Comments for Sustainable Bainbridge Discussion Circle http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog Join the discussion! Thu, 29 Mar 2012 06:49:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Is Altruism Sustainable? by Sustainable Bainbridge http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=139#comment-2859 Sustainable Bainbridge Thu, 29 Mar 2012 06:49:05 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=139#comment-2859 Mr. Haller’s response offers views very different from mine on a number of issues. I see some common ground, and I want to carry the conversation further. I agree whole-heartedly that individual initiative is responsible for the greatness of our nation – past, present, and future. Mr. Haller’s distinction between selfish and self-interested behavior is useful, and it is natural for individuals and groups to pursue what they consider to be in their own self-interest. Capitalism supports that pursuit, and our government at all levels, from its beginnings down to the present day, has pretty consistently supported capitalistic enterprises; utopian communities at odds with the prevailing capitalist ethos have sometimes been tolerated by governmental authorities, and have sometimes been suppressed. I have no quarrel with the fundamental principles of capitalism, but when, in practice, they are boiled down to the slogan “Greed is good!” I think it’s time to blow a whistle. Also, when the relationship of certain businesses to government is too cozy (“crony capitalism”) the public interest is bound to suffer; likewise, when the relationship is too adversarial (tax evasion, and rejection of all but token regulation). Mr. Haller focuses on the individual’s ambition to improve their circumstances by accumulating wealth and property. That is a common and worthy motive, but the pursuit of happiness may take many other forms. From the beginnings of settlement in the New World by European soldiers, missionaries, and colonists, millions of immigrants have come to our shores to seek their fortunes. Some became wealthy, others died in the attempt; still others came with more modest or less materialistic ambitions. The typical story of immigrants is of people who struggled and sacrificed so that their children and grandchildren would have opportunities that were beyond their own reach. Self-interest is normal and necessary, but humans are social animals. They cluster together for security and comfort, and once the basic necessities of life are secured, individuals may yearn for various kinds of self-transcendence, which often means devotion to the interests of others, not oneself alone. Writing about altruism, I didn’t mean to question the value of self-interest. I don’t see any conflict between altruism and self-interest; they go together like yin and yang. I cannot end this without commenting on Mr. Haller’s reference to “the global warming fraud.” What is the rationale for this attitude? It is altogether too common, and it flies in the face of common sense. Science is never indisputable, especially when scientists try to predict what will happen in 10, 20, or 50 years; any scientist will tell you this. But the body of hard data on what has already happened is huge, and scientists have developed increasingly accurate models for interpreting the data and describing what is bound to happen, based on what we know ‘for sure’ about the many determinants of the global climate and its cascading effects on the world as we know it. I’ll write more about this when I review Mark Hertsgaard’s book. Jon Quitslund Mr. Haller’s response offers views very different from mine on a number of issues. I see some common ground, and I want to carry the conversation further.
I agree whole-heartedly that individual initiative is responsible for the greatness of our nation – past, present, and future. Mr. Haller’s distinction between selfish and self-interested behavior is useful, and it is natural for individuals and groups to pursue what they consider to be in their own self-interest. Capitalism supports that pursuit, and our government at all levels, from its beginnings down to the present day, has pretty consistently supported capitalistic enterprises; utopian communities at odds with the prevailing capitalist ethos have sometimes been tolerated by governmental authorities, and have sometimes been suppressed.
I have no quarrel with the fundamental principles of capitalism, but when, in practice, they are boiled down to the slogan “Greed is good!” I think it’s time to blow a whistle. Also, when the relationship of certain businesses to government is too cozy (“crony capitalism”) the public interest is bound to suffer; likewise, when the relationship is too adversarial (tax evasion, and rejection of all but token regulation).
Mr. Haller focuses on the individual’s ambition to improve their circumstances by accumulating wealth and property. That is a common and worthy motive, but the pursuit of happiness may take many other forms.
From the beginnings of settlement in the New World by European soldiers, missionaries, and colonists, millions of immigrants have come to our shores to seek their fortunes. Some became wealthy, others died in the attempt; still others came with more modest or less materialistic ambitions. The typical story of immigrants is of people who struggled and sacrificed so that their children and grandchildren would have opportunities that were beyond their own reach.
Self-interest is normal and necessary, but humans are social animals. They cluster together for security and comfort, and once the basic necessities of life are secured, individuals may yearn for various kinds of self-transcendence, which often means devotion to the interests of others, not oneself alone.
Writing about altruism, I didn’t mean to question the value of self-interest. I don’t see any conflict between altruism and self-interest; they go together like yin and yang.
I cannot end this without commenting on Mr. Haller’s reference to “the global warming fraud.” What is the rationale for this attitude? It is altogether too common, and it flies in the face of common sense.
Science is never indisputable, especially when scientists try to predict what will happen in 10, 20, or 50 years; any scientist will tell you this. But the body of hard data on what has already happened is huge, and scientists have developed increasingly accurate models for interpreting the data and describing what is bound to happen, based on what we know ‘for sure’ about the many determinants of the global climate and its cascading effects on the world as we know it. I’ll write more about this when I review Mark Hertsgaard’s book.
Jon Quitslund

