When Doctor Borlaug set out to improve crops in Mexico his path in science created the "Green Revolution" that stopped the starvation of many million human lives. He was solely responsible for the current economic miracle in China and in India. No other person in the recorded history of mankind has ever had such positive effect on humanity.
Dr. Borlaug also pointed the scientific way forward for others to develop improvement in crops that is still a 'new' invention even though crops genetically modified in a lab instead of in seed trials have been in use for twenty years.
When Borlaug began his work in the sixties, dozens of books were being published about the coming catastrophes brought on by world hunger. Borlaug alone removed the threat and his success has arguably removed it for ever.
I doubt he ever imagined a goal of affecting the entire world in food security, social change and political change but that is what he achieved.
Borlaug used fact and reason to solve problems. If only ideologues could see the value of his approach.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug
Monday, September 14, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
BC's Deficit Surprise (heh,Heh)
I expect all of us were aware that the world economy took a serious tumble last year. After the economy was sideswiped by poor lending practices in the US subscribed to around the world, major production industries dropped off the cliff behind the financial sector. Iceland bankrupted, nearly, followed by Chrysler and GM, really. You'll remember it even took a bite out of China's productivity.
Like me, you thought about how the drop in manufacturing and other industries world-wide and the total collapse of the housing industry in the USA would take a big bite out of the Canadian economy, especially the commodity rich Western Provinces. You expected a big deficit in the next budget. If you didn't, you were probably part of the Liberal government in BC.
It came as a huge surprise to the politicians after the provincial election. Even the NDP were dumbfounded: they had barely mentioned the weakening economy in their campaign.
Many commentators are suggesting the failure of politicians to face the looming revenue drop was simply a deliberate ploy to avoid criticism. Perhaps, but it seems far more likely that they just did not see the tidal wave coming because they were so busy gloating over Canada's superior banking laws, or, more , sadly, the high degree of focus on their own careers during an election campaign distracted them from their duties to serve the province.
Past and prologue! What about tomorrow? Canada currently has a balance of payments deficit due to all the capital that fled to Canada during the world financial meltdown. That flow helped and helps maintain a fairly stable stock market in Canada comparatively. Canada has a balance deficit with respect to goods as we keep buying from other countries but our wood, minerals, and petroleum are stock piled.
Investment will start leaving soon as opportunities in the stimulated USA and European economies call investors home to re-greened pastures. Shortly after, commodities will rebound and government coffers will recover.
An ordinary economic cycle even if slightly exaggerated that we will pass through again every 5 to 10 years.
The Campbell government has determined to use this economic downturn in the cycle to make structural changes in the economy.
You'll recall that he did the same thing on his first term when he took a relatively mild downturn and booted it into the depths by rewriting tax law to favour the richest in society. Premier Campbell was such a believer then that he reminded me of the old Socreds of Alberta. He believed that de-taxing the rich would create more revenue for the province then it returned to wealthy investors. Then China had a boom and proved him right. Now the world economy crashes and even he doesn't believe reducing taxes will save the day. Of course, even the von Mises Institute is favoring better regulation of capital now.
This time Campbell decides that a structural change is again the best fix for this cyclic downturn. But, economic belief in disarray, he has determined that the best hope for the economy this time is to increase taxes on the general population through a general increase in the social services tax by adding SS tax to all items that pay GST.
Even as the forgiveness of tax was the very essence of the new conservatism of Margaret Thatcher, so is increasing taxes on the general population the hallmark of the old conservatism in the day when Canada's cars were called "Bennet Buggies"
We don't know yet how big a kick in the gonads of the BC economy the new taxes will be but it is more likely to extend the tough times then hurry the relief to the resource sector that feeds so much of this province.
Investors interested in the domestic market are not coming. If Sobies had known this law was coming Thrifty's might still be locally owned.
BC will probably lag behind the rest of Canada in the anticipated recovery.
I wish we could have practical managers to govern us. Men like Doerr, E.Manning, Paul Martin, even W.A. Bennet. We always get believers when what we need are rationalists.
Like me, you thought about how the drop in manufacturing and other industries world-wide and the total collapse of the housing industry in the USA would take a big bite out of the Canadian economy, especially the commodity rich Western Provinces. You expected a big deficit in the next budget. If you didn't, you were probably part of the Liberal government in BC.
It came as a huge surprise to the politicians after the provincial election. Even the NDP were dumbfounded: they had barely mentioned the weakening economy in their campaign.
