mntnhousepermi wrote:
Usually we talk about how many Kwh a day or a month, so you are using 24kWh a day, correct ? How many people in your household ?
Good job on cutting it in half, are there more gains to be made ?
For most of us, transportation is killer, so van pool is a great savings
We should all put the stones down for we all share guilt.
Recollecting memories from early in our awareness, Angie and I would envy those who had experienced little or no guilt. They could enjoy multiple homes, boats, race vehicles etc.We drove little had no vacations (still don’t) accumulated land, home schooled children, farmed and gardened. I still get wonder lust for folk who either deny responsibility, or use the “Jones’” metric
stones are for building with each other not casting at…
Kelsey is settled again, and I felt guilt at having her hauled 2hrs. to meet a draft stallion. In a long emergency her and her team mate would be hitched to a wagon and we would drive, camp and relate with the other draft folk. Doesn’t sound to bad from here.
Nate wrote:
mntnhousepermi wrote:
Usually we talk about how many Kwh a day or a month, so you are using 24kWh a day, correct ? How many people in your household ?
Good job on cutting it in half, are there more gains to be made ?
For most of us, transportation is killer, so van pool is a great savings
My household is also rural, all electric, and pump my own water, 2 pumps, one up from the well and the other from the tank to the house. We use alot less electricity than you do. We use in a year what you do in a month, so I wonder what the differences are ?
It can be valuable to investigate what is using the most power. Some people use a Watt meter. I noticed high usage a few years ago ( took me a few months to notice ! ) and could not figure it out, so I turned off circuit breakers and turned them on one at a time. What I found out was that my well pump was on and trying to pump when the well was dry (needed to recharge). So, I made adjustments and fixed the issue. Your issues are likely different, but investigating could turn up waste. I also changed the well pump to a lower horsepower one years ago, why have 3/4, or 1 HP when 1/2 or 1/3 is more than enough ? Something to keep in mind for when it next needs replacement.
Heating is the worst energy use of electric, so to minimize that we never use the house electric space heating and only heat with the wood stove. ( I live in an area with high fire risk and too much winter down wood, so this is a no brainer even for neighbors who do not think of energy savings)
We added solar hot water heating, although this presently needs repair and is not connected ( 30 year old panel needs to be fixed). Even so, the use here is kept low, we put a timer on the electric hot water heater ( very inexpensive), take short showers, wash clothes in cold water, etc…
When we moved in, we took out 3 window airconditioners. We added 3 upstairs operable skylights to let out hot air at night, planted a grape arbor over the south facing deck, close curtains in the day, etc…
What do you think is your biggest use of all that electricity ?
Good discussion of guilt, nicely said RR about casting stones–referencing the biblical story of “let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” We have to be careful about equating energy or any other consumption with guilt. Chris and I discussed this briefly in our latest podcast. We agreed that getting thru the wormhole was not something to feel guilty about, as only those who survive can contribute to the world we;re trying to shape after the current arrangement falls apart.
I pointed out that energy will be available to those with “money”, whatever functions as a means of exchange and store of value on the other side of the wormhole. I will first stipulate that my carbon footprint is currently huge due to maintaining two households far from each other. Weirdly, this is not that costly (yet). If you look at the energy costs of fueling a big pick-up truck to carry one human (and a dog, weed-wacker, or other light load typical of most truck trips I witness) , it’s actually still extremely affordable due to the absurdly low price of energy. Nothing will change until the cost of energy requires some serious trade-offs and sacrifices in other desirables.
But one dynamic we should mention here isn’t just a price increase in energy–it’s a reduction in the availability of “money” to buy energy, Historically, nation-states debauch their currency (devalue it) as a means of papering over their insolvency. They also increase taxes substantially, effectively impoverishing most of their citizenry with this one-two punch. When it’s easier to go on Bread and Circuses welfare than work and pay taxes, guess what–the populace receiving Bread and Circuses swells enormously, putting additional pressure on the state to raise taxes even higher.
This is a classic self-reinforcing feedback loop with no good resolution.
