|
|
Wednesday, March 05, 2003
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Timothy Wilken, MD writes: The collective term we humans use to describe what we value is ‘wealth’. Synergic wealth is that which supports life for self and others. Synergic Wealth comes in two forms: Synergic Trust and Property. Synergic Trust is wealth that comes to us as a gift. This includes the Life Trust — life itself, the plants and animals which are a gift from God, and Nature, and our human bodies which are a gift from God, Nature, and our Parents. It includes the Earth Trust — the sunshine, air, water, land, minerals, the earth itself all of which come to us freely. This wealth is provided to us by God and Nature. And, thirdly it includes the Time Trust — the accumulated ‘knowing’ from the time-binding of all the humans who have ever lived and died. Our inherited Wisdom, Knowledge, and Information including Architecture, Art, Literature, Music, Science, and Technology. It is the Time Trust that forms the basis of all human progress. We humans are the beneficiaries then of three major trusts — the Life Trust, the Earth Trust and the Time Trust. We, humans can not and do not own these trusts. They are not derived of our lives. They are not the product of our mind or labor. We have not paid for them. There is no moral or rational basis for us to claim ownership. They are not property. If we wish to use and control these trusts, then we must act as trustees, and then only if we act responsibly. As responsible trustees, we must preserve and protect these trusts. We must act as conservationists. (03/05/03) | |
|
|
|
John Brand writes: I know, Mr. President, that at this moment you are occupied with serious affairs of the state. Your undivided attention is needed in this critical moment of the world's history. Yet, Mr. President, there are also other pressing problems begging for your understanding and concern. What does it benefit if you succeed in your present international venture but find a country beset with serious problems undermining the spirit, the morale, and the élan vital of your people? So, your "children" come to you with petition in hand requesting relief from burdens robbing them of the opportunity for the "pursuit of happiness." Surely, at the top of the list must be the request for a more orderly, a more dependent, and a more secure delivery of healthcare. How, indeed, does it profit anyone to live without having health? At this moment in time, over 40,000,000 of our citizens, your subjects, find themselves without medical insurance. You surely have been made aware that the list is growing daily. We respectfully submit to you the fact that under Managed Health Care, the delivery of timely and adequate medical services has suffered severely. We know that health care is expensive. But how can costs be contained while delivering competent services when probably more health dollars than we realize are siphoned off to pay private investors in the industry, to compensate executives with six-figure incomes, and to drown the system in needless iterative paperwork? It seems that each insurance company has its own regulations, required documents, and methods of payment for services rendered and standards of eligibility. Such duplication is not only expensive but also inefficient. (03/05/03) | |
|
|
|
London Telegraph -- Warren Buffett is poised to issue his most doom-laden forecast for the state of the world economy yet, including a damning verdict on the derivatives industry he fears could cause a global financial crisis. In the upcoming annual letter to shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway, Mr Buffett drops his usual folksy style to warn that banks do not understand the hidden risks lurking on their balance sheets. He labels derivatives "time bombs, both for the parties that deal in them and the economic system" and "financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that, while now latent, are potentially lethal". (03/05/03) | |
|
|
|
New York Times -- AMUNDSEN-SCOTT SOUTH POLE STATION, Antarctica — The "polies," as they call themselves, are getting a new home. Residents of the South Pole — astronomers, chemists, technicians, cooks, construction workers — are carrying their possessions 100 yards across snow and ice, bidding farewell to the windowless geodesic dome that has served for three decades as a symbol of polar exploration. On March 4, they begin taking up residence in a huge enclosure on stilts that resembles an economy motel, complete with windows. When the new station is finished in four years, the dome will be chopped into pieces and shipped to aluminum scrap yards. Everyone who works here knows it is time to replace the old station. The dome was built to house just 33 people. Scientific research at the pole has become so important that the National Science Foundation, which oversees polar programs, has committed $133 million to build the new station, which can house, feed, entertain and otherwise support 200 scientists and other workers. Still, reactions to the move are mixed. "I think the dome is amazing," said Shayne Clausson, a computer network technician from San Francisco. "Working and living in someplace this remote, this bizarre, it's only fitting that your habitat should resemble the set of some 1970's sci-fi thriller." Of the 60 people who plan to stay through the Antarctic winter, which starts in mid-February and ends around Halloween, Mr. Clausson is one of 20 who have chosen to remain in the old station. "I want to see what it's like to live here throughout the winter while I still have a chance," he said. (03/05/03) | |
|
|
|
