A Word About THE HOUSE: What's My Damage?

[Jcrowley]

Driving to the airport to pick up a friend, I stop at a red light. My eyes wander to a bus-stop bench across the intersection. 'Norma Whitfield - Your Real-Estate Connection.' Wham. Before I even have time to react, the advertisement has entered my mind and lodged itself between the folds of my thoughts. Another chunk of my mental landscape, grabbed without consent. There was nothing special about this ad. Every bench in the city is festooned with a marketing message, and my eyes have passed over thousands, possibly millions, like it before. Yet this time it stood out, somehow starker than the rest. Some balance inside me had tipped, and I suddenly felt saturated. My mental landscape had been overgrazed.

Thirty-five years ago, Garret Hardin, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, authored a ground-breaking article in the journal Science that introduced an idea: the tragedy of the commons. Our survival was at stake, he argued, if we failed to open our eyes and realize that Earth's physical resources were finite. Treating them as a free-for-all was no longer acceptable if we wanted to reduce human suffering and prolong our existence on this planet.

To illustrate the tragedy, he used the example of 14th-century common land. 'Picture a pasture open to all,' he wrote. 'It is to be expected that each herdsman will try to keep as many cattle as possible on the commons.' When a herder adds a cow to the pasture, he reaps the benefit of a larger herd. Meanwhile, the cost of the animal - the damage done to the pasture - is divided among all the herdsmen.

- Kevin Arnold



Globally, the 20% of the world’s people in the highest-income countries account for 86% of total private consumption expenditures — the poorest 20% a minuscule 1.3%. More specifically, the richest fifth:

* Consume 45% of all meat and fish, the poorest fifth 5%
* Consume 58% of total energy, the poorest fifth less than 4%
* Have 74% of all telephone lines, the poorest fifth 1.5%
* Consume 84% of all paper, the poorest fifth 1.1%
* Own 87% of the world’s vehicle fleet, the poorest fifth less than 1%

Runaway growth in consumption in the past 50 years is putting strains on the environment never before seen.

— Human Development Report 1998 Overview, United Nations Development Programme

[Digit]

1. I don't see anything wrong with Edwards owning this property

Neither does anyone else.
Besides, you are late to the party.

[Jcrowley]

2. Oh

Can you answer a few questions? I'm always late. It's not a party. It's gross overconsumption of resources. You're okay with that?

We consume a variety of resources and products today having moved beyond basic needs to include luxury items and technological innovations to try to improve efficiency. Such consumption beyond minimal and basic needs is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself, as throughout history we have always sought to find ways to make our lives a bit easier to live. However, increasingly, there are important issues around consumerism that need to be understood. For example:

* How are the products and resources we consume actually produced?
* What are the impacts of that process of production on the environment, society, on individuals?
* What are the impacts of certain forms of consumption on the environment, on society, on individuals?
* Which actors influence our choices of consumption?
* Which actors influence how and why things are produced or not?
* What is a necessity and what is a luxury?
* How do demands on items affect the requirements placed upon the environment?
* How do consumption habits change as societies change?
* Also influential is the very culture of today in many countries, as well as the media and the political institutions themselves. What is the impact on poorer nations and people on the demands of the wealthier nations and people that are able to afford to consume more?
* How do material values influence our relationships with other people?
* What impact does that have on our personal values?

Sounds like walking the walk isn't too important here. It's okay for Edwards to live a life of conspicuous consumption and massive energy usage? What will the children say?

[volstork]

4. THIS is why Gore

is my pick. He has worked hard to reduce his "carbon footprint" and generally eschews conspicuous consumption.

[Jcrowley]

7. It seems

there is no shortage of ecological illiteracy in the land as we live our absurdly abstracted lives.

How is it we are in a place where people can ignore the connections between Edward's, or anyone's, opulence and the degradation of our planet and the impoverishment of so many citizens.

How is this disconnect even possible by people who consider themselves educated?

The peasantry in medieval Europe didn't need the internet to tell them the mansion on the hill meant they were enslaved.

[RiverStone]

17. You ask a great question....

How is it we are in a place where people can ignore the connections between Edward's, or anyone's, opulence and the degradation of our planet and the impoverishment of so many citizens.

I'm baffled.