PP.com readers know all the arguments in favor of owning precious metals as the historically supported means of retaining purchasing power as the state pursues its self-destructive policies. But the state (by which I mean the central bank as well as the elected government and the unelected Deep State) will very likely pursue any and all “wealth” that can be expropriated without triggering a revolution.
Thus we can anticipate a "wealth tax"on everyone “hoarding” gold and silver, everyone with an IRA or 401K worth more than (say) $50,000, everyone who owns a property worth more than X, and so on.
Outlawing cash will push all “money” through state-monitored and controlled gateways where the appropriate expropriation can be exacted. Illinois seems to be showing how the death-by-a-hundred tax increases works: what’s the value of a home when property taxes are $20,000 annually and the people with the means to buy homes are leaving the state in droves?
The state doesn’t have to take the house in one “legal” action: it can expropriate the value over the course of a decade or two via ever-higher property and income taxes that bleeds the state of productive taxpayers who have the freedom to leave and increases the number of dependents on the state.
The super-wealthy have already secreted much of their wealth offshore or in tax-avoidance schemes such as family trusts, LLCs in no-income-tax states, etc., so its the populace with no access to these havens who are most at risk, i.e. the rest of us.
I don’t have an answer, as we don’t yet know the exact means of expropriation the state will select first (the rules will change overnight as needed, we do know this) , but we should be alive to the need for flexibility and perhaps new strategies. I have yet to have someone explain why my idea of mailing bitcoin on a thumb drive to a locale where BTC is still legal (or unmonitored) is unworkable. I mail books overseas all the time, via USPS and FedEx, and all they do is ask what’s inside. Can they scan every package for USB drives, open every package with a USB drive, overcome the encryption on the drive and locate the bitcoin? This isn’t plausible unless you are willing to shut down all commerce, trade and postal services.
Anyway, retaining some “money” with which to buy energy seems like a good idea.
calling Davefairtex… any data series available on unearned income?
Here's a link to the current BEA table for personal income (table 2.6):calling Davefairtex... any data series available on unearned income?
https://bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9#reqid=9&step=3&isuri=1&903=76Unfortunately, this table does not include the NIPA codes - I found the codes on another table which has the same items, but the data is out-of-date. Tell me the code you want to see, I'll post a chart. Table 2.6. Personal Income and Its Disposition Monthly . Monthly (igrp=78) (tbl 240) BILLIONS OF DOLLARS; MONTHS SEASONALLY ADJUSTED AT ANNUAL RATES BEA published 2013-December-5. For pre 1969 data 2010-June-25. This file written 12/10/2013 10:58:09 PM. FULL DATA HERE (csv) ->
nipa_2__6____m.csv Data from 1959 Jan to 2013 Oct. LOC 40 variables.
Monthly
Quarterly
Yearly
ivar-gang
code
Monthly range all data (csv)
2013.10
2013.09
2013.08
2013.07
2013.06
2013.05
2013.04
2013.03
2013.02
2013.01
2012.12
Var
1
907 9/15
A065RC1
Equals: Personal income
1959-2013 Oct
14290.1
14300.9
14236.6
14162.3
14138.4
14088.3
14031.9