]]> Comment on Is Altruism Sustainable? by Maradel Gale http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=139#comment-2854 Maradel Gale Wed, 28 Mar 2012 04:00:00 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=139#comment-2854 Jon: You seem to bite off a lot in your blogs -- and then manage to weave a credible essay incorporating a number of ideas and examples. I was happy to learn that the groups that practice some form(s) of altruism seem eventually to prevail over those that don't -- and I find myself looking for current examples. It seems there can be many smaller, yet significant groups within a larger society (like the many organized environmentalists within the US) who cannot seem to break through the barriers that surround a larger segment of the population that may consist of climate change deniers; those who realize that significant change will destroy their current status which allows them to thrive by preying on the larger population (the major oil companies would be an example of this group); and others who are so far out of the loop they haven't begun to tune in. It would seem that we are a long way from reaching another tipping point -- that being where those who see the handwriting on the wall can generate enough power to move the much larger uninvolved and/or "selfish" members of the culture to change for the benefit of the whole. Jon: You seem to bite off a lot in your blogs — and then manage to weave a credible essay incorporating a number of ideas and examples. I was happy to learn that the groups that practice some form(s) of altruism seem eventually to prevail over those that don’t — and I find myself looking for current examples. It seems there can be many smaller, yet significant groups within a larger society (like the many organized environmentalists within the US) who cannot seem to break through the barriers that surround a larger segment of the population that may consist of climate change deniers; those who realize that significant change will destroy their current status which allows them to thrive by preying on the larger population (the major oil companies would be an example of this group); and others who are so far out of the loop they haven’t begun to tune in. It would seem that we are a long way from reaching another tipping point — that being where those who see the handwriting on the wall can generate enough power to move the much larger uninvolved and/or “selfish” members of the culture to change for the benefit of the whole.

]]> Comment on Is Altruism Sustainable? by Leon Haller http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=139#comment-2843 Leon Haller Sun, 25 Mar 2012 23:59:28 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=139#comment-2843 There are important issues here. Rabid individualism, which can obviously be beneficial for individuals (the extreme example is the amoral criminal), can, if practiced widely enough without countervailing pro-social pressures, result in collective disaster (the obvious example being the 'de-civilization' of a black ghetto like LA's Compton or Watts). The problem is that the unleashing of individual initiative is also in no small part what built the USA into the greatest nation in the world. Men wish to improve their (individual) circumstances, and that ('selfish'? no, 'self-interested') drive, combined with the dispersal of knowledge across society, which no central planner can hope to replicate, and which is the basis of capitalism's success (along with, of course, individual liberty to pursue ambition, and secure property rights), is what has led to wealth in the modern world, which in turn is the basis of ultimate environmental sustainability (it is no accident that the socialist economies were environmental disasters, and that it's the per capita wealthiest nations which are also the cleanest). What is optimal for a sustainable wealth maximization is simply to harness capitalist efficiency, but then to recognize the need for environmental protections (provided the science is indisputable, as it clearly is not wrt the global warming fraud). The wealthier a society is made through capitalism, the more it can afford 'luxuries' like super-clean air and water legislation. Of course, there are many other measures that can be taken re sustainability. The most important is population sustainability. The fewer people on the Earth, the more our material standard of living can be sustainably raised. Thus, the Western nations should never provide any type of food or medical care to Third World countries, though we should provide abundant prophylactics (we should also work for the empowerment of women across the planet, as the rise in female socioeconomic status is what most closely correlates with reductions in natality). We should also curtail all immigration, which acts as a kind of psychological safety-valve for Third World countries (their thinking is along the lines of "more children are not a resource problem, as they can be 'exported' to the West"), thus delaying their own confrontation with the need to reduce domestic fertility rates. These problems are not in the least insoluble, nor do they require drastic changes in the American way of life (other than cutting off immigration, which we should have done decades ago, and for reasons quite apart from environmental concerns). There are important issues here. Rabid individualism, which can obviously be beneficial for individuals (the extreme example is the amoral criminal), can, if practiced widely enough without countervailing pro-social pressures, result in collective disaster (the obvious example being the ‘de-civilization’ of a black ghetto like LA’s Compton or Watts).

