It's an idea worth discussing.
Drinking carbonated sugar water is not good for our organisms and it is quite reasonable to conclude that, to some extent, processed junk foods are making us sick. Why not then utilize the very logical solution of targeted excise taxation and establish wellness programs with those collected funds.
Though it might not affect disease in the short term, to legislate a tax implement, whereby 2-5 cents on every dollar spent on soft drinks and junk food in the province of Alberta goes to public coffers for investment in preventative health care, will help us in the long view. Especially when we think of how we could creatively use such excise tax income, the attractiveness of a 'junk food tax' policy offered to the Alberta public may indicate that the AP is engaged and willing to think outside the box of the current debate around health care.
The medical community agrees that the more we promote preventative health care and wellness programs amongst the population, the healthier we will be. Imagine a society where, in any population centre, you can go to a yoga or tai chi class for next to free because our 'junk food tax dollars' work to provide such activities on a not-for-profit basis. Perhaps you come from Asia and would prefer to see someone whose health care approach more relevantly addresses your traditional worldview; wouldn't it be great to see the traditional chinese doctor or ayurvedic physician down the street and not break the bank? Maybe its simply the support for increasing funding for cutting edge research and development of genetic testing and disease screening that helps to empower the individual in making more informed decisions regarding the health of themselves and their families.
Those that want to drink lots of pop and binge on chocolate bars laced with all manner of interesting ingredients are still free to do so. Its just that a negative feedback mechanism will prevent all of the externalities of such behaviour from going unaddressed and also work to nurture a healthier population that is less of a burden on our existing institutions.
It is my hope that the AP and its candidates integrate this idea into the evolving discussion around policy and platforms of debate for improvements to our health care system. I think this would effectively address multiple elements in the health care debate and simultaneously pickup significant public support while sparking some much needed media attention.
जय सच्चिदानन्द
-KSE
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
A Response to Glenn Taylor's "Alberta Government Has Role in Keystone XL Pipeline Rejection"
I am a Member of the Alberta Party for a good many reasons. Foremost among these is the general respect I have for the human beings whom have taken it upon themselves to create a viable progressive political alternative here in Alberta. From Michael Walters' creative support for entrepreneurship and small-business to Sue Huff's ability to constructively critique government plans, the AP is bristling with talented citizens whose care for the future of our Province is made manifest in their thoughts and actions.
Another large factor in my decision to support and contribute to this political faction is the feeling that my perspectives and arguments will not fall on deaf ears. This may, at first, seem quaint but for someone who seeks the 'middle-path' and yet often finds himself positioned with hypothesis, data, and conclusions that largely contradict the received wisdom of the status quo, this is no trivial thing. In feeling that the larger discussions of how to govern our society are available to me, I do not fear offering up my thoughts on important issues, even when they do contradict the majority's opinion within the AP (or the public at large). This essay then, though opposing many of the leader's notions, stems from a respect for transformative dialogue and the quest to re-vitalize democratic participation here in Alberta.
First, let me honour the fact that Glenn Taylor's response to the current geopolitical situation regarding the Keystone XL pipeline appears as the most authentic and comprehensive available from all of the province's political parties. Compared to the other party leaders statements that I've come across, Taylor's message is one that has not been pre-packaged by public relations professionals but rather has been composed out of the genuine reflection of his own person and the balancing of forces needed to address the many concerns involved. It is, I believe, such dedication to providing personal responses to current events that helps to set the AP apart from other factions.
This being said, I feel obliged to address some of the ideas that Taylor shares in the hope that a more integral response to the challenges we are faced with may be developed.
I largely agree with Taylor that a "stronger role for government in enforcing and ensuring responsible stewardship of our resources is crucial" but see a falsehood when he states "environment is not a cost of doing oil sands business. It is integral to the business". I say this because to understand the raison d'etre for the oil sands industry is to know that they are in the business of eking out every last drop of stored sunlight from one of the most sensitive recoverable deposits of hydrocarbons on the planet with the primary incentive of short-term fiscal profit.
Observation by scientific method is blunt: nearly every living system in the direct vicinity of industrial-scale extraction, refining, and transportation of bitumen suffers deleterious effects. Sure, the outputs and impacts of hydrocarbon exploitation can and must be minimized but general and lasting harm cannot be negated. Thus, it should be understood, and this goes for all fossil-fuels, that the longer we base our economies on their utilization, we will be, barrel by barrel, well by well, increasingly compromising the health of our environment and the communities of organisms within it.
With regards to stewardship of the environment, the Alberta Party can do profound good here in the province but before we can do so, it is imperative that we move from the economic to an ecological land ethic in our deliberations and our policy-making so personified by Aldo Leopold. This tradition, where 'a thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community and wrong when it tends otherwise' will aid us in setting limits to resource exploitation and embolden protocol that guides us in the transition to a post-carbon society.
Another issue that I found in Taylor's post which speaks directly to Alberta Party policy is the support for the development of a pipeline corridor and a west coast liquid and natural gas facility. When he states that the "development will allow access to markets for our oil and gas production" he falls prey to the conformism of 'The Unconscious Civilization' where we "fling down and fling up the structures of our society as the marketplace orders." In other words, it appears as though Taylor's priorities (and those of AP policy) mistake the directives of economic globalization for the best interests of Alberta and dominion of Canada.