14016.8
13969.3
13791.7
14420.2
Equals: Personal income
2
1255 5/11
W209RC1
…Compensation of employees
1959-2013 Oct
8935.0
8923.9
8894.5
8848.8
8872.9
8830.4
8803.2
8776.4
8762.6
8705.8
8910.3
…Compensation of employees
3
1256 9/19
A576RC1
…Wages and salaries
1959-2013 Oct
7203.2
7194.2
7168.6
7127.5
7151.4
7112.9
7088.6
7065.9
7053.7
7001.5
7200.8
…Wages and salaries
4
1257 9/18
A132RC1
…Private industries
1959-2013 Oct
6005.9
5997.0
5979.9
5941.4
5958.3
5918.2
5894.2
5872.5
5857.5
5803.5
6000.1
…Private industries
5
1258 9/18
B202RC1
…Government
1959-2013 Oct
1197.4
1197.2
1188.7
1186.2
1193.1
1194.6
1194.4
1193.3
1196.1
1198.0
1200.7
…Government
6
992 13/18
A038RC1
…Supplements to wages and salaries
1959-2013 Oct
1731.7
1729.6
1725.8
1721.3
1721.4
1717.5
1714.5
1710.6
1708.9
1704.3
1709.5
…Supplements to wages and salaries
7
1032 9/14
B040RC1
…Employer contributions for
…employee pension and insurance funds1
1969-2013 Oct
1197.2
1195.3
1193.1
1190.8
1189.2
1187.6
1185.9
1183.4
1182.2
1180.8
1177.4
…Employer contributions for employee pension and insurance funds
8
1033 9/15
B039RC1
…Employer contributions for
…government social insurance
1969-2013 Oct
534.6
534.3
532.8
530.4
532.2
529.9
528.6
527.2
526.7
523.5
532.2
…Employer contributions for government social insurance
9
998 21/28
A041RC1
…Proprietors’ income with inventory
…valuation and capital consumption
…adjustments
1959-2013 Oct
1357.2
1376.9
1354.8
1339.2
1325.8
1342.9
1355.7
1370.6
1339.4
1293.9
1256.9
…Proprietors’ income with inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments
10
1034 17/23
B042RC1
…Farm
1959-2013 Oct
125.0
147.4
127.9
118.4
109.0
129.0
148.9
168.9
137.0
105.2
73.4
…Farm
11
1035 13/16
A045RC1
…Nonfarm
1959-2013 Oct
1232.2
1229.5
1226.9
1220.7
1216.8
1213.9
1206.8
1201.7
1202.3
1188.7
1183.5
…Nonfarm
12
999 19/27
A048RC1
…Rental income of persons with
…capital consumption adjustment
1959-2013 Oct
608.4
606.0
599.7
594.6
590.2
587.7
585.1
584.2
574.9
565.6
556.9
…Rental income of persons with capital consumption adjustment
13
905 9/13
W210RC1
…Plus: Personal income receipts on
…assets
1959-2013 Oct
2027.5
2031.6
2028.3
2030.8
2015.2
1995.2
1971.5
1951.5
1960.0
1895.9
2269.0
…Plus: Personal income receipts on assets
14
1259 5/12
A064RC1
…Personal interest income
1959-2013 Oct
1234.6
1233.4
1234.4
1235.3
1236.3
1225.6
1214.9
1204.1
1215.8
1227.4
1239.1
…Personal interest income
15
1260 5/11
B703RC1
…Personal dividend income
1959-2013 Oct
792.9
798.2
793.9
795.5
779.0
769.6
756.6
747.4
744.2
668.5
1029.9
…Personal dividend income
16
906 9/14
A577RC1
…Plus: Personal current transfer
…receipts
1959-2013 Oct
2476.3
2475.7
2469.0
2453.4
2441.8
2434.9
2416.1
2430.9
2427.8
2419.4
2408.8
…Plus: Personal current transfer receipts
17
1261 5/15
A063RC1
…Government social benefits to
…persons
1959-2013 Oct
2431.1
2430.7
2424.1
2408.7
2397.2
2390.4
2371.9
2386.7
2383.9
2375.5
2368.8
…Government social benefits to persons
18
1262 5/6
W823RC1
…Social security2
1969-2013 Oct
803.4
804.1
803.9
799.1
801.4
797.3
785.8
795.4
789.0
785.0
781.1
…Social security
19
1263 5/6
W824RC1
…Medicare3
1969-2013 Oct
598.4
599.8
596.6
593.0
589.4
586.0
583.4
590.1
591.1
586.8
582.2
…Medicare
20
1264 5/6
W729RC1
…Medicaid
1969-2013 Oct
452.7
450.4
448.6
439.6
426.9
427.7
423.7
424.0
423.6
423.5
426.6
…Medicaid
21
1265 5/5
W825RC1
…Unemployment insurance
1969-2013 Oct
59.7
59.6
62.4
64.7
66.6
68.5
70.4
72.3
73.8
75.6
78.3