Many commentators are suggesting the failure of politicians to face the looming revenue drop was simply a deliberate ploy to avoid criticism. Perhaps, but it seems far more likely that they just did not see the tidal wave coming because they were so busy gloating over Canada's superior banking laws, or, more , sadly, the high degree of focus on their own careers during an election campaign distracted them from their duties to serve the province.
Past and prologue! What about tomorrow? Canada currently has a balance of payments deficit due to all the capital that fled to Canada during the world financial meltdown. That flow helped and helps maintain a fairly stable stock market in Canada comparatively. Canada has a balance deficit with respect to goods as we keep buying from other countries but our wood, minerals, and petroleum are stock piled.
Investment will start leaving soon as opportunities in the stimulated USA and European economies call investors home to re-greened pastures. Shortly after, commodities will rebound and government coffers will recover.
An ordinary economic cycle even if slightly exaggerated that we will pass through again every 5 to 10 years.
The Campbell government has determined to use this economic downturn in the cycle to make structural changes in the economy.
You'll recall that he did the same thing on his first term when he took a relatively mild downturn and booted it into the depths by rewriting tax law to favour the richest in society. Premier Campbell was such a believer then that he reminded me of the old Socreds of Alberta. He believed that de-taxing the rich would create more revenue for the province then it returned to wealthy investors. Then China had a boom and proved him right. Now the world economy crashes and even he doesn't believe reducing taxes will save the day. Of course, even the von Mises Institute is favoring better regulation of capital now.
This time Campbell decides that a structural change is again the best fix for this cyclic downturn. But, economic belief in disarray, he has determined that the best hope for the economy this time is to increase taxes on the general population through a general increase in the social services tax by adding SS tax to all items that pay GST.
Even as the forgiveness of tax was the very essence of the new conservatism of Margaret Thatcher, so is increasing taxes on the general population the hallmark of the old conservatism in the day when Canada's cars were called "Bennet Buggies"
We don't know yet how big a kick in the gonads of the BC economy the new taxes will be but it is more likely to extend the tough times then hurry the relief to the resource sector that feeds so much of this province.
Investors interested in the domestic market are not coming. If Sobies had known this law was coming Thrifty's might still be locally owned.
BC will probably lag behind the rest of Canada in the anticipated recovery.
I wish we could have practical managers to govern us. Men like Doerr, E.Manning, Paul Martin, even W.A. Bennet. We always get believers when what we need are rationalists.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
"Death of America" replaces "Death to America" ??
Listening to the debate over health care reform in the USA raises worries about our neighbour to the south.
As a Canadian, I grew up knowing that a poor education was a right that made many American citizens especially proud. Hunters came up to Langenburg, Sask., about this September each year, set down by a slough in some farmers field and started blasting off shots from daylight to dark, earlier in the summer Americans turned up for fishing trips in July with snow boots, parkas, and long johns; enquiring American minds touring the RCMP training centre in Regina queried the wisdom of Mounties patrolling modern traffic on horseback. Some even complimented us on our ability to speak American. No matter. They were, after all, Americans.
Today, in Congress, 50 years later, a highly educated American doctor, Dr. Boustany, Representative from Louisiana proudly maintained the right. Sitting in the audience listening, following along in a print copy of Obama's speech, Boustany revealed he was unable to master the various statements by Obama declaring that the President would not support government run health care. With real American aplomb he declared, "Replacing your family’s current health care with government-run health care is not the answer." Duh!! American education still produces proud graduates. Perhaps, we can convince him to by a gopher farm in Saskatchewan along with a Canadian Royal Title.
If he was alone in this shamefull debate against the best interests of the people of the USA, it would be humorous. But many peers agree with him that the USA should spend its fortunes on a killing machine to use around the world against enemies like 15 year old boy from Canada and ignore the welfare of millions of Americans, who have been educated to be so proud they will die of disease before they will demand security of person in their own country.
Is there a civil society left in the USA? Or is America already dead ?
As a Canadian, I grew up knowing that a poor education was a right that made many American citizens especially proud. Hunters came up to Langenburg, Sask., about this September each year, set down by a slough in some farmers field and started blasting off shots from daylight to dark, earlier in the summer Americans turned up for fishing trips in July with snow boots, parkas, and long johns; enquiring American minds touring the RCMP training centre in Regina queried the wisdom of Mounties patrolling modern traffic on horseback. Some even complimented us on our ability to speak American. No matter. They were, after all, Americans.