Leaving alone the fact that it will be very difficult to 'honour and preserve our unique natural ecosystem' while building and maintaining thousands of kilometres of new pipeline and fossil-fuel infrastructure, it seems a mistake to prioritize the enterprise of international trade of our resources over the creation of resilient systems that would serve our long term regional and national interests first. David Suzuki's recent article, along with providing convincing logic for opposition to projects such as Northern Gateway, does suggest alternative policy pursuits that more fully reflect the real and pressing needs of Canadians.
We can, as Albertan's, spearhead the design of provincial and national energy plans that helps us to:
Finally, the last subject of contention, and one that readers of my previous posts will no doubt recognize, is Taylor's insistence that we can and should "continue to grow our economy in a responsible, sustainable manner for the future." As a student of economics and a practitioner of an ecological design science I hazard to suggest that as attractive this goal is in the eyes of the public, business and much of academia, it is a fool's errand. The notion that we have an economic theory that contradicts multiple factors of reality or that a grande misconception of the true source of wealth is afoot in our civilization, is unkind to the sensitivities of the modern domesticated primate but a pill that we have to swallow.
For, in sitting down and talking with our friends, families, co-workers, or even complete strangers, it becomes evident that an economics of happiness is a much better fit for us here in Alberta and indeed across the planet. That the current monster of theory that parades around making life on planet earth more crowded, dirty and mean must be killed so that we may indeed have a sustainable and responsible future economic order is without a doubt one of the highest callings I feel we can have as citizens at this point in history. For, in order to become leaders in relocalization, conservation, and cooperation it is imperative that we drastically rethink the form and function of our current economic policy apparatus and strive to progressively implement measure that will foster a steady-state orientation.
During AP leadership debates I recall Glenn Taylor as saying something along the lines of:
"It is not enough to invite [young dynamic people with new perspectives] in occasionally. This is about meaningful, authentic engagement in the development of the policy and the party."
It was statement's like this that convinced me that he was the best candidate for leader of the party and helped to embody that refusal to accept the static patterns of power and perspective that have governed politics in this province for far too long. I am grateful to all the members of the AP and citizens at large who too, are willing to listen to thoughts such as mine and share their own in the discussion about how best to proceed on the path ahead.
जय सच्चिदानन्द
-KSE
Another large factor in my decision to support and contribute to this political faction is the feeling that my perspectives and arguments will not fall on deaf ears. This may, at first, seem quaint but for someone who seeks the 'middle-path' and yet often finds himself positioned with hypothesis, data, and conclusions that largely contradict the received wisdom of the status quo, this is no trivial thing. In feeling that the larger discussions of how to govern our society are available to me, I do not fear offering up my thoughts on important issues, even when they do contradict the majority's opinion within the AP (or the public at large). This essay then, though opposing many of the leader's notions, stems from a respect for transformative dialogue and the quest to re-vitalize democratic participation here in Alberta.
First, let me honour the fact that Glenn Taylor's response to the current geopolitical situation regarding the Keystone XL pipeline appears as the most authentic and comprehensive available from all of the province's political parties. Compared to the other party leaders statements that I've come across, Taylor's message is one that has not been pre-packaged by public relations professionals but rather has been composed out of the genuine reflection of his own person and the balancing of forces needed to address the many concerns involved. It is, I believe, such dedication to providing personal responses to current events that helps to set the AP apart from other factions.
This being said, I feel obliged to address some of the ideas that Taylor shares in the hope that a more integral response to the challenges we are faced with may be developed.
I largely agree with Taylor that a "stronger role for government in enforcing and ensuring responsible stewardship of our resources is crucial" but see a falsehood when he states "environment is not a cost of doing oil sands business. It is integral to the business". I say this because to understand the raison d'etre for the oil sands industry is to know that they are in the business of eking out every last drop of stored sunlight from one of the most sensitive recoverable deposits of hydrocarbons on the planet with the primary incentive of short-term fiscal profit.
Observation by scientific method is blunt: nearly every living system in the direct vicinity of industrial-scale extraction, refining, and transportation of bitumen suffers deleterious effects. Sure, the outputs and impacts of hydrocarbon exploitation can and must be minimized but general and lasting harm cannot be negated. Thus, it should be understood, and this goes for all fossil-fuels, that the longer we base our economies on their utilization, we will be, barrel by barrel, well by well, increasingly compromising the health of our environment and the communities of organisms within it.
With regards to stewardship of the environment, the Alberta Party can do profound good here in the province but before we can do so, it is imperative that we move from the economic to an ecological land ethic in our deliberations and our policy-making so personified by Aldo Leopold. This tradition, where 'a thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community and wrong when it tends otherwise' will aid us in setting limits to resource exploitation and embolden protocol that guides us in the transition to a post-carbon society.
