You will have to pardon the crude way of speaking here in this text, but you have to realize how some people in this world utilize this word “sustainability.”
In order for a society to be sustainable it has to be founded upon the concept of sustainable ways and means from the government on down to how people live their lives. If a government is spending more than it takes in, or is ever increasing its spending year by year without addressing the need to balance its budget than that government will fall, it will spend its nation into bankruptcy as it reaches the point where it can never pay back its debts based upon the money it borrows. Hence in this scenario such a government’s talk about sustainability is a true oxymoron and it is likewise hypocritical. It is incompetence, and furthermore there are such people in this world as this that head up various nations who believe that the remedy to reach sustainability is to die off much of their population. And as we are now seeing some of these nations have taken in so many refugees that the scenario there in those nations is unsustainable and is likely to lead to a down fall as well as civil war in Europe. Thus as we talk about this word sustainability and its true concept we have to address the lack of people in this world practicing this although they preach about it. Sustainability unfortunately in the view of some in the various governments of this world means nothing more than population reduction in their minds. And so, they favor such things as endless wars and inferior health care to help reduce the world’s population as fast as possible. If you expect those who preach about sustainability to practice what they preach, in the purest sense of the word, you will be disappointed. Do not be surprised to find out that their definition of sustainability is twisted.
It is left up to us to utilize the word correctly and not make it an oxymoron. Also we have to realize that when we are talking with people in government about sustainable building and sustainable communities their definition of the word might be more like something from George Orwell’s “1984” or something like that seen in some sort of bazaar science fiction movie. Hence what we might be thinking and what they might be thinking are not at all one and the same. Some of them have this vision of us being reduced down to living in third world conditions, where they promise us a little plot of ground to grow tomatoes in and a goat or in some special cases cow. While they reduce our roads back to being dirt, and remove our electricity and give us a candle to use at night. This is actually a vision you can see being spoken of by some who use this word sustainability.
If those who speak of sustainability within our governments and learning institutions were actually working on making sustainable things possible in the true sense then we would have seen a transformation take place in our world some time back when they began to toss this word around. However as I said above, you should not be surprised to find out that their definition of sustainability is something other than they preach. Its like the fallacy of the notions of socialism, which reduces the people down to living by the means of government being their provider, where the corporations become government owned and hence the freedom of choice is removed from the products in the marketplace. Where there is no competition, the corporations can charge what the want as the government allows this to be carried on. Where there is little real production, where this is no competition to spark new companies and hence new jobs, where the people have to resort to living with whats available and thus provided them regardless of how inferior the product may be. Where also, the means of production has been removed which removes the people’s means to work and support them self, such a government will come to view the people as a burden and either fall under the weight of having reached a point of un-sustainability, or turn on the people and send troops out to reduce the nation’s population.
Here today in the USA we have seen our factories leave for overseas some time back, thus taking with them our means of working to support ourselves, and hence we have now a nanny or welfare state that is providing the people with welfare and food stamps, and is now providing them with free health care. The problem with this is that someone has to pay for all of this. And those who are paying are those who have managed to remain working, and in addition to this, our government is borrowing money to support some of this since the tax payer can not afford this all on their own, as they also spend allot of what they borrow wastefully. And thus, there is a lack of understanding economics, as well as a lack of understanding what sustainability really means. Call it incompetence or say that it is contrived, it will lead to our ruin. Never listen to a socialist talk about sustainability because he or she first of all has no concept of economics. Capitalism with a free market within a nation, along with a good manufacturing base where the market is fueled by affordable products, makes an economy robust and keeps it that way. When you remove a nation’s means of production you remove the means that the people have to support and sustain them self. Along the way the government will act partially as a provider, but the means to sustain the people is now gone, the government has to increase the tax on those who have remained working as well as borrow money, and thus in the end the people will meet with their demise. They will come to a day when they will starve and when troops come out to put down an uprising that has occurred when the supplies run out. You see if you follow an unsustainable course, this is the end result. You can not escape this end once you have come to the point where the scenario has reduced the people down to a generation or two of dependence upon the state as their provider, where all the manufacturing jobs are gone. Hence we are on the wrong road, and have been listening to those with this alternate idea of what sustainability means.
Here at Emerald City Visions we do talk about ways and means to become sustainable and self sufficient in the pure sense of the word, and will not spin the definition to mean anything like our incompetents in the world’s various governments and radical institutions spin the word to mean.
Fortunately here in the USA we still have some of the means we need to re-establish a robust economy. We can do this surprisingly through green building and not by way of the green means so far provided by politicians and those institutions who sound good on the surface have provided us. You see their definition of a green economy and market is another oxymoron, especially when you see them legislating and make illegal such things as living independently off the grid, and do not say that you have not heard of this, you can Google this. We can not do as they do which is to destroy our base of natural resources that we must utilize until the day we have come to be able to switch over to renewables, at present we can not force renewables on society without providing a means to afford them. here we know of a means as well as know of a means to get the market moving so that jobs will be created and then people will be able to invest in the kinds of things that the future needs.
Check this link out if you want to see more about how they talk of sustainability but do the opposite. States With Laws (and What They Are) About Living Off The Grid