Today, in Congress, 50 years later, a highly educated American doctor, Dr. Boustany, Representative from Louisiana proudly maintained the right. Sitting in the audience listening, following along in a print copy of Obama's speech, Boustany revealed he was unable to master the various statements by Obama declaring that the President would not support government run health care. With real American aplomb he declared, "Replacing your family’s current health care with government-run health care is not the answer." Duh!! American education still produces proud graduates. Perhaps, we can convince him to by a gopher farm in Saskatchewan along with a Canadian Royal Title.
If he was alone in this shamefull debate against the best interests of the people of the USA, it would be humorous. But many peers agree with him that the USA should spend its fortunes on a killing machine to use around the world against enemies like 15 year old boy from Canada and ignore the welfare of millions of Americans, who have been educated to be so proud they will die of disease before they will demand security of person in their own country.
Is there a civil society left in the USA? Or is America already dead ?
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Peace in Georgia
The battles in Georgia have ended. What will it take to create a lasting secure peace?
As in the Balkans, the feuds in Georgia are long-standing between differing groups of people over many generations. Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, the feuds have frequently risen to small wars supplied and encouraged by the larger antagonists, especially from the USA.
After large scale intervention by NATO, Serbian Bosnia was split in two on religious lines resulting in de facto "ethnic cleansing" so abhorrent to the NATO partners on entering the fray. By the time a few killings had occurred based solely on ethnicity, there was little hope of any other settlement.
Obviously, pluralism is no more valued in Georgia then in Serbian Bosnia. There is no acceptable outcome other then division along ethnic lines. At least to the extent that such division occurs in Canada with Quebec.
If anyone has the knowledge and understanding to build a lasting peace in Georgia, it is those individuals who have managed to keep Quebec in Canada.
I suggest we send a team to Georgia as part of the UN mission to write a report on how Georgia might survive as an ethnically differentiated state without bloodshed and dominance.
I would recommend Jean Chretien lead the team with a selection of politicians and civil servants of his choice with a mission to create a stable, peaceful, plural Georgian state.
As in the Balkans, the feuds in Georgia are long-standing between differing groups of people over many generations. Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, the feuds have frequently risen to small wars supplied and encouraged by the larger antagonists, especially from the USA.
After large scale intervention by NATO, Serbian Bosnia was split in two on religious lines resulting in de facto "ethnic cleansing" so abhorrent to the NATO partners on entering the fray. By the time a few killings had occurred based solely on ethnicity, there was little hope of any other settlement.
Obviously, pluralism is no more valued in Georgia then in Serbian Bosnia. There is no acceptable outcome other then division along ethnic lines. At least to the extent that such division occurs in Canada with Quebec.
If anyone has the knowledge and understanding to build a lasting peace in Georgia, it is those individuals who have managed to keep Quebec in Canada.
I suggest we send a team to Georgia as part of the UN mission to write a report on how Georgia might survive as an ethnically differentiated state without bloodshed and dominance.
I would recommend Jean Chretien lead the team with a selection of politicians and civil servants of his choice with a mission to create a stable, peaceful, plural Georgian state.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Nationhood.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nationhood
na·tion (n
sh
n)n.
na·tion (n
shn)n.1.a. A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.b. The territory occupied by such a group of people: All across the nation, people are voting their representatives out.
2. The government of a sovereign state.
3. A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language; a nationality: "Historically the Ukrainians are an ancient nation which has persisted and survived through terrible calamity" Robert Conquest.
4.a. A federation or tribe, especially one composed of Native Americans.b. The territory occupied by such a federation or tribe.
The UN charter speaks of member states and occasionally uses 'nation' as a congruent term. States can sign treaties, are sovereign and independent in UN parlance. But, in spite of common usage, it is clear that nations do not have the same powers as do states .It is not clear what nations can do. It isn't even clear what nations are.
Lately, it seems that states are territories that are ruled by a government that makes the laws that cover a particular piece of real estate. But it seems that nations are groups of people that share a common bond from history of language and culture. So it appears that 'nation' means something more similar to 'tribe' then to 'state'. Nations are groups of people that share culture, language, religion, based on a common history and perhaps a common geography. Nations do not necessarily control a piece of real estate.
