Un-Sustainable Rise Of Complexity and Bureaucracy
Date Sat 16 Aug 2008 | Leave a Comment
“Bureaucracy is the death of all sound work.”
– Albert Einstein
Bureaucracy irritates me, I mean REALLY <blanky> irritates me. All my friends hate bureaucracy. All my family hates bureaucracy. In fact, everyone I’ve ever mentioned the word bureaucracy to hates bureaucracy! If so many of us (seemingly all of us) hate bureaucracy, then why is it thriving? What is really going on here?
I believe the answers are critical elements to us building a better future with a sustainable economic system and hanging onto an atmosphere that you can actually breathe.
Increasing bureaucracy is not some benign quirk we should simply tolerate. Increasing bureaucracy is a tell-tale sign of bloated, inefficient systems (economies) that are simply not sustainable.
It’s worse than it looks… We’re not just talking about your classic text-book definition of bureaucracy here. What we’re seeing today is the momentous rise of an unproductive sector which I loosely categorize as “bureaucracy” and define as the parasitic drag affecting the REAL production and distribution of REAL essential goods.
My list of parasites includes administrators, accountants, salespeople, middle-men, traders, speculators, bankers, marketers, lawyers, CEOs and all those employed in non-essential government sectors. Basically if you don’t actually produce anything of value you’re on my list as a parasite!
Right now, some readers are nodding their heads in agreement while others are taking offense. That’s where it gets complicated. What is “essential”? What is “value”? As a society, we don’t really know anymore. It’s become a subjective matter because the issue has become incredibly complex. A couple of hundred years ago, to determine whether or not someone was a parasitic drag, we would have asked the simple question, “Did you contribute to putting food on the table or building the barn or fixing the wagon?”. With the exception of entertainers (for which we’ve always had a soft spot), if you answered no, then you hadn’t “earned your keep”.
Today that simplicity is gone. Mechanization, fueled by cheap, non-renewable fossil fuels has freed us from productive manual labor, allowing us to increase in complexity (specialization), pursue consumerism and wallow in the creation of non-sustainable, non-productive jobs! (See consumerism and sustainable job creation). Critically, it is that cheap energy which has allowed us to “afford” bureaucracy and tolerate the inefficient use of labor.
“Government machinery has been described as a marvelous labor saving device which enables ten men to do the work of one.”
– John Maynard Keynes
The Double-Whammy Of Bureaucracy, Complexity And Centralization
The “growth of complexity” is a recognized phenomenon of evolving systems like societies. Biological evolutionists describe blind variation and selective retention as tending to produce increases in both structural and functional complexity of evolving systems.
The trouble with societal evolution is that there is someone guiding the process. There is questionable “intelligence” manipulating things. The bureaucrats are at work. The “blind” variation is not so blind, the selective retention is skewed. Both forces have been railroaded by narrow self interest that ultimately leads to more centralized bureaucracy and more poor decisions. It’s a cancerous rot that is difficult to combat.
Here’s a true case that illustrates why bureaucracy thrives and why it’s so hard to combat… Selective retention at it’s worst…
Karen owned her own business. Gradually the profit margins dwindled under the ever-increasing administrative loads, taxes, and costs of compliance with new rules and regulations dreamed up and imposed by centralized bureaucracy.
She sold out (in more ways than one). And quickly landed a fairly cushy government job. Her thinking was, “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.” Ambitious, she climbed the ladder within her department until she reached managerial status with a great perks package.
One day the news filtered down that the bloated department was to be rationalized. The razor gang was trimming all dead wood. Karen’s ENTIRE branch was earmarked for pruning. What does a bureaucrat do in that situation? One finds a palatable solution!
Karen immediately contacted a few close confidantes in adjacent branches and on the main trunk. A plan was hatched and Karen was able to quietly reassure her underlings that all was not lost - accept your massive redundancy packages - We have a plan…
The generous redundancy packages were quickly tucked away and phase two kicked in… Karen’s public service buddies began pulling the required strings, nodding, winking and lobbying the appropriate people. In no time at all it was determined that a new branch should be created.
