Bacon's Rebellion

The Jan. 19, 2009, edition of the Bacon’s Rebellion e-zine has been published.

Virginia and the Employee Free Choice Act
The panic over the Employee Free Choice Act is overwrought. Here’s why it isn’t as big a deal as partisans on both sides would have you believe.
by Lawrence H. Framme III

Lowering the Costs of Virginia’s Prison System
Has the time come where conservatives need to cast the same wary eye at our prison budget that they do at every other item in the state budget?
by Pat Nolan

Virginia Needs More Charter Schools
Overall, Virginia does a good job with public education, but that doesn’t mean we can ignore the failure of public schools in some parts of our state. Instead of more bureaucracy we need to give parents what they want, more choice in what school their kids go to.
by Christian Braunlich

Stimulating Job Creation
Obama’s stimulus bill may help the economy, but only if we make sure that it doesn’t let the government try to compete against the private sector.
by John Palatiello

Presentism in Virginia Politics
When Virginians recoil in horror from a Southern symbol like Lee-Jackson Day, just as a vampire shrieks at the Cross, they engage in “presentism.” This affliction of the mind pollutes the spirit and poisons the body politic.
by James Atticus Bowden

This Holiday Means Help for the Economy
America’s small businesses are hurting. Here’s how we can help them get back on their feet.
by Todd Stottlemyer

Saturday night my wife and I went to see the movie “Revolutionary Road” starring the Titanic team of Leonardo and Kate. It’s sharp, intelligent and deeply depressing fare by the same director of that gem “American Beauty” but without much of the satiric humor.

The film brought to mind the concept of suburbs and just how intellectuals despise them, often for good reason. This is true at Bacons Rebellion (at least the original one) where such keen-eyed observers as EMR and Jim Bacon and Larry Gross take apart the problems of the car-centric suburbs that have overwhelmed Virginia since about the 1930s when the New Deal brought lots of new federal workers to Washington and many flocked to the cheap housing in Arlington.

I, too, have done my dissing of suburbs, although I lived in some as a child and some of my earliest memories are not of cities, but of station wagons on Rockville Pike north of Bethesda and Congressional Shopping Center, a converted civil airport, where I used to buy my plastic models. Later, I lived in true small towns and in the country. During my adult life, I tended towards residing near the centers of cities, including Norfolk, Richmond, Washington, Chicago, Moscow and New York.

Like Frank and April in the movie, marriage and two children brought me to the suburbs which are where I am now. But I start to wonder, why does everyone hate the suburbs so much? Is it really fair, since suburbs have been a huge part of the American experience since at least the 1950s? Are we really the worse for it as the EMRs and Baconators would have us believe? I mean, Ed and Jim, are we all really so worthless?

There is a certain pretension in ‘burb-bashing. Consider this excerpt from the New York Times which was riffing off the upcoming release of “Revolutionary Road:

“In the last couple of decades, the antisuburban film has become as much a staple of Hollywood as the Serious Crime Drama With an Incomprehensible Plot. A few prominent examples: Todd Haynes’s “Safe” (which has suburban people inexplicably bleeding from every pore of their bodies); the 2004 remake of “The Stepford Wives” (where Viking range + Sub-Zero refrigerator = robotic wife, death of feminism and extinction of human rights); “The Ice Storm” (just in case you ignored the urgent alarm sounded by the antisuburban novel by Rick Moody on which the film is based and moved to Larchmont); the British Sam Mendes’s very own “American Beauty” (of which “Revolutionary Road” is simply a reiteration — take a sprinkler, add a dollop of anomie, and presto! you’re an authentic American filmmaker).”

So, let me see if I am getting this right. The “autonomobile” + “dysfunctional settlement patterns” + boredom = hopelessness + self-abortion (see the movie). But I think that is terribly harsh and negates such much of what has been good about U.S. culture at least when I have been alive (I turned 56 last week).

