seem to forget those when they get to Raleigh or Washington, likely because their money comes from corporations and out-of-state PACs. Not many of those around here.


It did not, I split the city vs rural discussion out of the IPCC thread where it was off topic and a distraction.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15449
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Next

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

cron