The problem is that the unleashing of individual initiative is also in no small part what built the USA into the greatest nation in the world. Men wish to improve their (individual) circumstances, and that (‘selfish’? no, ‘self-interested’) drive, combined with the dispersal of knowledge across society, which no central planner can hope to replicate, and which is the basis of capitalism’s success (along with, of course, individual liberty to pursue ambition, and secure property rights), is what has led to wealth in the modern world, which in turn is the basis of ultimate environmental sustainability (it is no accident that the socialist economies were environmental disasters, and that it’s the per capita wealthiest nations which are also the cleanest).

What is optimal for a sustainable wealth maximization is simply to harness capitalist efficiency, but then to recognize the need for environmental protections (provided the science is indisputable, as it clearly is not wrt the global warming fraud). The wealthier a society is made through capitalism, the more it can afford ‘luxuries’ like super-clean air and water legislation.

Of course, there are many other measures that can be taken re sustainability. The most important is population sustainability. The fewer people on the Earth, the more our material standard of living can be sustainably raised. Thus, the Western nations should never provide any type of food or medical care to Third World countries, though we should provide abundant prophylactics (we should also work for the empowerment of women across the planet, as the rise in female socioeconomic status is what most closely correlates with reductions in natality).

We should also curtail all immigration, which acts as a kind of psychological safety-valve for Third World countries (their thinking is along the lines of “more children are not a resource problem, as they can be ‘exported’ to the West”), thus delaying their own confrontation with the need to reduce domestic fertility rates.

These problems are not in the least insoluble, nor do they require drastic changes in the American way of life (other than cutting off immigration, which we should have done decades ago, and for reasons quite apart from environmental concerns).

]]> Comment on Adapting to the Future by Sustainable Bainbridge http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2810 Sustainable Bainbridge Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:23:19 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2810 In response to my inquiry, Marja Preston has provided answers to Althea's questions. She says that only three houses, already vacant, will be removed this year, to make way for single-family and multi-family homes in the three-acre portion of the project to the west of John Adams Lane. The 16 homes on John Adams Lane will be undisturbed. Further, "We worked with the previous tenants of the three houses to give them options to rent other homes on the property. The new units will be comparable in price to the existing rental homes, and taking into account the reduced utility bills, some may prove to be less expensive. We will work with the existing renters to give preference for those who wish to move into the new homes; we will also assist those who wish to move elsewhere in finding comparable rental homes on the island." Marja concludes: "This is a community designed to be inclusive, not exclusive. That includes the families currently living in the neighborhood." ---Jon Quitslund In response to my inquiry, Marja Preston has provided answers to Althea’s questions. She says that only three houses, already vacant, will be removed this year, to make way for single-family and multi-family homes in the three-acre portion of the project to the west of John Adams Lane. The 16 homes on John Adams Lane will be undisturbed.

Further, “We worked with the previous tenants of the three houses to give them options to rent other homes on the property. The new units will be comparable in price to the existing rental homes, and taking into account the reduced utility bills, some may prove to be less expensive. We will work with the existing renters to give preference for those who wish to move into the new homes; we will also assist those who wish to move elsewhere in finding comparable rental homes on the island.”
Marja concludes: “This is a community designed to be inclusive, not exclusive. That includes the families currently living in the neighborhood.”