The fact is that for years hardly anyone has lived in the extremely-densely packed neighborhoods where I resided in Brooklyn for four years when I worked at a magazine in Manhattan. I spent fascinating weekends inspecting brownstones and redbricks, studying the sub-society on tenement roofs and on fire escapes and marveling at the incredible ethnic diversity of the place. My Soviet-born wife loved New York with a passion and was disappointed when we ended up in a nice suburb. She ought to know — she teaches the children of suburban families and knows their issues very well.

Suburbs are alien worlds to her so her viewing of “Revolutionary Road” was a bit clinical. As a child, she lived for a while in a city in a “kommunalka” or apartment where as many as a dozen families lived on one floor and shared one kitchen and bathroom. Talk about properly dense housing patterns! Think of it as Risse’s ideal world on steroids with a vodka chaser!

It wasn’t that her family was poor – everyone was. Her mother worked at a partly-underground factory that made, among other things, surface-to-air missiles of the type used against U.S. aircraft in Vietnam. Back then in the Urals, such housing wasn’t so much a factor of far-sighted urban planning, Rather, it was because the nation was still getting over the effects of World War II which killed millions of Russians.

Anyway, back to the movie. Leonardo and Kate do a fine job of playing out their enormous frustrations at being alive in the 1950s suburbs and they really seem to want to get on to Paris and make like Kerouac or Ginsberg. I liked the movie but really admired “American Beauty,” another gutting of suburbia, but more of a satire thanks to Kevin Spacey’s wry and brilliant humor.

I guess I subscribe to the intellectual pretension of ‘burb-bashing because I am so much a product of it.

Peter Galuszka

There seems to be an intentional attempt on this blog to distort EMR’s views of governance and the achievement of Fundamental Transformation in human settlement pattern, governance structure and the global economic structure.

Darrell – Chesapeake dismisses EMR as just another socialist.

Larry Gross somewhere got the idea that it will require a philosopher king to manage society. He has not bothered to read THE ESTATES MATRIX.

Nova Middle Man recently said:

“EMR and You (Jim Bacon) seem to have similar goals but totally different ways of getting there. EMR’s plans only work with massive government regulation. Am I missing something?”

Yes!

“EMR probably would want 100% control in the typical liberal elite I know best mentality. In reality what would this look like.”

Where does this foolishness come from?

Not from anything we have written. Not from any lecture we have delivered. The primary source of this foolishness appears to stem from readers not understanding the Fundamental Transformation means FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION.

Since inquiry is part of a chapter we will be editing soon and we have not specifically addressed this issue before in this forum we will try to summarize:

Management at the Cluster scale is critically important since the Cluster is largest organic component with realistic potential to have effective direct democracy. This observation is base on years of Community management experience and on the study of group dynamics as well as the physical constraints of meeting space that is available at times and in locations when all the citizens of a Cluster can assemble.

So that means at least 2-million “leaders” and if there is any delegation of responsibility about 10-million.

The New Urban Region is the smallest Organic Component of human settlement that can achieve sustainability (and may also be the largest but that is another issue). To lead New Urban Regions, citizens need thousands of “leaders.” There are also Subregions and Urban Support Regions so let us say there is a need another 250,000 to manage at the Regional scale.

Above the New Urban Region – MegaRegions, nation-states, trading-blocks, continental and global scales there are many who would like the have roles. These are the one now hears about as “leaders” but they should have worked up through to ranks and they should be among those already tabulated.

Of course there are more than just Agencies in need of leadership. Many Enterprises and Institutions will be managed by those who also participate in the governance structure. The difference between now and a sustainable future is that in 24-7 Sunlight, everyone will know of the multiple roles and the conflicts can be eliminated.

At the other end of the spectrum of Organic Components is the Unit occupied by the Household. It is clear that to be a functional Household there must be at least one informed “leader.” If part of Household activity is to raise children there need to be at least two. So there is another 130-million more or less leaders.

The Dooryard, Neighborhood, Village scales components need leaders too but almost all will also be among those already identified.

So far we are up to 140,250,000 leaders. In a true democracy everyone has a vote so even those who are not in a leadership position at any given time role have a say.

So where is the central committee, the philosopher king or the liberal elite? Pure fantasy on the part of those who do not want to understand Fundamental Transformation.