Another issue that I found in Taylor's post which speaks directly to Alberta Party policy is the support for the development of a pipeline corridor and a west coast liquid and natural gas facility. When he states that the "development will allow access to markets for our oil and gas production" he falls prey to the conformism of 'The Unconscious Civilization' where we "fling down and fling up the structures of our society as the marketplace orders." In other words, it appears as though Taylor's priorities (and those of AP policy) mistake the directives of economic globalization for the best interests of Alberta and dominion of Canada.
Leaving alone the fact that it will be very difficult to 'honour and preserve our unique natural ecosystem' while building and maintaining thousands of kilometres of new pipeline and fossil-fuel infrastructure, it seems a mistake to prioritize the enterprise of international trade of our resources over the creation of resilient systems that would serve our long term regional and national interests first. David Suzuki's recent article, along with providing convincing logic for opposition to projects such as Northern Gateway, does suggest alternative policy pursuits that more fully reflect the real and pressing needs of Canadians.
We can, as Albertan's, spearhead the design of provincial and national energy plans that helps us to:
- create jobs in Canada for refining and transporting our hydrocarbons from coast to coast
- reduce our reliance on 'un-ethical' oil from overseas and ensure long-term national energy security through conservation measures and efficiency standardization
- eliminate subsidies for fossil fuel companies and fund renewable energy infrastructure
- weather global economic and climatic turmoil by providing strong regional and national energy and resource support systems
Finally, the last subject of contention, and one that readers of my previous posts will no doubt recognize, is Taylor's insistence that we can and should "continue to grow our economy in a responsible, sustainable manner for the future." As a student of economics and a practitioner of an ecological design science I hazard to suggest that as attractive this goal is in the eyes of the public, business and much of academia, it is a fool's errand. The notion that we have an economic theory that contradicts multiple factors of reality or that a grande misconception of the true source of wealth is afoot in our civilization, is unkind to the sensitivities of the modern domesticated primate but a pill that we have to swallow.
For, in sitting down and talking with our friends, families, co-workers, or even complete strangers, it becomes evident that an economics of happiness is a much better fit for us here in Alberta and indeed across the planet. That the current monster of theory that parades around making life on planet earth more crowded, dirty and mean must be killed so that we may indeed have a sustainable and responsible future economic order is without a doubt one of the highest callings I feel we can have as citizens at this point in history. For, in order to become leaders in relocalization, conservation, and cooperation it is imperative that we drastically rethink the form and function of our current economic policy apparatus and strive to progressively implement measure that will foster a steady-state orientation.
During AP leadership debates I recall Glenn Taylor as saying something along the lines of:
"It is not enough to invite [young dynamic people with new perspectives] in occasionally. This is about meaningful, authentic engagement in the development of the policy and the party."
It was statement's like this that convinced me that he was the best candidate for leader of the party and helped to embody that refusal to accept the static patterns of power and perspective that have governed politics in this province for far too long. I am grateful to all the members of the AP and citizens at large who too, are willing to listen to thoughts such as mine and share their own in the discussion about how best to proceed on the path ahead.
जय सच्चिदानन्द
-KSE
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Thoughts on Premier Redford's Global TV Interview
So I had a chance to watch Global TV interview with Alberta's Premier Alison Redford and I thought I'd jot down some of my observations and reflections on what I saw:
I think one of the greatest accomplishments of the Progressive Conservative Party here in Alberta over the course of the last decade has been in marketing themselves as moderates following the path of inevitability. Personified in their new leader's response of preferring incremental change over the other approach, “pitted political dogfights”, I can't help but reflect on how their tactics give the impression that the dominant political party, processes, and culture is really the only option there is. By conveying the message that the best thing to do is 'keep doing what is being done, just a little better', she (they) dissolve themselves of the possibility that fundamental flaws exist. They are able to avoid serious discussions on the underlying logic of their stated visions and goals by functionally dismissing the potentiality that they could be wrong; by telling you there is no closet, they don't have to look inside to see if there is a monster.
The other notion that struck me whilst watching the interviewer and Redford giggle and chat was that all subject matter contained in the discussion - the Northern Gateway Pipeline, Health Care funding, foreign influence on domestic policy – was simply the news of the day as dictated by the Overlord of Economic Growth. In other words, what I saw in the interview was that, all the priorities of governing officials, all mandates pertaining to political institutions, are in service of the uncontested, unquestioned pursuit of economic growth. The narrative of progress that resides at the centre of our society's hopes, dreams, and fears primarily depends on the continuance of a type of business-as-usual where production, consumption, and monetization increases, continually. Hence, when Redford states the patently untrue – that the growth of non-conventional bituminous sands exploitation can be “managed” and that it “benefits the quality of life of all Canadians” - she does so with the most honest of intentions: propping up the imperative of economic growth.
As our world continues to slip down the slope of peak oil and is more frequently faced with the hard limits (and responding blow-back) of a finite planet pushed past the point of its carrying capacity, I shudder to think of the exponential rise in contradictory rhetoric that will emerge to draw our minds away from the realities we are faced with. This interview further convinced me of how politically unprepared we really are here in Alberta for the future that awaits us and how much hard work we have ahead.
जय सच्चिदानन्द
-KSE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