—Jon Quitslund

]]> Comment on Adapting to the Future by Sustainable Bainbridge http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2804 Sustainable Bainbridge Fri, 16 Mar 2012 19:54:56 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2804 The subject of the HDDP and the choice between sunset in August of this year and extension, with or without modification, is separable from Althea's concern over displacement and relocation of current residents at the Grow Community site. The HDDP issue was displaced from Wednesday's agenda to make way for other pressing business; I hope it will be back in place soon, before a Council that is ready to work together and listen to citizens concerned about a pro-active and forward-looking housing policy. Affordability for low-income and middle-income residents, in all age groups, is essential to the economic and cultural vitality of our community. This consideration is at the top of my own priority list. Right next to it is preservation of open space and undeveloped land, and reduction, wherever possible, of the environmental impacts that come with development (past, present, and future). These two concerns co-exist in some tension, but not necessarily in conflict. The HDDP ordinance addresses both, in admirable ways. It is not yet possible to evaluate its effectiveness; only two projects made possible by its regulations are in the works, and one -- the Grow Community -- has yet to break ground. So I hope that the Council won't adopt a "Hurry Sundown" attitude toward the HDDP, and I don't expect that they will. The Council could extend the lease of the HDDP as is, to provide time for a careful review and modification of its provisions to be completed in 2013. This would provide everyone (citizens, Planning Dept. staff, Planning Commission, and Council) with time to get a better grip on the best that can be accomplished by means of this ordinance. The Council might decide to require certain changes in the ordinance to be made before August of this year, as a condition of renewal of the HDDP for another three-year period. For example, a certain number or percentage of the units in any HDDP-authorized project could be required to be "affordable" under the criteria administered by the Housing Resources Board. Although I prefer the first of these options, I would find the second acceptable. ---Jon Quitslund The subject of the HDDP and the choice between sunset in August of this year and extension, with or without modification, is separable from Althea’s concern over displacement and relocation of current residents at the Grow Community site.
The HDDP issue was displaced from Wednesday’s agenda to make way for other pressing business; I hope it will be back in place soon, before a Council that is ready to work together and listen to citizens concerned about a pro-active and forward-looking housing policy.
Affordability for low-income and middle-income residents, in all age groups, is essential to the economic and cultural vitality of our community. This consideration is at the top of my own priority list. Right next to it is preservation of open space and undeveloped land, and reduction, wherever possible, of the environmental impacts that come with development (past, present, and future).
These two concerns co-exist in some tension, but not necessarily in conflict. The HDDP ordinance addresses both, in admirable ways. It is not yet possible to evaluate its effectiveness; only two projects made possible by its regulations are in the works, and one — the Grow Community — has yet to break ground. So I hope that the Council won’t adopt a “Hurry Sundown” attitude toward the HDDP, and I don’t expect that they will.
The Council could extend the lease of the HDDP as is, to provide time for a careful review and modification of its provisions to be completed in 2013. This would provide everyone (citizens, Planning Dept. staff, Planning Commission, and Council) with time to get a better grip on the best that can be accomplished by means of this ordinance.
The Council might decide to require certain changes in the ordinance to be made before August of this year, as a condition of renewal of the HDDP for another three-year period. For example, a certain number or percentage of the units in any HDDP-authorized project could be required to be “affordable” under the criteria administered by the Housing Resources Board.

Although I prefer the first of these options, I would find the second acceptable.

—Jon Quitslund

]]> Comment on Adapting to the Future by Sustainable Bainbridge http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2799 Sustainable Bainbridge Thu, 15 Mar 2012 22:22:04 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2799 Althea voices a legitimate concern, and I will post a complete response as soon as I can. One thing I know is that the short term plans call for demolition of only two houses, to make way for the first phase of building. The buildings that once housed Navy officers and their families won't be disturbed for another two years. Sincerely, Jon Quitslund Althea voices a legitimate concern, and I will post a complete response as soon as I can. One thing I know is that the short term plans call for demolition of only two houses, to make way for the first phase of building. The buildings that once housed Navy officers and their families won’t be disturbed for another two years.
Sincerely, Jon Quitslund