Will such a system work? So far the field tests say yes – if citizens understand their role and take responsibility for their actions.

There need be no central committee and no philosopher king. No liberal elite, no pseud-conservative Belief Tank, no Tri-lateral commission, no messiah, no caliph, no dictator, no Darth Vader. Just citizens making informed decision in the market and in the voting booth.

As we suggest in posts over the last three months that focused on achieving a sustainable trajectory for civilization, creating an AntiParty and the upcoming change of administration – for example “Thanksgiving Perspective”:

The problem citizens face is massive over expectation that any one person or the team any one person assembles can “solve the problem.”

Larry Gross again:

“But EMR has failed repeatedly and miserably IMHO to lay out a clear and articulate path for citizens to understand what a Balanced Community is (and is not) – and what changes they should support via elections and referendum and current development proposals (like Tysons) to move in that direction.”

No, Larry, you have failed “repeatedly and miserably” to bother to read what EMR has written on these topics. For some reason you expect that every time a question occurs (or reoccurs) to you, that EMR has the obligation to drop everything and try to again answer it. That is especially a problem when you appear to only listen / read / understand what supports you preconceived notions which lack a comprehensive Conceptual Framework or a Vocabulary to articulate that framework.

That is why a sustainable trajectory requires hundreds of millions of citizens who are ‘responsible’ and informed so democracy and the market can work.

So far Jim Bacon is the only one who has grasp just how profound “Fundamental Transformation” – in settlement patterns, governance structure and economic systems – must be to obtain a sustainable trajectory.

The central tragedy is that the market and the vast majority of citizens indicated that they WANT that change but are thwarted by those who now benefit from special privileges under the existing system.

That is exactly what Niccolo M. said thwarted change…

EMR

In a Jan. 12 release, and again in his state of the Commonwealth speech, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine outlined the details of his “green jobs” initiative. For the most part, it is a worthy policy thrust, containing some very good ideas, some inoffensive ones, and only one worrisome proposal. The package is modest in scope, constrained by Virginia’s budget straightjacket, but considered as a whole, it would nudge the Commonwealth in the right direction.

Let’s be clear about what the green jobs initiative is not. While there are strong conservation components, the Kaine initiative is not a comprehensive approach to reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions across the economy. “Green jobs” does not address key drivers of energy intensity in Virginia’s economy, such as the auto-centric system of transportation and land use. But provisions of the program, if enacted, would get us closer to creating sustainable, energy-efficient regions.

The most far-reaching – and laudable — provisions would promote energy conservation in two ways: (1) raising energy-efficiency standards for state buildings, and (2) promoting electric utility investments in conservation.

In his state of the Commonwealth address, Kaine cited the top recommendation of his Climate Change Commission: to reduce electricity consumption in Virginia by 19 percent of current levels by 2025 (with adjustments for population growth). That goal won’t reduce total consumption by 19 percent, but it would reduce per capita consumption. It’s an ambitious goal but an achievable one.

Kaine has already issued an executive order requiring all new state buildings be constructed to high energy-efficiency standards. This year, the governor proposes extending that idea by amending the Code of Virginia to require “all state and local government buildings meet either LEED or Green Globes standards for efficiency.”

He’s not talking about new buildings only. He’s talking about retrofitting existing buildings. Retrofits, he notes, would put a lot of carpenters, electricians and installers back to work – a good thing in a recession. Fair enough. What he didn’t do in the speech was say how he intends to pay for the retrofits.

If the plan relies upon the routine allowances for building maintenance and improvements in the state budget, the sums available to pay for the energy-efficiency retrofits will be meager indeed, and the impact on jobs would be minimal. This strikes me as an instance in which the state should exercise its AAA bond rating to borrow money.

Let’s say, for purposes of illustration, that the Department of General Administration has identified $250 million worth of worthy energy-efficiency projects in public buildings, including only projects that generate a payback of 20 percent per year or more. The Commonwealth could borrow that $250 million, paying 5 percent or so on its bonds. Not only would the expenditure of those funds create work for the construction industry at a time it desperately needs it, the expenditures would more than pay their way. Every dollar the state devotes to debt payment, it makes back through a reduction in energy costs — with an ample “profit” to spare. That’s just good business, and a good tactic for addressing the state’s long-term budget challenges.