Of course, the new branch wouldn’t do exactly the same things as the old branch (nobody was too sure what that was anyway). What they did know for sure was that the new branch presented new challenges and the rates of pay would need to be adjusted upwards! The new branch is now thriving at great expense to the taxpayer and society in general.
The story is unfortunately all too common and illustrates the vicious circle behind expanding bureaucracy; Bureaucrats naturally don’t want to give up their jobs so will do anything in their power to keep them (forget efficiency and ideals like the collective good - it’s every man for himself!) and secondly, crushed by the sheer weight of bureaucracy everyone on the “outside” sees “joining ‘em” as an attractive option.
While we’re bagging bureaucracy let’s continue with another quick illustration of the stupidity of centralized governments and bureaucratic bungling…
Nobody really knows the full story because nobody has owned up yet. A few years back, a brand new police station was built in the village of Carinda (population 194) in Walgett shire, NSW. The sheer size of the station mystified locals, after all with a population of just 194 crime was practically non-existent. Somehow, the construction of this “overly large” police station received approval, passed inspection and was put into service in the wrong town! The police station was actually meant to be built at Quirindi, a town of 2500, many miles away. The oversized police station has become a tourist highlight and testament to the stupidity of centralized government.
I could go on with examples of monumental blunders at local, state and federal level; the rainwater tank fiasco, the septic tank fiasco, grey water policy confusion etc. Bureaucrats get it wrong over and over again and expect society to foot the bill.
Our centralized bureaucracies have no “common sense”, they’re inefficient and we can no longer afford them.
Joseph Tainter, in “Complexity, Problem Solving, and Sustainable Societies” points out that while a certain level of complexity is beneficial for the sake of efficiency, at some stage, societies hit the point of diminishing returns on complexity… Further investment in complexity becomes a counter-productive burden and alienates the society it was meant to serve…
“diminishing returns make complexity less attractive and breed disaffection. As taxes and other costs rise and there are fewer benefits at the local level, more and more people are attracted by the idea of being independent. The society “decomposes” as people pursue their immediate needs rather than the long-term goals of the leadership.”
I would say that we reached the point of diminishing returns on increasing complexity a long time ago. It’s my guess we reached that point in the late 1960’s, perhaps the 1970’s. The mind-boggling growth of complexity since then is just pushing on a string. Despite all the gadgetry and “stuff”, I just can’t see the evidence of any real improvement in our quality of life in the last 40 years, in fact, I’d argue that the social dysfunction we’re now seeing is evidence of society “decomposing”.
One thing is clear; complexity, bureaucracy and other non-productive parasitism has grown to unsustainable levels. What happens when cheap fossil fuel energy runs out? And cheap alternatives cannot be found? Again, Tainter speculates…
“One often-discussed path is cultural and economic simplicity and lower energy costs. This could come about through the “crash” that many fear — a genuine collapse over a period of one or two generations, with much violence, starvation, and loss of population. The alternative is the “soft landing” that many people hope for - a voluntary change to solar energy and green fuels, energy-conserving technologies, and less overall consumption. This is a utopian alternative that, as suggested above, will come about only if severe, prolonged hardship in industrial nations makes it attractive, and if economic growth and consumerism can be removed from the realm of ideology”
It’s little wonder that voluntary simplicity and self-sufficiency are gaining popularity. I’m firmly convinced that relocalization - creating self-sufficient communities - and decentralization is the path we need to take to engineer a soft landing.
Patents for DIY Self-Sufficiency Projects
Date Wed 6 Aug 2008 | Leave a Comment
As a fabricator, I’m constantly looking online for input, ideas or even working plans for my self-sufficient living projects. One of the best sources of information I’ve found are the various patent sites.
The other day I downloaded a patent for an efficient wood heater. The drawings were detailed enough to actually build a unit from. For an upcoming home-built vertical axis wind generator I’ve assembled enough information, from airfoils to generator to structure, all from patents available online.