…Unemployment insurance
22
1266 5/5
W826RC1
…Veterans’ benefits
1969-2013 Oct
83.6
83.4
81.1
80.5
81.6
80.3
78.0
76.1
78.2
76.1
73.9
…Veterans’ benefits
23
1267 5/5
W827RC1
…Other
1969-2013 Oct
433.3
433.4
431.5
431.8
431.3
430.7
430.5
429.0
428.1
428.6
426.6
…Other
24
1039 11/17
B931RC1
…To persons (net)
1959-2013 Oct
45.2
45.0
44.9
44.7
44.5
44.4
44.3
44.1
44.0
43.8
40.0
…To persons (net)
25
901 9/16
A061RC1
…Contributions for government social
…insurance domestic
1959-2013 Oct
1114.2
1113.1
1109.7
1104.5
1107.5
1102.6
1099.7
1096.8
1095.4
1088.9
981.6
…Contributions for government social insurance domestic
26
1268 5/17
W055RC1
Less: Personal current taxes
1959-2013 Oct
1678.9
1666.1
1663.8
1663.8
1681.4
1668.9
1656.2
1641.5
1632.6
1612.9
1591.0
Less: Personal current taxes
27
1169 7/12
A067RC1
Disposable personal income
1959-2013 Oct
12611.3
12634.9
12572.8
12498.5
12457.0
12419.4
12375.7
12375.2
12336.7
12178.7
12829.2
Disposable personal income
28
1269 5/10
A068RC1
Less: Personal outlays
1959-2013 Oct
12006.3
11974.2
11943.3
11901.4
11881.6
11822.9
11806.4
11837.5
11812.8
11734.4
11709.3
Less: Personal outlays
29
102 17/30
DPCERC1
…Personal consumption expenditures
1959-2013 Oct
11582.9
11550.2
11526.4
11491.7
11476.0
11413.0
11392.4
11419.0
11397.1
11321.4
11300.6
…Personal consumption expenditures
30
1270 5/12
B069RC1
…Personal interest payments4
1959-2013 Oct
259.6
260.5
253.6
246.7
239.8
244.3
248.7
253.1
250.4
247.8
245.1
…Personal interest payments
31
1271 5/9
W211RC1
…Personal current transfer payments
1959-2013 Oct
163.8
163.6
163.3
163.0
165.8
165.6
165.4
165.4
165.3
165.2
163.5
…Personal current transfer payments
32
1272 5/14
W062RC1
…To government
1969-2013 Oct
91.3
91.0
90.7
90.4
90.1
89.9
89.7
89.5
89.4
89.3
89.2
…To government
33
1273 5/12
B070RC1
…To the rest of the world (net)
1969-2013 Oct
72.6
72.6
72.6
72.6
75.7
75.7
75.7
75.9
75.9
75.9
74.4
…To the rest of the world (net)
34
1274 5/15
A071RC1
Equals: Personal saving
1959-2013 Oct
604.9
660.7
629.5
597.1
575.4
596.5
569.2
537.7
523.9
444.4
1119.9
Equals: Personal saving
35
1275 5/9
A072RC1
…Personal saving as a percentage of
…disposable personal income
1959-2013 Oct
4.8
5.2
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.8
4.6
4.3
4.2
3.6
8.7
…Personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income
Addenda:
Addenda:
36
1276 5/8
W875RX1
…Personal income excluding current
…transfer receipts billions of chained
…(2009) dollars5
1959-2013 Oct
10990.9
10998.3
10956.9
10913.8
10913.6
10914.5
10888.1
10830.2
10778.3
10662.0
11269.4
…Personal income excluding current transfer receipts billions of chained (2009) dollars
Disposable personal income:
Disposable personal income:
37
1170 7/10
A067RX1
…Disposable personal income5
1959-2013 Oct
11732.8
11751.3
11706.6
11649.7
11623.0
11631.9
11600.4
11568.0
11520.9
11418.1
12036.5
…Disposable personal income
Per capita:
Per capita:
38
1277 5/12
A229RC0
…Current dollars
1959-2013 Oct
39755
39855
39686
39477
39372
39277
39161
39182
39081
38601
40683
…Current dollars
39
1278 5/12
A229RX0
…Chained (2009) dollars
1959-2013 Oct
36985
37068
36952
36796
36736
36786
36708
36626
36497
36190
38170
…Chained (2009) dollars
I think the question here was the growth rate of unearned income, which in this BEA table includes rents, interest, dividends and what they call “personal income receipts on assets” which I presume is unearned income from assets that isn’t rent or interest/dividends.