Of course, state and local government account for only a tenth or so of Virginia’s economy, so these measures leave 90 percent of the economy untouched. Kaine’s proposed changes to utility rate structuring would address that problem. Said Kaine:

Under current law, we guarantee a rate of return for a utility building a new coal plant, but not for investments that promote conservation. That just makes no sense. Our long-term planning should recognize that conservation is just as important an energy source as new construction. We should treat conservation investments at least as favorably as new generation investments, and my bill will do that.

This measure would address a fundamental flaw in Virginia rate-setting policy. (I haven’t read the bill, so I cannot comment on the specifics, but the broad idea behind it is sound.) Despite the many opportunities available, Dominion, Appalachian Power and the smaller power companies have little incentive to invest in energy efficiency and conservation. One idea currently under consideration is Dominion’s proposal to install smart meters in every home. Smart meters would give consumers the means to carefully monitor their electricity consumption. Pilot programs around the world have demonstrated that people utilize electricity more efficiently when they can measure the impact of their activities.

These proposals are “slam dunks” and warrant the full and fair consideration of the General Assembly. Gov. Kaine proposed some other measures, which don’t seem like the “slam dunks” that may require more thought. I will address them in a future post.

In the 47th comment on the TRAGEDY OF TRICKLE DOWN string, TMT posted a question unrelated to Trickle Down but on an important topic:

The optimum location for the evolution of Balanced Communities.

Jim Bacon posted a responding comment that is on target but TMTs post provided an opportunity to nail down some flapping issues and misunderstandings (aka, misunderestimations).

We have reproduced TMTs comment here and interlined comments. That is the fastest way to deal with the issues.

“Maybe I’m still missing something – wouldn’t be the first time and won’t be the last.

“My question is then: How are balanced communities to be implemented?”

Jim Bacon outlines three good principles in his post. In The Shape of the Future, EMR lays out six Overarching Strategies that provide a comprehensive context for achieving Balance.

The first step is to understand that achieving Balance will be to everyone’s benefit and the failure to achieve Balance will result in Collapse.

“Having lived in the Midwest and Great Plains for many years, I know from personal observation that there is plenty of room in many states to the west of the Eastern Seaboard and to the east of the Left Coast.”

Here is the first issue that needs to be nailed down: There is “plenty of room” not just in the Midwest and the Great Plains but right here in the National Capital Subregion. There is a vast amount of vacant and underutilized land for which the public has already provided infrastructure. Check out Blueprint.

EMR prepared a PowerPoint on this topic (“Five Critical Issues”). No one has (nor could they) dispute the calculations. All they can say is “I would rather not live in a dwelling in the patterns and at the density that the market demonstrates is in the greatest demand.” This pattern is, by the way Balanced at the Alpha Community scale and it functions / performs well.

Jim Bacon and EMR say: “Live where you what and as you want so long as you pay the fair cost.” The 12.5 Percenters do not like it but 87.5 percent is a majority and if they do not want to go with the majority, all they have to do is pay the cost.

“Should it be the policy of the United States to push population and even job growth to “Fly-over Country”?”

No, No, No. The markets shows the vast majority do not want to live in Fly-over Country. That is why it is Fly-over Country.

Some do want to live there and there is no reason they cannot build Balanced Communities there. However, it should not because “policy” pushes them there.

There is another reason besides the value of free choice. That reason is that the cost of contemporary society is vastly more than anyone is now paying. That is why there is huge debt — public and private — but what is being paid plus what is being barrowed now is not nearly the total cost. If ‘policy’ starts pushing citizens where they do not want to go it will cost far more.

“What if it would be much less expensive to triple the population of North Dakota than to build a mixed use Tysons Corner?”

No, not even close. How much would they have to pay you to move to Fargo? OK you are from Fargo and want to return but only 1 out of 7,346 are in that situation. The market says; the Creative Class says; common sense says: Go to the best places.