Fortune Magazine -- Warren Buffett writes: Despite three years of falling prices, which have significantly improved the attractiveness of common stocks, we still find very few that even mildly interest us. That dismal fact is testimony to the insanity of valuations reached during The Great Bubble. Unfortunately, the hangover may prove to be proportional to the binge. The aversion to equities that Charlie and I exhibit today is far from congenital. We love owning common stocks--if they can be purchased at attractive prices. In my 61 years of investing, 50 or so years have offered that kind of opportunity. There will be years like that again. Unless, however, we see a very high probability of at least 10% pretax returns (which translate to 6% to 7% after corporate tax), we will sit on the sidelines. With short-term money returning less than 1% after-tax, sitting it out is no fun. But occasionally successful investing requires inactivity. (03/05/03) | |
|
|
|
New York Times -- The next batch of lynxes is expected to be released in the San Juan and Rio Grande national forests here in Colorado this spring. If they knew what they faced, they might not want to come. Life has not been easy for the lynx here. By 1973, it had disappeared. In 1999, lynxes trapped in Canada and Alaska were released here, only to find an unduly harsh environment. Four of the first five died of starvation; a fifth was found emaciated. Of the 96 lynxes brought to southwestern Colorado so far, 43 are known to be dead and 34 are still tracked by radio collars. Researchers say 53 could still be alive. Over all, nine have died of starvation, six were killed by vehicles, six were shot and killed and some died of unknown causes. In addition, the lynxes do not appear to be reproducing. Despite a recent legal challenge to the release program, state officials are proceeding with a $2 million plan to reintroduce 180 more lynxes over the next five years. (03/05/03) | |
|
|
|
Timothy Wilken, MD writes: If we humans synergically reorganized our world, we would all be wealthy beyond our wildest dreams. Today in 2003, if we were to reclaim the gift of all the land and natural resources presently held on planet Earth as individual property. And if we were to further reclaim the gift of Progress from those few who control it today, and then divided these two gifts equally among the 6 billions of us living on the planet, we would discover to our surprise and amazement that every man, woman, and child is wealthy beyond their dreams. With synergic organization, and careful utilization of the planet’s total wealth for the benefit of all humanity, the carrying capacity of the Earth could be maximized to solve all our human problems and meet our all our needs. And this is without any need to damage the Earth, or degrade our environment. There would never be any need for humans to earn their livings again. Our livings have already been earned by all those humans who lived and died to give us the great gift of progess. Then all humans would be free to spend their time making their lives meaningful by creating more wealth to be gifted to living and future humanity. To better understand my proposal for a synergic future, it is important to understand what I mean by wealth. (03/04/03) | |
|
|
|
John Brand writes: Malthus suggests that it is evil for governments to impose any restrictions whatsoever on what is essentially a license to practice unlimited greed. However, it seems to be quite all right for the government to enact legislation granting special rights and privileges to large, moneyed interests. Smithian religion approves what America's dot.coms did. Deceit and fraud is not only right, it is the most supreme form of worship to the Golden Calf of Mammon. Congress made sure that chicanery, deceit, and fraud were legal. Well, it's a rotten system, hell-bent on destroying the vast majority of people both in America and elsewhere. Such a system must come to an end. If human life means anything at all, then this nefarious economic theory must be dismembered and tossed overboard. If the mighty and all-powerful captains of industry do not heed the call of an abused humanity, then the wheels of history grinding slowly but consistently will produce the antithesis that will annihilate the present system. Whether the new system will place world-wide dominance into a few hands -- with its concomitant results of continuous sabotage, terrorism, and riots -- or whether our species shall put in place a just and equitable system of distribution of goods remains to be seen. (03/04/03) | |
|
|
|
BBC Science -- The UN's World Population Prospects report estimates Aids deaths in the 53 worst affected countries as 46 million in the first decade of this century but says "that figure is projected to ascend to 278 million by 2050". ... As well as the threat of Aids, there is also the effect of falling fertility levels in the Third World dropping beneath the rate needed to ensure long-term replacement of the population. The UN said "future fertility levels in most developing countries will likely fall below 2.1 children per woman... at some time in the 21st century". (03/04/03) | |
|
|
|
BBC Science -- "According to most official government statistics, most urban people have good water and sanitation," Mr Satterthwaite said. "Our puzzle has long been that pretty much every city and small urban centre I work with in Africa and Asia, and most in Latin America, has very poor provision, especially for low-income groups." He added that the problem was particularly bad in "informal settlements" - such as shanty towns - where the very poorest live. "There are no sewers, few open drains, and most people rely on standpipes," Mr Satterthwaite said. "It's common for there to be 1,000 people to each stand pipe." ... "Possibly the most shocking thing we found was the number of urban dwellers who rely on open defecation," he said. "They have no toilet. What we found was, in many cities, there's even a popular term given to open defecation. "In many cities in Africa, it's known as "flying toilets", because you defecate in a plastic bag and then you throw it." (03/04/03) | |
