I quoted this to my twelve year old and he said, “I guess we’re pretty paranoid.”

Out of the mouths of babes …

And I don’t think being anti-capitalist necessarily means being against all private ownership. I have no problem with small-scale private ownership and very small businesses.

It’s called “distributism”. The name and idea was promoted heavily in the early 20th century by the English writers G. K. Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc, among others, as a concrete attempt to implement the Catholic social encyclicals.

“Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists.”

This is exactly what Chesterton and the other distributists were (are) after - a widespread distribution of usable property. Or put another way (which ties directly into Sharon’s writing), aiming at a society of “tolerably contented peasants.”

peace,

And I don’t think being anti-capitalist necessarily means being against all private ownership. I have no problem with small-scale private ownership and very small businesses. But I think it was one of the sadder days in American history (not, of couse, on the scale of slavery and the genocide of the Indian nations) when corporations were given the rights of persons. We now live in a country where corporations have virtually unlimited rights and we have virtually none (if you doubt this, just read the USA Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Act, The Military Commisions Act). The Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution has been gutted recently, but even before that, Corporations had ever-growing rights and powers. I think its terribly important that we withdraw our support from the corporate powers-that-be. And not buying anything from them is one very important way of doing that.

It’s certainly true that paying of your debts, all of them, no more mortgage, no more nothing, would be a more effective way than not paying taxes to achieve your goals.

This is because all our money is created as debt. Hence, no more debt, no more money. It’s a shame not more people understand this. For high-speed connectors, there is a nice animation that explains it very well:
Money as Debt.

Problem is, most of our debts are hidden from view. USA Today, of all rags, runs a piece today that states every U.S. household carries $516,348 in Federal debt. (By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of “just” $112,043 for personal loans, including mortgages etc.)

This means every household would have to pay about $31,000 a year for 75 years just tp pay off the current Federal debt.
Rules ‘hiding’ trillions in debt

It looks like we’re beaten by creative accounting.

But getting out of debt should be the first priority for everyone, before doing anything else. Debts feed the machine. And you are the fuel.

“In very short”, it goes like this: when a million people sign for a $100.000 mortgage, that’s $100 billion. But fractional banking allows for 100 times that amount to be created. So $10 trillion flows into the economy. And that’s not all: before that mortgage is paid off in full, you’ll have paid $300.000, though principal, fees, interest, etc. Do the math.

Another matter: the way Washington hides its debts is by saying that future obligations don’t have to show up in this year’s books. Hmmm.. that would be like you signing a mortgage with one bank, and then closing another one with the next bank, without saying you already have a mortgage, claiming that since you don’t have to pay it right away, it’s not a debt. Yeah, that would be callled fraud.

My answer: Set up a trailer park in the front yard. Enemies of the
bride on the left, enemies of the groom on the right.(Michelle)

It is likely that many of our parents (and us) will experience slightly shorter lifespans. With a good triaging of the medical care system (something I’m writing about now and would be interested in your take upon), I think it isn’t necessary that those lifespans drop much. But we can expect much of the interventions traditional in the last few years of one’s life to end, and be replaced mostly with palliative care.(Sharon)

Anytime. (Michelle)

This says it better than I can.

There is every chance that we’ll have 3-5 boomer family members who mostly can’t stand each other (either from lack of taste or having been previously married) living with or near us. That does not fill us with glee.

We *are* going to need help, and better support systems. For example, if people imagine we could go to a 1-child family structure, they are going to have to figure out how that would happen when many of us have 6-8 parents to care for. My husband is an only child, and let’s just say I wish he’d had four or five siblings some days ;-).

And I don’t deny that the medical system is overburdened. I do point out here that jobs caring for the ill and disabled are useful. I think many of us should stop lawyering and take up nursing, for example.

On the other hand, no low-energy future is going to be anywhere near as medicalized as the present is, which will cut down that acute care need enormously. The average senior citizen has 3 surgeries in their last 5 years of life - in many cases, without them their lives would be only a few months shorter.

In many cases, we aren’t so much prolonging life as prolonging death - and I’ve seen that in my days as a hospice and nursing home worker, and also in my own family. I’ve worked in EMS and seen the number of elder injuries that could have been avoided if they just lived with someone who cared about them, or had a better localized support system.

I watched my husband’s grandfather, while dying, suffer from the side effects of numerous medications. He’d already had multiple small strokes, had poor quality of life and was 94 years old, but his doctor and wife didn’t want to discontinue his heart medication since he might have a heart attack. Never mind that there was little doubt he’d be dead within the year - we wouldn’t want him to have a heart attack ;-P.

It is likely that many of our parents (and us) will experience slightly shorter lifespans. With a good triaging of the medical care system (something I’m writing about now and would be interested in your take upon), I think it isn’t necessary that those lifespans drop much. But we can expect much of the interventions traditional in the last few years of one’s life to end, and be replaced mostly with palliative care.

Help is necessary. More professional medical help is probably necessary. But not as much as we think - a large portion of what is needed can be done by people with basic, minimal or no medical training but lots of commitment and compassion. Some of it will require nurses and doctors - but to a large degree, nurses and doctors are overburdened by a host of habits that IMHO, won’t survive the end of the oil age.

Sharon in upstate NY

I think you are absolutely right that we are funding this war with debt. What I’m not sure is that that means we can’t shut it down - that is, I’m not convinced we’re so far away from the point at which Japan and China will be disinclined to support our economy that causing a short term crisis might not precipitate a long term one.

For me personally, the moral argument against complicity is compelling, although I can understand your arguments for mucking things up from in the inside. Personally, I’m all for mucking it up for a long time - the system has shown what I think is surprising resiliance, and I’m increasingly convinced that we are far better off with an earlier, sooner collapse (little as I like the idea in some ways) than putting off until further into depletion, and casting not just the debt but the burden off on our kids.

Sharon