“Should immigration reform be tied to “settling the great open middle”?

No, no, no. There is no need “settle” anyplace. Over 95 percent of the population is Urban and to house the entire Urban population of the US of A requires less than 5 percent of the total land area of the Lower 48 at MINIMUM densities.

“For example, just as with homesteading in the 19th century…”

You could have a lot of that homestead land right now for NonUrban activities – really cheap. If you want to use it for Urban purposes the cost will be huge.

“… should Obama propose “amnesty” to any person who lived here illegally for five years or more, but only if she/he lives in a place such as Iowa or Wyoming for five more years?”

Of course not.

“Should new immigration permits be conditioned on settling in Montana or Arkansas?”

Only if the immigrants have skills that will evolve Balanced Communities in Montana and Arkansas and that is where they want to go.

“Should Congress enact a law that says 50% of federal agency staffs must be located in either the Central or Mountain Time Zones?”

No, see note on cost above.

That does not say that for some Agency purposes it would be more efficient to have facilities in small New Urban Regions or in Communities in Urban Support Regions but the function should dictate the location. And be prepared to pay bonuses to those who do not end up in desirable Communities and the most desirable Communities are Balanced Communities.

“Should Fairfax County simply say, “We’ve grown as big as we are going to get. The next big building boom must occur in Fairfax, Minnesota or Fairfax, Ohio.”

Fairfax County’s problems are rooted in settlement pattern dysfunction and lack of Balance, not over-population. Over-population is what dysfunction looks like to those who do not understand human settlement patterns and have let an inequitable allocation of costs line the wrong pockets.

“If we recoil at all or some of these programs as being violative of free choice, why is so-called ‘Smart Growth’ being rammed down people’s throats?”

So far as EMR is aware no “smart growth” policy or program has been established in any jurisdiction where the elected representatives did not believe that the majority of the citizens supported those policies. There may be cases where the governance practitioners believe that the majority would support these policies if they knew what was good for them but by the time “smart growth” is an issue, the majority do support it. Yes, most want the change in someone else’s Neighborhood, not theirs but few favor “dumb growth.”

“Is “Smart Growth” just an alliance between those who hate autos and suburbs and the landowners/developers who want to make money, but don’t want to move west, or south or wherever?”

You know the answer to that. But if it is the case, then the alliance is the majority in the jurisdiction where it occurs.

EMR

Every municipality in Virginia bases its land use planning on the anticipated demand for new housing. Their plans are only as good as their projections. And the projections are good only as long as historical trends hold up.

The demand for housing is based upon the rate of new household formation. And that is driven by population growth and the average size of the household. Of the two, population growth is the most important, but average household size is by no means insigificant. Look what’s happened over the past century or so: In 1915, the average household size stood at 4.5. By 1967, it had declined to 3.0, and by 2006, it had dipped again to 2.6.

Bottom line: Shrinking household size has turbo-charged the growth in demand for housing. Insofar as housing projections are predicated upon past increases in household formation, the planning assumptions embedded in comprehensive plans across Virginia assume that average household size will continue to shrink.

While population is expected to continue increasing, we cannot assume that household sizes will continue to shrink. Indeed, there is evidence that household sizes actually may begin to increase in size. That is the thesis of a column, “Reinventing the Family,” that I wrote earlier this week for the Times-Dispatch. (Here is the version posted on the Boomer Project web site.)

One factor is the increasing tendency of adult GenYs to live longer with their parents. Whether the trend reflects a prolonged adolescent dependency or the economic realities of student loans and credit card debt, I don’t know. But it’s happening. At the same time, on the older end of the age scale, more parents are moving in with their children. Thus, we’re seeing signs of a re-emergence of a three-generation household. (There are other factors reversing the atomization of the family, but those are the two biggest.)

I suspect this trend will be accelerated by the severity of the current recession. As unemployment shoots up, it only makes sense for family members to combine residences and reduce overhead. As much as Americans love their big homes and personal privacy, they are not immune to economic forces. They will change their behavior in response to adverse economic circumstances.

