The Credit Crisis Visualized

The Crisis of Credit, or how we got into this mess.


The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

Thomas Friedman on the Economics of "Stuff"

Questioning the concept of infinite expansion of consumption is receiving mainstream media attention.

In an article intriguingly titled "The Inflection is Near?" three time Pulitzer prize winning writer and New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman suggests we need to

...step out of the normal boundaries of analysis of our economic crisis and ask a radical question: What if the crisis of 2008 represents something much more fundamental than a deep recession? What if it’s telling us that the whole growth model we created over the last 50 years is simply unsustainable economically and ecologically and that 2008 was when we hit the wall — when Mother Nature and the market both said: “No more.”

He then points out that:

We have created a system for growth that depended on our building more and more stores to sell more and more stuff made in more and more factories in China, powered by more and more coal that would cause more and more climate change but earn China more and more dollars to buy more and more U.S. T-bills so America would have more and more money to build more and more stores and sell more and more stuff that would employ more and more Chinese ...

We can’t do this anymore.

He then links this to the issue of climate change and long term sustainability.

“We created a way of raising standards of living that we can’t possibly pass on to our children,” said Joe Romm, a physicist and climate expert who writes the indispensable blog climateprogress.org. We have been getting rich by depleting all our natural stocks — water, hydrocarbons, forests, rivers, fish and arable land — and not by generating renewable flows.

“You can get this burst of wealth that we have created from this rapacious behavior,” added Romm. “But it has to collapse, unless adults stand up and say, ‘This is a Ponzi scheme. We have not generated real wealth, and we are destroying a livable climate ...’ Real wealth is something you can pass on in a way that others can enjoy.”

What I see him describing is the inevitable consequence of unrestrained globalization fed by the ever increasing consumption of energy during the latter half of the twentieth century. Everyone thought (and most continue to believe) that expansion of economic growth is not only inevitable but necessary. Few people, it seems, are satisfied with what they have and constantly search for more. It is what the western way of life seems to be built on.

Interestingly, though, Friedman has been a promoter of globalization in his books The Lexus and the Olive Tree and The World is Flat. Does this recent column represent a shift in his thinking?

The comments on this article are quite telling. More and more of us are starting to understand that we are on a freight train that is recklessly heading out of control in the fog. It is time to slow down.

Redefining "Standard of Living"

This is a comment posted at the New York Times in response to Thomas Friedman's article "The Inflection is Near?"

"We created a way of raising standards of living that we can't possibly pass on to our children."

The problem, Mr. Friedman, is how we define "standard of living." The conventional definition needs an overhaul.

If Person A owns a mansion, several cars and a yacht, he is said to have a high standard of living. If Person B owns very little, but takes his daughter fishing, watches his son play baseball, reads Tennyson, listens to Mozart, and visits the local art museum, no one comments on his living standard. Why?

There is no reason we cannot improve our standard of living. We just need to revise the definition.

— Steve Blevins, Oklahoma City

So true.

Barrack Obama Comes to Ottawa

I happened to be standing in the right place at the right time to capture the arrival of President Barrack Obama as his motorcade drove down Colonel By Drive next to the Rideau Canal in Ottawa.

Letter to the Editor Re: Virgin Radio Ads

I have fired off the following "Letter to the Editor" of the Ottawa Citizen, with copies to management at Virgin Radio. I'll be curious to see (1) if it's published and (2) what response I get from Virgin, if any.

To: Letter Editor, Ottawa Citizen

To use the serious social problem of unwanted teenage pregnancy as a vehicle to promote a business as Virgin Radio has done is disrespectful and hurtful. This campaign is counter-productive to developing a comprehensive solution as it serves to stoke the baser predatory instincts of some men.

I am a male who enjoys hard rock music. This does not mean, however, that I will be whipped into a sexual frenzy by listening to the tunes played on Virgin Radio. I have more control than that, as should every one of us. To suggest otherwise is not only offensive, it is wrong.

The marketing moguls of Astral Media view this campaign as part of an effort that "...will build on its heritage to feature a re-energized rock format aimed at 25- to 54-year-old men." This campaign seeks to attract their target audience by, in part, legitimizing the portrayal of men as sexual predators. Unwanted teenage pregnancy as a result of irresponsible sexual behaviour is not a joke. It should not be used as a marketing tool.

I have written to the local management team at Virgin Radio asking them not only to remove the offensive ads, but also publicly state that they understand that they have trivialized a very serious social problem. I believe a public apology from them is in order. A campaign on their part that encouraged donations to our area women's shelters may be a good starting point. Perhaps then they could refocus their "heritage" as one built on social responsibility instead of exploitation of our societal ills. The true "Goddesses & Gods of Rock" do not demean others and instill fear. They inspire us! Virgin Radio should consider doing the same.

Yours truly,
--
Leonard Poole

Are These Virgin Radio Ads Sexist?

I like hard rock like so many other men. Apparently, though if I listen to it on Virgin Radio in Ottawa you would be well advised to lock up your daughters, as I, and many others may not be able to control ourselves. The "Gods of Rock" are about to be unleashed, and unless precautions are taken, your young daughters will be impregnated.


These ads came to my attention in a letter to the editor published this morning. Laura Sparling states:

The ads support the notion of women as property that can and should be supervised, controlled, and even locked up. They suggest that controlling women is the solution to teen pregnancy. They imply that women are not educated enough to make informed decisions about sexual health.

And besides being a slap in the face of all women, the ads are also insulting to men as they portray men as potential sexual predators. Lastly, these ads reinforce the idea that all good music is produced by men rather than including "goddesses of rock."

I couldn't agree with her more, and am doing what I can to draw attention to this issue.

Ms. Sparling has also organized an online petition. It deserves our support.

I also suggest you consider other means to let Virgin Radio know your concerns. I have sent the following comments to the staff at the station:

Greetings to everyone at Virgin Radio in Ottawa!

I tried to send a copy of the email below to your sales dept., but it bounced back. Just wanted to keep you all in the loop that I find your current ad campaign to be quite offensive and am letting my friends and neighbours know my views.

Unwanted teenage pregnancy is a very serious social problem, worldwide. To have it trivialized for a radio station ad campaign is, in my view, appalling. No doubt, we live in a part of the world where free speech is the accepted norm. I am very supportive of that. However, it goes both ways, and I am exercising my freedom as well, as I shall also be commenting on my blog.

Just because I am a male who loves hard rock, doesn't mean that I am going to be stoked into some kind of sexual frenzy by listening to your radio station. I have more control than that, and so should EVERY person. To suggest otherwise, as you do, is wrong.

At this point, the only reason I would be listening to your radio station is to find out who advertises with you, so I know who to avoid.

Not only do I expect you to remove these offensive ads, I also urge you to publicly state that you understand that you have trivialized a very serious social problem, and that you apologize for doing so.

I know, so often any kind of publicity is viewed as good publicity. In this instance, I wouldn't be so sure.

Regards,
Leonard Poole

If you share my concerns, I urge you to let Virgin Radio and your friends and neighbours know!

Virgin Radio ads give slap in face for women

Virgin Radio ads give slap in face for women: "ipetitions.com/petition/nosexisminmyottawa"

Richard Branson gives a great interview, and can seem like such a nice (albeit exceedingly wealthy) guy. How does he defend this type of advertising? More on this soon........