Keith Hudson wrote:
>
> I'm convinced that one of the largest problems of our economy is not
> capitalism per se -- or even corruption (which gets sorted out in due
> course) -- but the concentrated nature of the pockets of energy resources
> which have fuelled our economies since the dawn of the Industrial
> Revolution. I believe it is these natural circumstances and the necessary
> forms of distribution which have strongly influenced the structural pattern
> for the rest of the global economy.
This makes sense to me.
Of Everyman (woman, child) had their own means of production,
then they would be free to not have to become wage laborers
for those who have monopolized the means of production and
who have the police and the army to keep the people from
liberating them.
I would have absolutely no problem with MacDonalds trying to
hire people at $6 per hour if every person had the means to be
economically self-sufficient.
And since technological progress, "overall" is a process
of making ever more with ever less, and of decoupling outputs
from specific raw materials (gold *can* be made from lead via
nuclear physics...), the logical end result of persons becoming
energy independent is for them to become fully self-sufficient.
Yes, let companies compete with independent entrepreneurship
on a level playing field, so that those who go to work
in the morning are choosing to go to a place that is even
more desirable to be than
"And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under
his vine and under his fig tree, from Dan even
to Beersheba, all the days of Solomon." (1 Kings 4:25)
I might consider working in the Domain Romanee Conti rather
than drinking my own wine.
\brad mccormick
>
> This is why I'm interested in various aspects of the coming solar energy
> economy, particularly in those technologies which will be able to tap
> directly into the sun's energy almost anywhere on the earth's (or sea's)
> surface rather than in specific locations that are only suitable for wave
> or wind power. In time, I believe this will create an entirely different
> pattern of economic distribution -- and possibly with significantly
> different side-effects.
>
> I mentioned Hermann Scheer's "The Solar Economy" yesterday -- reviewed in
> this week's New Scientist. Today, in the Economist, I notice that a
> similar, but probably more authoritative, book written by alternative
> energy specialist, Amory Lovins, is recommended as one of the best books of
> 2002. This is "Small is profitable: The Hidden Economic benefits of making
> Electrical Resources the Right Size". Amory Lovins is a veteran campaigner
> and used to write for my environmental magazine, "Towards Survival", in
> the 60s, before he upstaked and went to the US.
>
> Anyway, this is what the Economist says about Lovins' latest: "In a
> provocative and well considered work, Amory Lovins and his colleagues at
> the Rocky Mountain Institute, a Colorado natural resources think-tank,
> expose the folly of building gigantic power plants and make a convincing
> case that the world is about to be turned on its ear by the rise of
> micropower."
>
> Keith Hudson
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------
>
> Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com
> 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
> Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ________________________________________________________________________
--
Let your light so shine before men,
that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