The closest I can come to an answer is the depth of connect is directly related to the depth of experience one may have with those that are indeed impoverished. Friends who like me have traveled into the 3rd world and have seen 3-4 families living in a 500sq ft. tin shack in Nepal or India gets it. Just working with street kids in inner city L.A. or kids still living without indoor plumbing in rural Appalachia will totally shift perspective.

This is not to say one has to have been "there" to get it; lots of empathetic folks out there - but too many Americans travel no farther outside their comfort zone then what TV shows them. And we know - TV's not real.


peace~

[RiverStone]

13. Yes, yes, YES!

We are so much on the same page here volstork :)

I posted this earlier tonight:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x50954


GORE/CLARK 08

[nam78_two]

6. I am so sickened by posts like this:

"In America, you can do whatever you want with your money"....

"I would have 5 cars and a 400,000 sq ft house if I could"....

:shrug:

What is the cognitive dissonance that leads people who care about global warming to veer to such a libertarian stance when it comes to conspicuous consumption? We all have an eco-footprint. Can't these issues be discussed without it getting personal?

We are past the time when band-aids like "recycling" will fix things. Its such a pity that so many people make light of this issue and find it amusing.

[wtmusic]

10. Problem is that there is no dissonance

These people feel perfectly comfortable with the idea that global warming is someone else's problem.

Support the troops, just don't send my kid.

Global poverty needs action, but I gave at the office.

[druidity33]

23. yes!

Such valid questions! I would highly recommend the book Cradle to Cradle by McDonough and Braungart. It's a book full of positive solutions/advice about how to deal with problems such as these. Innovators will be very important in the coming years.

Also good but a little OT is No More Throw-Away People by Edgar Cahn... if you've ever heard of Time Dollars, he's the founder of the concept.

btw, the children say Kucinich!

[5X]

3. I see something wrong with the excess, and whatever time the

discussion is joined has nothing to do with it, unless of course
you make the rules around here.

[nam78_two]

5. I heart JCrowley

:hug:
You were much needed today-you put it so much better than I could ever hope to...

Thanks so much! Great post...

[Reterr]

8. k&r

yayy one of DU's coolest kids agrees about Edwards' house ;).

[roguevalley]

9. this is appalling.

[femrap]

11. I've been going at it in another thread started

by bling bling. Thank you for starting this thread.

I really wonder about Edwards now...this is the 3rd red flag I've encountered with him. Bilderberg, talk in Israel about Iran, and now this 'house.'

WTF? The hypocrisy is almost republican in intensity.

[The Count]

12. You missed the most important. IWR oopsie only covers his vote. But look:

http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:SJ00046:@@@P

[BushOut06]

14. There's a rather easy solution to this

Simply have the government confiscate all money, property, and material goods deemed to be in excess of what is required to live reasonably well (as determined by the government). Redistribute this wealth around the world.

There, now isn't that simple?






Oh, I almost forgot - because some people here seem to take everything literally ;)
:sarcasm:

[The_Casual_Observer]

15. If everybody did that there would no trees left.

But I guess it's ok if one guy does it.

[katsy]

16. bookmarked, k/r

I just can't wrap my brain around the statistics you've provided.

Thank you.

[The Count]

18. "Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed" Gandhi

[Straight Shooter]

19. I didn't know that was Edwards' house until I read the thread.

My first thought when I saw it, "Ugh, no character, too much of the land is stripped bare around it. It must be a second home for Bill Gates."

That is some kind of ferociously materialistic property. Ah, well, to each his own.

[upi402]

20. nice fuckin house. room for a dirtbike track in back too!

fuckyeah!

[Qanisqineq]

21. Thanks for writing pointing this out

This is the only problem I have with Edwards and his monstrosity of a house -- the strain on the environment. Urban sprawl is something that really bothers me and people that build these huge houses don't build UP, they build OUT and take up as much land as possible. And then there's the perfectly manicured lawn that supports how many different species? That's why I hate golf courses, too.

I don't know who's property is pictured in your original post, but it is a perfect example of what I am talking about.

[jgraz]

22. We still have a long way to go

Even here at DU, people don't just miss the point, they seem to feel some obligation to take a crap on anyone who raises it. As long as our society holds up these obscene displays of wealth as ideal examples of what we all should aspire to, we'll never be truly civilized or truly conscious.