Yesterday, USA Today published an article quoting the National Association of Home Builders to the effect that the average size of new single-family homes, which has climbed steadily over the decades, has gone into reverse. The NAHB’s analysis showed that the average size of new houses declined from 2,629 square feet in the third quarter of 2008 to 2,438 — the steepest dip since researchers started collecting the data in 1999.

Business-As-Usual is on its last legs. Many assumptions that underpinned Virginia’s governance systems of the past half century are no longer valid. We are entering a new era — and I fear that our planners and elected officials are not prepared for it.

The Jefferson Institute for Public Policy has published the Jan. 5, 2009, edition — its second — of the Bacon’s Rebellion e-zine. The highlights:

Privatization Can Transform the Delivery of State Psychiatric Services
by Leonard Gilroy

Wanted: A Virginia Land Inventory
by John Palatiello

The Ultimate Tax Cut that can Help President Obama get America’s Economy Moving Again
by Paul Goldman

The Right to Choose…Secretly
by Christian Braunlich

The Economic Mess
by James Atticus Bowden

Global Virginia
by Michael Cecire

Change We Can Believe In
Lawrence W. Framme III

As part of my job for the Boomer Project, I survey the media and blogs for emerging trends. One unmistakable trajectory is the increased commentary on what EMR and I would call the “end of the era of mass overconsumption.” Others have given catchier names to the phenomenon, but it all amounts to the same thing: The era of unsustainable, debt-fueled consumption in the American economy is over. In contrast to the past two recessions, consumer spending will not rebound stronger than ever. Consumers are fundamentally re-evaluating the idea that accumulating more stuff is the path to happiness.

Matt Thornhill, a principal of the Boomer Project, sees the rise of what he has labelled “responsible consumerism” and, alternatively, the “new fru” (for new frugality). Personally, I find the second term more memorable. Responsible consumerism sounds like more people reading Consumer Reports. New Fru sounds like people embracing frugality as a positive virtue, which is, in fact, what I think more and more people are doing.

As Matt elaborates the concept in a Times-Dispatch op-ed piece, “Age of Responsible Consumerism Begins,” the spreading rejection of mindless consumption will persist beyond the cyclical tightening of credit. Writes Matt:

We saw this seismic shift coming a generation away. Members of both the G.I. and Silent generations, those now ages 63 and older, led the way by reducing their own consumption of goods and services as they grew older. Their desires shifted as they reached 50 and then 60: fewer material goods, more enriching experiences. Fast on their heels comes the largest, wealthiest, and most important demographic group America has even seen. Boomers, raised in front of television sets, a target for marketers from age 5 upward, are now reaching 60 at the rate of one every eight seconds.

That’s right. The generation that put the mass into consumption is now at the stage of life where people naturally shift focus from the material to the ethereal. What’s fascinating (or worrisome, if you’re in a retail or consumer-products business) is that the impact of this shift on America’s consumption-driven economy is just beginning.

But wait, there’s more: This shift away from spending by our largest demographic group coincides with a larger societal trend toward sustainability. Consumers of all ages are thinking more about the environmental impact of their purchase behavior and consumption patterns. In a national study we conducted among all adults in late summer, before the economic meltdown, 80 percent of all consumers told us they think or act in a “green,” or environmentally responsible fashion. Green is mainstream, and here to stay. Today’s consumers want to be responsible in their consumption. They crave sustainability, not planned obsolescence. They focus increasingly on “needs” and not “wants.”

• As the retail sector shrinks, there will be fewer retail jobs — an entry point for many Virginians into the workforce.
• As retail sales shrivel, so will revenues from the sales tax. Government services that depend upon the sales tax for funding will be more fiscally challenged than services that rely upon, say, the income tax for a funding stream.
• As retail chains contract, demand for retial space in malls and shopping centers will evaporate. Vacancies will rise. Investment in retail development and re-development will plummet. That, in turn, will hurt municipalities that depend upon their commercial property tax base for revenue.

These changes are bearing down on us like a freight train. There is no wishing them away. Governance practitioners have no excuse for getting caught off guard.