|
|
|
BBC Science -- Fifty years ago, on 28 February 1953, Francis Crick walked into the Eagle pub in Cambridge, UK, and announced something for which he would later share a Nobel Prize. "We have found the secret of life," his collaborator and subsequent fellow Nobel laureate James Watson later quoted him as saying. The pair really had figured out something very close to that. Working out the famous double helix structure of DNA was an achievement which led to countless advances and solved a mystery which had troubled scientists for decades. "When we saw the answer we had to pinch ourselves," Watson told the BBC in an anniversary interview. "Could it really be this pretty? When we went to lunch [at the Eagle] we realised it probably was true because it was so pretty." (03/04/03) | |
|
|
|
New York Times -- If Maryland can restrict Virginia's ability to withdraw water from the river, Maryland is in control of Virginia's destiny," said Stuart Raphael, a special counsel to Virginia, rehearsing a complaint that is now before the United States Supreme Court. It is a fight over royal charters, interstate compacts and years of precedent, but mostly it is a fight over water, reflecting growing worries in the region that a commodity is not as bountiful as it once seemed. And up and down the East Coast, its echoes can now be heard. Such tensions have long been common in the arid West. But their emergence in the East is relatively recent, a product in large part of scares in 1999 and again last summer, when many rivers fell near critical lows, the victims of drought and development. Along rivers like the Savannah, the Pee Dee, the Roanoke, the Chattahoochee and the Potomac, Eastern states are wrangling over a question that suddenly seems to matter very much: Whose water is it? "This past year, we came within feet of shutting down nuclear power plants because there wasn't sufficient water to cool them," said Freddy Vang, the deputy director of natural resources in South Carolina, which is enmeshed in disputes with North Carolina, over the Pee Dee, and with Georgia, over the Savannah. "At the same time, we came within feet of shutting down major municipal water supplies because they couldn't pump water anymore. "So the question is, how do we take a shared resource and manage it to both entities' benefit?" Mr. Vang said. "And right now, there are zero rules." (03/04/03) | |
|
|
|
New York Times -- Murderous, google-eyed crustaceans with barbed spears and razor-switchblade appendages that can shred fish and flesh to ribbons have been captured in the shallow waters off Waikiki. Big ones. Salami-sized. The biggest ever recorded in Hawaii. ... The news that the jumbo stomatopods (not shrimp, technically) were thriving in waters that regularly give canoe paddlers infections and parasitic rashes caused much wonderment when it was reported recently in The Honolulu Advertiser. People here think of the Ala Wai (pronounced Allah-why), when they think of it at all, mainly as a habitat for old tires, rusty shopping carts and schools of indestructible tilapia. ... With little ocean circulation to flush it clean, the 1.3-mile-long canal has essentially become a liquid compost pile, teeming with marine life and bacteria, but stinky, and unloved by people who walk next to or paddle in it. Some heavily silted stretches are barely a foot deep or exposed at low tide. "It's either working really well or not at all," said Dr. Eric H. De Carlo, a professor of oceanography at the University of Hawaii. "The Ala Wai is one of the world's most productive estuaries in terms of carbon production," Professor De Carlo said, thanks to runoff nutrients, but it also contains contaminants like pesticides, detergents and lead. ... The canal's years of neglect gave the dredged-up shrimp time to grow about as big as the species ever gets. (03/04/03) | |
|
|
|
New York Times -- A bipartisan group in Congress has now moved to reassert the historical reach of the Clean Water Act to protect all the waters of the United States — not just those chosen for protection by the Supreme Court, the Bush administration or the Army Corps of Engineers. It's a necessary move. An ill-considered Supreme Court decision two years ago narrowed safeguards for certain isolated wetlands long covered by the law. Then, in January, the administration invited a further reinterpretation of the statute that could narrow its scope far more severely than the court required — enriching commercial interests while impoverishing the environment. For more than 30 years, the act has been broadly interpreted as shielding everything from large navigable rivers and lakes to seasonal streams and "prairie potholes" from pollution and unregulated development. In 2001, however, the Supreme Court ruled that the law could not be applied to certain "isolated" wetlands if the only reason for doing so was their use by migratory birds. The court did not rule out other reasons for protecting these wetlands, like fishing and irrigation. Nevertheless, the administration — arguing that the decision had created confusion among federal and state regulators — chose to open key sections of the act to public review, including the fundamental (and until now well-settled) issue of which waters deserve protection and why. (03/04/03) | |
5:42:40 AM 
|
|
|
|
© TrustMark
2003
Timothy Wilken.
Last update:
4/1/2003; 5:16:47 AM.
This theme is based on the SoundWaves
(blue) Manila theme. |
|
|