But we can’t make sense of unearned income unless we also chart total personal income and earned income. If we are becoming a “rentier economy” then unearned income should have expanded at a higher rates than total income and earned income. If all 3 are more or less in parallel then that would tell us unearned income hasn’t changed much as a % of total income.
Please, only work on this if it’s of interest to you…but I think the results would be of wide interest, as it would illuminate the state of the “rentier” (unearned income) economy.
There are quibbles, of course–the BEA doesn’t break out interest earned by the bottom 90% and the top 1%, so we have to take all unearned income, even the income flowing to the bottom 90%. Based on evidence of wealth ownership, roughly 2/3 to 3/4 of all financial wealth is held by the top 5%, so we could apply that to interest and dividends as a guesstimate of “rentier” income.
http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/good-people-really/
This is why we can’t/won’t address these issues of energy (amongs many others that are killing us).
The disgrace of America’s putative intellectual class is nearly complete as it shoves the polity further into dysfunction and toward collapse. These are the people Nassim Taleb refers to as “intellectuals-yet-idiots.” Big questions loom over this dynamic: How did the thinking class of America sink into this slough of thoughtlessness? And why – what is motivating them? One path to understanding it can be found in this sober essay by Neal Devers, The Overton Bubble, published two years ago on TheFuturePrimaeval.net — a friend turned me on to it the other day (dunno how I missed it). The title is a reference to the phenomenon known as the Overton Window. Wikipedia summarizes it:The Overton Window, also known as the window of discourse, is the range of ideas the public will accept…. The term is derived from its originator, Joseph P. Overton (1960–2003), a former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy….Devers refines the definition:The Overton Window is a concept in political sociology referring to the range of acceptable opinions that can be held by respectable people. “Respectable” of course means that the subject can be integrated with polite society. Respectability is a strong precondition on the ability to have open influence in the mainstream.This raises another question: who exactly is in this corps of “respectable people” who set the parameters of acceptable thought? Primarily, the mainstream media — The New York Times, The WashPo, CNN, etc. — plus the bureaucratic functionaries of the permanent government bureaucracy, a.k.a. the Deep State, who make and execute policy, along with the universities which educate the “respectable people” (the thinking class) into the prevailing dogmas and shibboleths of the day, and finally the think tanks and foundations that pay professional “experts” to retail their ideas.The Overton Window can be viewed as a mechanism of political control, demonizing anyone who departs from the consensus of respectable thought, and especially if they express their heresies in public speech. This has consequences…
We’re now living under that condition of “intellectual martial law.” The consequent degradation of thinking means that the polity can’t construct a coherent consensus about what is happening to it (or devise a plan for what to do about it). This is exactly the point where the Overton Window turns into an Overton Bubble, as described by Devers. The bubble comprises ideas that are assumed to be self-evident (though they actually aren’t) and notions that are potentially destructive of society, even suicidally so. Here is a partial list of the current dogmas and shibboleths inside today’s Overton Bubble:
Russia hacked the election of 2016 (no evidence required).
Russia (Vladimir Putin in particular) is bent on destroying the USA.
All immigrants, legal or illegal, have equal status before the law.
National borders are inconvenient, cruel, and obsolete.
Western Civilization is a malign force in human history.
Islam is “the religion of peace,” no matter how many massacres of “infidels” are carried out in its name.
Men are a negative force in society.
White men are especially negative.
Brownie points given for behaviors under the rubric LBGTQ.
All discussion about race problems and conflicts is necessarily racist.
The hijab (head covering worn in public by some Muslim women) is a device of liberation for women.
There should be a law against using the wrong personal pronoun for people who consider themselves neither men nor women (recently passed by the Canadian parliament).
A unifying common culture is unnecessary in national life (anything goes).
Colonizing Mars is a great solution to problems on Earth.
That list defines the general preoccupations of the thinking classes today — to the exclusion of other issues. Here is an alternative list of matters they are not generally concerned about or interested in:
The energy quandary at the heart of our economic malaise.
