Greg wrote: >BTB Jeff, thanks for the subscribe info on the World Bank sustainability >email list forum. Sounds like an oxymoron though, doesn't it? I'm trying to remain somewhat open to "sustainable development" but historically it looks like a nightmare. Some of the objectives look good, but the thinking always stays in our "economic box" and does not consider ideas that do not fit. The argument that i hear constantly is: if it can't make a profit or fit current economics then it isn't sustainable. This is a very narrow view of sustainability that is controlled by economics. It drives me nuts. I'm seeing this view everywhere and almost never hear ideas about balance or the role of dreamers in our society. The dreamers are sneered at as impractical weirdos. This intolerance is also present from the dreamers but they usually argue more ethically. Most don't play language games calling others "weirdos" or use words like "impractical" which shifts the conversation towards personal judgements. I think economics does have a role in sustainability as does politics and just about everything else, but they will need some adjustments. I'm not sure what this sustainable future would look like, but i know it will not think in dichotomies and will be open to feedback. Hopefully, it will understand balance and behave in harmony with sustainable ethics. Today we have a wide variety of ethics that are seldom questioned and everyone acts in accordance with a consumption ethic they are not aware of. I'll bet if you asked ten random people what their ethics are they will feel uncomfortable and recite something meaningless.... rant, rant, rant<grin>. ---------- Jeff Owens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Zone 7, http://www.teleport.com/~kowens Underground house, solar energy, reduced consumption, no TV
