"The net worth of the 225* richest people in the world now equals the combined income of the poorest 2.6 billion, who comprise 47 percent of the world's population." (UNDP's 1998 Human Development Report) (* billionaires)
my World View:
my Personal Actions:
I believe the human race passed a comfortably sustainable
population in about 1950, at 2.5 Bn, but now there's twice as
many of us, and three times as many in twenty years, with a most
influential minority using FAR too much. The middle- class and
rich have the wrong goals (largely induced by advertis- ing), if
the world is to remain as civilised as it was between ' 55 and
' 77 (not incl. Stalin/Amin).
__ I have reduced my demands on the Earth to
a bare minimum by spending US$950 p.a. TOTAL; including no more
than US$450 a year, or $8.65 per week, on food (all of it bought
at the super- market). I pay for my share of the rates on our
mortgage- free house, and I walk or (occasionally) take the bus,
e.g. to buy the groceries. I walk barefoot year- round (@
lat. 37, maritime), wearing thongs/jandals if the road is rough
or my pack is heavy. I haven't thrown out clothes for a couple
of decades, and I'm now gradually using up that capital investment.
|My newest page is: www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html|
Please read the early-'98 : Rachel's Weekly: #582: (01/22/98):
I'm not recommending others do the above, though I am saying it's possible. David MacClement ZL1ASX
A recent description of what I think of my life ;
(in a new browser window)
and: our family travels in Malaysia and India;
(what we learnt [new browser window] )
David's reason for existence
Best of RainForest
Click BELOW for larger version
The Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at James Cook University, Townsville, Australia is acknowleged for receiving and processing the images. Permission from the Japanese Meteorological Agency is required and they are to be acknowleged for providing the raw data. (JMA Fax +81 3 3212 2453)
Weather in NZ, 6 Mar 2000.
The Worldwatch Institute. Worldwatch is dedicated to fostering the evolution of an environmentally sustainable society, one in which human needs are met in ways that do not threaten the health of the natural environment or the prospects of future generations.
An extract from a recent WorldWatch book;
Income for All (?) :
Signs of hope:
- October 1998 -
- NEW CHAPTER IN GERMAN GREEN POLITICS -
- GERMAN GREENS IN GOVERNMENT -
- SLOVAK CITIZENS HAVE DECIDED ON CHANGE -
NEW CHAPTER IN GERMAN GREEN POLITICS
The German voters have opened a new chapter in the history of German Politics and ... of the German Greens.
The final result of the elections: Social Democrats: 40,9 % (+ 4,5 %; 298 MPs), Christian Democrats 35,2 % (-6,2 %; 245 MPs), Greens 6,7 % (- 0,6 %; 47 MPs), Liberals 6,2 % (-0,7 %; 44 MPs), Socialist Party 5,1 % (+0,7 %, 35 MPs). This result leads to a Red-Green absolute majority by 21 seats.
[T]he Greens and the Social Democrats ... negotiations towards a new Red-Green government in Germany.
... Both the Greens and SPD ... a strong start will be essential for the new government.
All in all, the situation is not bad considering that there is a Red-Green majority in both houses. More importantly, the German Greens have Green partners in government on a European level with Italy, France, Finland and potentially Sweden in the EU, as well as Georgia which will give them the opportunity to new Policy making on that level also.
Considering the national elections in Europe within the last 2 years, we have a completely new perspective for the Greens on the European level, and we shall use these victories over [economic-] neoliberal governments.
Despite an endless stream of corporate propaganda, consumers in the
U.S. -- as well as the rest of the world -- remain troubled or anxious about
genetically-altered food. Every major national poll in the industrialized
world over the past 10 years has found 80-95% of consumers demanding
labeling of biotech foods -- primarily so that they can exercise their right
to avoid buying them if they so choose. ...
In a ... comprehensive poll by the biotech giant Novartis in February of 1997, a full 93% of Americans said that all genetically engineered foods should be labeled. In the same Novartis poll 73% said they felt "strongly" about mandatory labeling of gene-altered organisms, while 54% wanted to see agriculture move toward organic production methods. For a global summary of consumer polls on labeling genetically engineered food see:
Despite overwhelming public sentiment, Monsanto, the Clinton Administration, and biotech/ factory-farm interests remain unalterably opposed to mandatory labeling and safety testing of gene foods. Over the past two years U.S. authorities repeatedly have threatened to sue the E.U. under the new GATT rules for "restraint of trade" if they require mandatory segregation and labeling of U.S. agricultural exports containing gene- altered substances. ...
On May 19 U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky threatened France and the EU with trade sanctions on the g-e corn issue. In a statement to Reuters, Barshefsky stated: "This is very serious and threatens a very substantial trade row if these corn varieties are not allowed to be marketed fully."