The enormous debt racked up to run society in the absence of affordable energy inputs.
The dangerous interventions and manipulation in markets by unelected officials of the Federal Reserve.
The extraordinary dysfunction of manipulated financial markets.
The fragility of a banking system based on accounting fraud.
The dysfunction and fragility of the American suburban living arrangement.
The consequences of a catastrophic breakdown in the economy due to the above.
The destruction of planetary ecology, threatening the continuation of the human race, and potentially all life.
Now, the question of motive. Why does the thinking class in America embrace ideas that are not necessarily, and surely not self-evidently, truthful, and even self-destructive? Because this class is dangerously insecure and perversely needs to insist on being right about its guiding dogmas and shibboleths at all costs. That is why so much of the behavior emanating from the thinking class amounts to virtue signaling — we are the good people on the side of what’s right, really we are! Of course, virtue signaling is just the new term for self-righteousness. There is also the issue of careerism. So many individuals are making a living at trafficking in, supporting, or executing policy based on these dogmas and shibboleths that they don’t dare depart from the Overton Bubble of permissible, received thought lest they sacrifice their status and incomes.
I was at a get-together this weekend and a neighbor shared that she home-schooled her children for most of their school years but the kids did end up attending public school for their last couple of years of high-school. She shared that She and her Husband were called in for a conference with the teacher as their child was being disruptive. The teacher explained she presents information that the kids need to learn and take a test in and then move to the next lesson. The child kept asking questions, wanting to know why and learn more about the subject which was disruptive and was therefore they were considered a problem. Teaching seems to have become less about free thinking and more about learning what you are told to,… Silently!
AKGrannyWGrit
Oh never mind I asked Siri and she or is it - “it” told me.
Guess I could have asked my grand-children, no doubt they would know. It’s probably taught in school.
AKGrannyWGrit
mntnhousepermi,
Please feel free to start one, or at least list the improvements that you’ve made and how you would prioritise them (e.g. what gave you the most gains, what was easiest to install, what you’d avoid/do differently). As a man with a young family (i.e. very young) I’d be interested in making the transition as painless as possible.
Cheers,
Luke
The conversation between Nate, LesPhelps, and mntnhousepermi reminds me of a prediction made in “The Fourth Turning” by Strauss and Howe about Boomers during the fourth turning. For those unfamiliar with the book, Boomers were encouraged to explore during their youth (50s&60s.) Then, they raised that exploration to new levels during their young adulthood (60s&70s.) In the '80s, they went from Yippies to yuppies (from consciousness to consumerism.) Many are still stuck in consumerism today.
S&H predicted that Boomers would stay in the prior turning mindset much longer than they collectively should. When it becomes obvious that it is time to move to the next phase of life, Boomers will abandon the trappings of the last phase and make the new phase their own. The new phase will be about as opposite of consumerism as it gets; however, it won’t be adopted until absolutely necessary. In other words, Boomers will end up destroying the government’s social networks (social security, medicare, etc.) before moving on.
In the next phase, the abundance that we’re so accustomed to … won’t be here. Boomers will regain the values of the '60s and delve into self sacrifice. Because Boomers are Boomers, they’ll brag about how little they need to survive. Nate and LesPhelps are just early adopters of this mindset. (I get the sense that mntnhousepermi is too young to be a Boomer, but I could be wrong.)
The “Age of Less” gets closer every day. We can either practice to live as if it were here already or we can enjoy the fruits of abundance as long as possible. Either way, almost all of us will have to ratchet our lifestyles downward.
Grover
because I just did a list, but it was a list of things anyone could do anywhere, in no particular order, the Steve St. A… thread, look at the end of the comments ? This was in response to a comment implying that I must have done exceptional things allowed because of where I live and that others couldnt possibly… all of which couldnt be further from the truth. I just decided to d these things
I will start a thread when I have time tomorrow in the “prepare” area, but peoples lists of what to do first are often different, so would think it more at first of strategy, what to look at first, as the most wasteful areas can be similar.
There is an area titled Frugal Living there, but no one goes there and says anything
This article by Charles Hugh Smith, an excellent ecologically literate author, appears to not include facts we now know about history.