Historically, tribes became nations as the population sharing a culture grew large. The nation group lived in close proximity enabling establishment a state. Developing from tribes, these states predictably governed by a noble family , protected by lesser nobility arising from the tribal milieu by strength of arms. The largest of these Nation states became conquerors of smaller states and imposed their own statutes and customs creating empires. And those empires inevitably led to the decline of nations as minor tribal usages were absorbed or subdued under the impositions of the tribal custom and institution of the empire.
As tribes/nations were marginalized, political theory was developing to make possible the creation of states based on needs of individuals. The will of the majority replaced the authority of cultural history and traditions personified by the nobility. The rule of law became the paramount instrument of governance, individual rights replaced cultural practises and ideological plurality replaced nation,tradition, state religion, to make the rule of law possible.
Paradoxically, the change from rule by tradition to rule of law has had the most success in Western Europe where it began and where the most violent consequences through wars and revolutions have been suffered. Once the composed of countries typical of nation states, United Europe is multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and broadly representative of the whole world in ethnicity and cultural history.
Europe is now a partial test ground for the idea of a plurality of cultures under the rule of law, equitable jurisprudence, and political egalitarianism. If it will manage to accomadate Turkey, it will be a more comprehensive test.
The UN charter speaks of member states and occasionally uses 'nation' as a congruent term. States can sign treaties, are sovereign and independent in UN parlance. But, in spite of common usage, it is clear that nations do not have the same powers as do states .It is not clear what nations can do. It isn't even clear what nations are.
Lately, it seems that states are territories that are ruled by a government that makes the laws that cover a particular piece of real estate. But it seems that nations are groups of people that share a common bond from history of language and culture. So it appears that 'nation' means something more similar to 'tribe' then to 'state'. Nations are groups of people that share culture, language, religion, based on a common history and perhaps a common geography. Nations do not necessarily control a piece of real estate.
Historically, tribes became nations as the population sharing a culture grew large. The nation group lived in close proximity enabling establishment a state. Developing from tribes, these states predictably governed by a noble family , protected by lesser nobility arising from the tribal milieu by strength of arms. The largest of these Nation states became conquerors of smaller states and imposed their own statutes and customs creating empires. And those empires inevitably led to the decline of nations as minor tribal usages were absorbed or subdued under the impositions of the tribal custom and institution of the empire.
As tribes/nations were marginalized, political theory was developing to make possible the creation of states based on needs of individuals. The will of the majority replaced the authority of cultural history and traditions personified by the nobility. The rule of law became the paramount instrument of governance, individual rights replaced cultural practises and ideological plurality replaced nation,tradition, state religion, to make the rule of law possible.
Paradoxically, the change from rule by tradition to rule of law has had the most success in Western Europe where it began and where the most violent consequences through wars and revolutions have been suffered. Once the composed of countries typical of nation states, United Europe is multi-cultural, multi-ethnic and broadly representative of the whole world in ethnicity and cultural history.
Europe is now a partial test ground for the idea of a plurality of cultures under the rule of law, equitable jurisprudence, and political egalitarianism. If it will manage to accomadate Turkey, it will be a more comprehensive test.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Raison 'detre: Another blog
Simply: I want to force myself to think through serious problems and issues that affect existence; political, social, personal. I want to do it without silly arguments and name-calling from people for whom thought, evidence and logic is simply shit on the road.
I admit to arrogance without pride. I just have very little experience meeting or discussing issues with people who are able to follow the evidence, the work of the intellectual giants, and the consequences of those two pinnacles to the application of logic and reason.
I often make some leaps by postulating 'IF" and "THEN" to reach for probabilities and possibilities when describing solutions and I hate having to defend each posited variable as if they were stated values.
I love to admit that I am wrong because it means I have learnt something new. Sadly, discourse rarely leads to such confessions though reading often does.
I want to have my say. I want to record my ideas. I want to think freely and freely express my thoughts.
I admit to arrogance without pride. I just have very little experience meeting or discussing issues with people who are able to follow the evidence, the work of the intellectual giants, and the consequences of those two pinnacles to the application of logic and reason.
I often make some leaps by postulating 'IF" and "THEN" to reach for probabilities and possibilities when describing solutions and I hate having to defend each posited variable as if they were stated values.
I love to admit that I am wrong because it means I have learnt something new. Sadly, discourse rarely leads to such confessions though reading often does.
I want to have my say. I want to record my ideas. I want to think freely and freely express my thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