U.S. free traders received further bad news on May 26 as EU farm ministers
passed a long-awaited bill requiring mandatory labeling of g-e corn and
soybean products. The law basically states that all foods with detectible
levels of genetically modified corn or soya (gene-altered DNA or proteins)
will have to be labeled. Although the law was condemned by U.S.
authorities, European groups such as Greenpeace, the Green Party, and
consumer associations complained that the law contains exemptions on
non-detectible additives such as soy oil and lecithin -- which means that
most processed foods, such as margarine and chocolate, will still not have
to be labeled. Informed sources in Europe have told Food Bytes* that,
although the Clinton administration doesn't like the soy and corn labeling
law, they will not at this time try to challenge the rule at the GATT/WTO.
In the wake of the USDA organic standards fiasco and mounting global pressure for biotech labeling, U.S. authorities fear yet another public relations disaster if they attempt to overturn the May 26 law.
Even Monsanto has felt the need to try to placate their opponents recently, claiming, somewhat unconvincingly, that they no longer oppose labeling of gene-altered products in Europe. In the words of Monsanto's Europe-Africa President Bernard Auxenfans, quoted in the UK Farmers Guardian of May 22:At the same time Monsanto's PR spin doctors stress that the U.S. is "different," and therefore requires no "understandable language," i.e. labeling.
* from: Food Bytes #9, June 2 '98.
Copyright © 1998 Nando.net
Copyright © 1998 AFP
WASHINGTON (May 21, 1998 2:56 p.m. EDT http://www.nando.net) -
The United States and six Latin American countries signed an agreement Thursday to protect dolphins from tuna fishing nets that threatened to devastate the mammals. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright hailed the accord as "one of the strongest agreements ever negotiated to conserve marine life."
Under the accord reached in February following six years of negotiations, all tuna fishing vessels will be required to have observers on board to monitor catches and an international panel will be established to ensure compliance.
Albright signed the International Dolphin Protection Program agreement with the ambassadors of Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama and Venezuela, which were among the 13 countries to negotiate the accord.
The United States has agreed to lift tuna trade embargoes on all nations that sign the pact.
''I am very pleased to participate in this signing ceremony,'' said Albright from the podium in the State Department's Benjamin Franklin Room.
"It's not every day that I can honestly say we take action to benefit a group whose members are uniformly intelligent, open, friendly and can swim close to 40 miles an hour," she said.
Delegates to a 150-nation conference on global warming met in closed session Friday after saying there were large gaps to be overcome before a draft treaty could be approved at a December conference in Japan. The fight over global warming, thrust into the limelight this week when President Clinton presented U.S. proposals, pits industrial countries against developing nations who want a cleaner, cooler world but not obstacles to their economic growth. Delegates to the United Nations-sponsored conference on climate change in Bonn said the negotiations were expected to go down to the last minute in Kyoto, Japan, and would ultimately have to be settled at the highest levels.
The Kyoto Climate Treaty: U.S response (polls, etc.)
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY COALITION Contact: Henry Griggs 202-326-8714 315 CircleAvenue, #2;Takoma Park, MD 20912 Ken Bossong 301-270-2258 301-270-2258; fax: 301-891-2866 <firstname.lastname@example.org> For Immediate Release January 28, 1998
COALITION CALLS PRESIDENT CLINTON'S CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVES IN THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
President Clinton's announcement in last evening's State of the Union address of a $6 billion package of increased R&D spending and tax incentives to address global climate change is a step in the right direction. However, given the serious environmental and public health threats posed by growing dependence on fossil fuels and the resulting greenhouse gases, the U.S. must move further and faster in deploying sustainable energy technologies. Wide-spread use of presently available and cost-effective energy-efficient technologies, renewable energy (i.e., biomass, solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric), fuel cells, and district energy could reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by at least 10% below 1990 levels by 2010.
Accordingly, the Sustainable Energy Coalition, a coalition of 40+ national business, environmental, consumer, and energy policy organizations, plans to support the President's proposals to expand the use of sustainable energy technologies while pressing for additional funding increases and tax incentives; pro-efficiency, renewable energy, and environmental protection provisions as part of electric utility restructuring; and other policy initiatives.
Ngai Tahu Agreement (NZ)
|("Less cars" also talked about what living was like in the 40s, 50s and early 60s, especially for school kids.)|
|[Prev|Next|Skip Next|Random|Next 5|List Sites]|
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 07:23 +1200 Subject: [GREENNEWS] Non-sense Don't blame me, I'm just passing this on... -----If a parsley farmer is sued, can they garnish his wages?
Chris email@example.com, Wellington, New Zealand.
Click here for experimental stereo window.
|This page has been visited times.|
For your own free web page, go to Tripod Download Netscape Now!