Colonialism equals industrialization leading directly to AI (artificial intelligence), made possible by alien tech distributed by Col. Phillip Corso. The author’s excellent projections are irrelevant because, in fact, there is a plan already deployed to sterilize, retard and depopulate humans and much other life. Chemtrails and glyphosate are real. It is happening right now, and the roll out of 5G is part of it.
Prosperity is certainly not in the cards, but neither is poverty. Something machine like is already here and will compress life into an abstraction if we don’t stop it. At closing statement Smith says other models are out there, but this is not true. There are no other models for 7.5 billion people, except resource decline and die back. Who or what will survive?
Knowing this, the elite Club of Rome issued book Limits to Growth in 1968, to seed the idea that intentional depopulation was, in the long term, humane. It is not. Smith doesn’t appear to know about Roswell and where our tech came from. He doesn’t know who Ben Franklin (electricity) was. He doesn’t know the history of the central bankers and who is really running Google, Facebook, the IMF, BRICS, both political parties, all network news and Hollywood. This long standing force is even running the values and attitudes of the reader.
Mr. Smith does not question how his observation might have come about: “…the remaining six billion are aspirants hungry for all the goodies… “
Who organized consumerism? This is the subject of the series, Lipstick and War Crimes. Read the center of home page here to get the plot. Charles Smith’s article is one of the best articles I’ve seen about realistic ecological thinking vs green new age thinking. However, he now needs to study the intent of the machine rigorously, because it is not insane stupidity that is our enemy, it is a very devious, cold and calculated genius that threatens life as we know it.
I vaguely recall hearing the concept before, but somehow this particular presentation really made a lot of sense.
I think such a window can be applied to mainstream economists also; if you want to remain within the economics Overton Window, you will ignore banks, debt and money in your study of the economy.
People like Steve Keen who try and get those inside the window to listen (“hey guys, your techniques aren’t so useful for predicting recession…maybe you should look at this over here…”) are exiled to Siberia. Those who remain within the window get Nobel prizes, work for the Fed, become advisors to Presidents, get paid big bucks by banks, and so on.
Once the Overton Window becomes solidified, the Backfire Effect comes into play with any attempt to disturb the status quo.
Well, its good to know what we’re up against anyway.
“Whether we or our politicians know it or not, Nature is party to all our deals and decisions, and she has more votes, a longer memory, and a sterner sense of justice than we do.” Wendell Berry
Grover wrote:
The "Age of Less" gets closer every day. We can either practice to live as if it were here already or we can enjoy the fruits of abundance as long as possible. Either way, almost all of us will have to ratchet our lifestyles downward.
Grover
But, it seems like in this last part of what you wrote you are implying that it doesnt matter how we live now. If it doesnt matter, then why wouldnt we “enjoy the fruits of abundance as long as possible” ? In other words, ignore it and go out in an orgy of consumption ? Which is counter to all advice I have ever heard from the crash course and others from this site, to writers like Dimitri Orlov, JM Greer, Kunstler, etc…
But maybe that was an unintentional implication ?
mntnhousepermi,
I’m not waiting for Boomers to suddenly start using less - until they absolutely have to do so. The Boomer mindset is one that lingers in the last phase until that phase is rotting around their feet. Then, they jump to the new phase and make it their own. Working too much to earn the money to pay the creditors and to buy the things that aren’t need to impress people who don’t matter … consumes time and clouds vision. It normally takes a life changing event (death of a loved one, divorce, losing a job, health crisis, etc.) to wake us up. Do we really need this latest bauble?
I’ve seen the crisis driven change hit a few friends over the years. At first, they were devastated that they couldn’t keep up with the Joneses. Eventually, it hits home that meaningless consumption is just meaningless. It is more important to be than to have. Other generations won’t understand it because they grew up under different circumstances. Because of their upbringing, they have different motives than Boomers do.
It doesn’t matter what you or I personally do. The sun will still rise in the east, the tides will come and go, and most of the economically extractable fossil fuels will still get consumed. If you can show me how to conserve a limited resource (like oil) by just cutting average daily consumption by a value significantly less than 100%, I’ll change my tune. Since it took many tens of millions of years to deposit and we’re using it in a few hundred years, we’d need to cut consumption by much more than 99% to make it sustainable. That won’t happen voluntarily.