In 2007, trucks paid $2.7 million in fees for permits to operate in excess of Virginia’s vehicle weight limits. But that number fell far short of the estimated $211.4 million that heavy loads did to the state’s roads that year, according to Gary Allen, head of the Virginia Transportation Research Council.

I’ve got a big backlog of stories that I hope to get to this long New Year’s weekend. Some, like this, are a bit out of date. But better late than never.

Does anybody remember the terrorist siege of Mumbai? Definitely yesterday’s news. But there’s a local angle that’s worth bringing to your attention. By way of preface, we often read criticisms of American Muslims for sitting quietly on the sidelines when radical Islamists commit terrorist acts. Well, I think it’s worth noting that a league of Virginia Muslims — many of whom are South Asians — has spoken out in the strongest possible terms.

From Dr. Imad Damaj, president of the Muslim Coalition for Public Affairs:

It is with an utmost sadness and shock that we received the news of the terrorists’ attacks in India in the eve of Thanksgiving.

The Virginia Muslim Coalition for Public Affairs strongly condemns and denounces these criminal acts and expresses its sincere words of comfort and feelings of sympathy and sadness for the loss of all innocent lives in India.

We extend our heartfelt condolences to all the families of the victims and in particular to the family of our fellow Virginian, Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife.

Regardless of who was involved, the people who carried these attacks out are people with no sense of humanity or morality. They can claim the Religion of Islam as their creed, but their actions go against the fundamental spirit of Islam, which promotes a culture of life and humanity, not bloodshed and violence.

Bravo.

Further thoughts on MainStream Media’s culpability vis a vis Collapse of the global financial house of cards:

The previous post (IT is MainStream Media’s FAULT) engendered a number of useful observations concerning financial Collapse and the role of the Media:

REID ON THE RIGHT TRACK

At 6:37 AM on 30 December, Reid Greenum put his finger on a key issue: Greed.

He is right to rail against individual greed, but there are two kinds of greed.

The individual moral shortcoming that Reid is concerned about AND

The systemic, institutionalized (small ‘eye’) greed that is a key to the ‘success’ of Agencies, Enterprises and Institutions in the Friedman-Flat-Earth economy. Robert Reich documents this form of greed in Supercapitalism.

Organizational greed could be controlled by enlightened citizens through Agencies but at the current time this systemic problem is the more important of the twin manifestations of greed.

That is because it impacts almost every one of the Planet’s 6.3 billion citizens and because it is seen as a virtue by Business-As-Usual and Politics-As-Usual advocates – especially Consumption-Uber-Ales, pseudo-conservatives.

While systemic greed could be contained by enlightened Agency action, individual greed is genetically hardwired into humans. That is because what we now call ‘greed’ served humans well in most Hunter / Gather and Early Agrarian Societies.

On the other hand, the greed proclivities lead to unsustainable consequences in an Urban society – Mass OverConsumption and dysfunctional human settlement patterns. In a Driven-to-a-Frenzy-by-Technology Urban Society, there are too many choices; too many opportunities to do something “because I can.” This dire circumstance is often are mistaken for ‘freedom.’

That is why greed of both sorts must be controlled in the context of functional human settlement patterns. It flourishes in disaggregated and dysfunctional settlement patterns. More on that in a moment.

The flip side of both kinds of greed is ignorance. That is because even the most greedy individual or Organization will constrain their proclivities and desires if they know they will suffer more than they will benefit. Note the current course of consumer confidence and consumer spending…

This is where MainStream Media comes in. The Enterprises that control MainStream Media benefit from citizen ignorance. If citizens and Organizations fail to understand the cumulative consequence of their actions they will continue to over-spend, over-barrow and in other ways feed Enterprise greed.

BUT WHAT OF HUMAN SETTLEMENT PATTERNS?

If one does not understand human settlement patterns, they will not comprehend why the pattern and distribution of human activities is a key issue with respect to economic Collapse.

Saying dysfunctional human settlement patterns is not in play with respect to financial Collapse is like saying gravity had no role in killing Uncle Pete when he fell down three flights of stairs last News Years Eve. One can blame the rotten banister and too much moonshine, however, but for gravity, Uncle Pete would be alive this New Years Eve.