]]> Comment on Adapting to the Future by Althea Paulson http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2797 Althea Paulson Wed, 14 Mar 2012 18:10:10 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2797 I don't mean this as a criticism of the environmental aspects of the Grow project (I don't know enough about it to comment one way or another). But I've been trying to find an answer to the question of where the displaced current residents will go. Are there any efforts being made to help them relocate? True sustainability includes sustaining people as well as the "environment." We are not sustainable if we are turning a blind eye to the housing concerns of people with moderate to lower incomes--which is certainly more of the population than it was a few years ago. Reduced gasoline bills due to living in town, and the ability to grow your own vegetables does not begin to cover out-of-reach housing costs. That is why I do not support renewing the HDDP as it is currently written---it does not realistically and adequately encourage housing that is affordable for a variety of incomes. I don’t mean this as a criticism of the environmental aspects of the Grow project (I don’t know enough about it to comment one way or another). But I’ve been trying to find an answer to the question of where the displaced current residents will go. Are there any efforts being made to help them relocate?

True sustainability includes sustaining people as well as the “environment.” We are not sustainable if we are turning a blind eye to the housing concerns of people with moderate to lower incomes–which is certainly more of the population than it was a few years ago. Reduced gasoline bills due to living in town, and the ability to grow your own vegetables does not begin to cover out-of-reach housing costs. That is why I do not support renewing the HDDP as it is currently written—it does not realistically and adequately encourage housing that is affordable for a variety of incomes.

]]> Comment on Adapting to the Future by Dana Berg http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2761 Dana Berg Fri, 24 Feb 2012 03:29:47 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=135#comment-2761 In the 1960's I attended Bainbridge High School. Almost everyone I knew lived down a long dark driveway, most of them on the water. Everyone wanted space. I knew one girl who lived on Grow Avenue and she was somewhat shunned as she lived in "Winslow". Today, many people want to leave their big, distant houses with big yards and big power bills and move to a small home in Winslow. They want to walk or bike to work and shops. They want to have neighbors close by. They want energy efficiency, they want veggie gardens. I hope that Grow Village lives up to its promise, because it seems to be a terrific scheme. I hope that people really do downsize their car use along with their house size and that this community thrives. In the 1960′s I attended Bainbridge High School. Almost everyone I knew lived down a long dark driveway, most of them on the water. Everyone wanted space. I knew one girl who lived on Grow Avenue and she was somewhat shunned as she lived in “Winslow”. Today, many people want to leave their big, distant houses with big yards and big power bills and move to a small home in Winslow. They want to walk or bike to work and shops. They want to have neighbors close by. They want energy efficiency, they want veggie gardens. I hope that Grow Village lives up to its promise, because it seems to be a terrific scheme. I hope that people really do downsize their car use along with their house size and that this community thrives.

]]> Comment on The Cuban Sustainability Experience by Alan Halsted http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=102#comment-1085 Alan Halsted Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:56:11 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=102#comment-1085 Hi Maradel, that was very interesting and a bit disappointing as I was hoping that the original sustainable community was still thriving there. I saw the doco you mentioned and have been inspired by Cuba ever since, but it does not surprise me that modern greedy life is wrecking things there again. Thanks for the update! Alan Halsted Hi Maradel, that was very interesting and a bit disappointing as I was hoping that the original sustainable community was still thriving there. I saw the doco you mentioned and have been inspired by Cuba ever since, but it does not surprise me that modern greedy life is wrecking things there again. Thanks for the update!
Alan Halsted

]]> Comment on “RePower Bainbridge” by Philippe Boucher http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=75#comment-937 Philippe Boucher Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:07:15 +0000 http://www.sustainablebainbridge.org/blog/?p=75#comment-937 An interesting post, thank you. May I suggest that you provide your name? I find the anonymous "sustainable bainbridge" too... anonymous. One problem with Repower Bainbridge is that it does not include Condominiums. PSE is supposed to offer energy assessment for condos but the one we got was very superficial and not really helpful. Our condos have two big roofs oriented south that should be ideal for solar panels BUT where to get advice? I wish there was much more detailed information available on line. An interesting post, thank you.
May I suggest that you provide your name?
I find the anonymous “sustainable bainbridge” too… anonymous.
One problem with Repower Bainbridge is that it does not include Condominiums.
PSE is supposed to offer energy assessment for condos but the one we got was very superficial and not really helpful. Our condos have two big roofs oriented south that should be ideal for solar panels BUT where to get advice?
I wish there was much more detailed information available on line.

]]>