So, you have a choice of whether to jump on the consumption wagon or to try to do enough with less. Until it becomes a necessity, only a small percentage of the population will try to live responsibly. The rest will consume their share and the share you conserved. Of course, by living a more sustainable lifestyle now, you are climbing the learning curve at a much gentler pace. Those engaged in the consumption orgy will have to learn everything when the learning curve looks like Hoover Dam viewed from a rickety raft in the Colorado River. Either way, consequences lead to life or death. Most won’t make it past the first stumble. Ironically, they’ll be the lucky ones.
Grover
Grover wrote:
I've seen the crisis driven change hit a few friends over the years. At first, they were devastated that they couldn't keep up with the Joneses. Eventually, it hits home that meaningless consumption is just meaningless. It is more important to be than to have.
Other generations won't understand it because they grew up under different circumstances. Because of their upbringing, they have different motives than Boomers do.
The Ego
Humans are indeed set apart from the other sentient species on the planet such as dogs, elephants, whales, and dolphins. But what makes us 'special’ is not the use of language or tools. Plenty of other animals make use of both. Humans seem to be unique in having an ego. The ego is the part of the mind we interact with (almost) entirely each day. It mediates between the conscious and unconscious parts of ourselves, and is how we interact with the world. It forms our sense of personal identity. For most people it's a fair statement to say they are their ego. They identify with it fully, just as I did with mine until not that long ago. The ego thinks, assumes, that it is everything about you. One feature of the ego is that it is always, and forever, in a state of wanting. It needs more and more and MORE all the time. The ego sets goals and attains them, but is rarely if ever satisfied by reaching a goal. If it obtains one, it immediately sets a new one. Therefore it remains in a perpetual state of wanting as it strives towards each new goal. Our egos want more recognition. More money. A bigger house. Our life partners to be 'better'. I’ve personally met billionaires who are fixated on becoming multi-billionaires. Millionaires who need to be multi-millionaires. People with ten rare cars who only have their sights on the next ten. The ego is never satisfied. It wants and wants more, and so it lives in a perpetual state of wanting. Boy, does it get it, too. The wanting, that is. If you want to want, you’ll always be surrounded by plenty of wanting. But not very much by joy or satisfaction. Because the ego has half of itself buried in the shadows of our unconscious minds, it's also eminently controllable by marketers, opinion shapers and propagandists. While we're always tempted to think of ourselves as having free will and control of our own thoughts, a simple and honest self-assessment will prove this to be largely false for most people. Our emotional centers make our decisions, not cold hard logic from the cortex. It's usually only after we make a decision that our brains go looking for a rationalization to make sense of it, or even to make it appear moral and righteous in our minds.
I was thinking of this issue just as I saw these posts - greed, ego, and the will for acquisition, and then I remembered discussions on Potlatches from an anthropology class many years ago. I think the key is for developing rituals, practices, and norms that both enable continued ego-feeding while at the same time bringing us to a lower collective level of material resource use. Our culture feeds egos in part by acquisition and accumulation. A quick look at a Wikipedia entry corroborated my memory of the Potlatch as a wealth distribution system, where egos and status are fed/enhanced through wealth distribution rather than accumulation. Potlatches are a good example of a cultural practice/ritual that has very different outcome (resource distribution), but is based on the same psychological human behavioral drivers that shapes acquisitiveness in our culture.
I’m all for spiritual practices that are designed to penetrate our individual brands of ego-delusion - I’ve done one such practice for almost 20 years. I would heartily recommend engaging in them to anyone. But collective realization, individual by individual, on the scale needed to make people in our culture less acquisitive and less ego driven is simply not going to happen. Even after many years of practice, I feel like I’m still mired in my own stuff, only that I can see it much more clearly. I’m not materially acquisitive, but my ego still comes out in different ways.
I have not a clue on how to instigate radical cultural change, but I think this is where any hope that remains lies. Or maybe cultural change originates from people who have done some really deep spiritual work??? I have no idea - its an issue way bigger than I am.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potlatch