Saying dysfunctional human settlement patterns is not in play with respect to financial Collapse is like saying electro-magnetic fields do not effect radio reception. But for electro-magnetic fields there would be no radio.

In fact one way to come to understand the economic, social and physical impact of human settlement patterns is to understand gravitational forces and magnetic fields via celestial mechanics and physics.

The first 350 pages in the first Volume of The Shape of the Future detail why human settlement pattern has controlling impact on the economic, social and physical well being of citizens.

THE ROLE OF SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IS SUPPORTING ETHICAL BEHAVIOR

Reid is also correct about “ethics” playing a key role in economic Collapse. But it is not just the “family” that has fallen apart and is not providing an ethical rudder.

Back to human settlement patterns. It takes a Dooryard, Cluster, Neighborhood, Village and Community to engender and support ethical behavior. The more complex the society, the more important each of the organic components of human settlement become.

For a snapshot of what has happened to ‘family,’ see definition of Household in GLOSSARY as to why EMR stopped using the word “family” as in Single Household Attached Dwelling.

As Reid points out, ethics is important. That is not clear with respect to “religion.” There are a lot of citizens going to places of worship – on several different days a week – but few who practice their beliefs in the market or on the highways.

OTHER COMMENTS

Several other observations following the IT IS MainStream Media’s FAULT post deserve a note:

Larry Gross at 3:57 PM on 30 December:

Larry is right on with respect to the federal income tax mortgage deduction!

When Larry finally gets around to reading The Shape of the Future he will see that the mortgage deduction is high on the list of damaging subsidies driving dysfunctional human settlement patterns.

The last time EMR looked, something like 90 of benefit of the deduction went to top 20 percent of the Ziggurat. EMR has no problem with well considered Agency help for those in need of shelter assistance but those are the wrong folks to help. In fact they are the only one who do not need help.

There is absolutely no justification for the subsidy other than Business-As-Usual and driving Mass OverConsumption.

Larry will not admit it but this is another major cause of putting The Size Wrong House In The Wrong Location.

Larry Gross, 8:54 AM on 29 Dec:

It is not just citizens READING the wrong stuff. MainStream Media has other outlets besides material that is “read.”

It is hearing and seeing the wrong stuff and reading, hearing and seeing it over and over again – all slanted to encourage consumption and Mass OverConsumption.

NovaMiddleMan, 9:49 AM on 29 Dec:

NMM said… (“In quotes”)

“MSM is not relevant anymore.”

Some may wish that were true but if so, why are billions spent on advertising?

And if MainStream Media goes away tomorrow, where would citizens get any information? From self-serving, dysfunctional Agencies without geographic legitimacy? From Institutions funded by those who want to drive their own agenda? From the other Enterprises that do not even pretend to provide useful information? From Alternative Media? From Anti-media?

Achieving a sustainable trajectory for civilization requires that new “citizen media” take over the abandoned Fourth Estate before there is no source of information. See THE ESTATES MATRIX.

“People say other people read the wrong stuff because you can pick whatever “news” you want”

Now, there is an important statement! Reading only what one wants to believe is worse than reading what MainStream Media presents as ‘balanced’ – if that is possible.

“‘News’ anymore is just another wing of politics.”

No, it is not just Agency babble (aka, politics) but also and even more important Enterprise babble and Institution babble.

At 3:07 PM on 29 Dec MIGHTYBIGMEDIA provides a nice summary.

And in the meantime WaPo has concluded today (31 December) a “balanced” three part series on the crash of AIG and credit default swaps (CDSs). This follows up on their coverage of collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) on 16 December and the three part series on The Housing Bubble in June.

Again, WaPo did
not get to the root causes. They tut-tut over the wreckage and have nice photos of the scape goats.

Interestingly, on 28 December the front page of the Business section of WaPo ran a great graphic showing how responsible, conservative, saving citizens have had no place to “invest” for a decade. Nothing but the ups and downs of gambling venues.

And to this day, there is nothing to encourage conservative citizens to save, or reward those who have saved.

Happy New Year.

EMR