Of course you aren’t allowed to go into production of the “invention” but for the purposes of building your own equipment for self-sufficient living it is quite OK to base your design on patents.
The easiest site I’ve found is freepatentsonline. All you need to do is register and images, drawings and the full patent is made available in PDF which you can easily save to your computer.
The search function at freepatentsonline is a little whacky. If I can’t find what I want I’ll often just use Google for the same search terms and add the word freepatentsonline. Google’s results are often better. Having got some results, be sure to see related patents or “patents that cite this patent”. There is a goldmine of information available.
Consumerism and Sustainable Job Creation
Date Sun 3 Aug 2008 | Leave a Comment
There are very few humans currently living on planet earth that would dare claim that everything is rosy with our system. Yet we’ve had a hundred years - a whole century of rapid developments in mechanization, technological advance and social tinkering which promised to deliver a better world. One of the main promises of mechanization and technological advance was to get the work done easier and faster. The result we expected was increased leisure time - futurists went so far as to speculate as to just what we might do with our time when work was no longer necessary!
But here we are a century later most of us still “working”. And according to workplace studies in Australia, we’re working even longer hours than 20 years ago! Yes, The nature of the work has changed, to be sure. Gone is much of the heavy labor thanks to machinery. And gone too are hundreds of thousands of jobs on assembly lines and factories thanks to robotics. Gone too are thousands of jobs in agriculture and other labor intensive industries.
Mechanization, robotics and computers have without question eliminated jobs.
So it begs the question: how come unemployment is low? As of late 2007, the Australian government was claiming record low unemployment and a dire skill shortage. So dire is our shortage of workers that immigration and special programs for foreign workers have been ramped up. Despite losing hundreds of thousands of jobs to mechanization we’re still all employed! We’re still all commuting to work - gobbling up oil and spitting out smog in the process. Worse, both partners, husband and wife are making the commute, often in two cars - double the trouble for the environment. In Australia, two incomes (jobs) have become “essential”.
All of a sudden we see that things are not adding up… Those futurists were obviously wrong and it’s now clear that we no longer even expect the technological advances to eliminate work. It’s also clear that as a society we still feel that all able-bodied members must have have a job or they’re somehow shirking their responsibility. Here’s proof…
Let’s say you become unemployed and need government unemployment payments (the Dole) to survive, There’s just no way you’re going to get payments without “jumping through the hoops” and documenting your concerted effort to find a job.
Just try this claim at your social security office: “Oh no, I don’t need an actual job. I’ve been displaced by machines so just give me the cash. Where do I sign?” The nice lady behind the counter will smile at your “joke” - it simply must be a joke - nobody in their right mind expects to be paid for NOT working. Clearly, the expectation is that we must have a job.
So eager are we to provide ourselves with jobs that we’ll trash the planet to achieve our goal…
The monumental problem with jobs is this; almost everyone who has a job must commute to work and that commute, whether powered by electricity (unless solar photovoltaic) or internal combustion engine, requires energy and so contributes to environmental degradation. Obviously some modes of powered transport are more planet friendly than others but the bottom line is this: moving vast numbers of people to their place of work is unsustainable.
Consumerism Creating Unnecessary Jobs
The second problem with “jobs” is that many are totally unnecessary. There, I’ve said it. And I just know that some people are going to be offended by this but the fact is there are a number of occupations that are flat out destroying the world and a total waste of human endeavor.
Telemarketing springs to mind as the first obvious example. This particularly annoying form of marketing is intrusive, wastes time, costs the environment resources and drives rampant consumption. Telemarketing does not create food, does not build shelter or essential products. Telemarketing’s primary objective is to make sales, or more accurately, “make money” and nothing more. Telemarketing would receive a big fat zero on my “usefulness” scale. And I must add, zero intrinsic value to society.
At the other end of the spectrum, let’s take an occupation like the growing of staple foods. Imagine a very productive farmer who single-handedly grows enough grain and wholesome vegetables to feed an entire village. On my “usefulness” scale his occupation would deserve a 9.
Now let’s look at an extreme “negative usefulness” occupation by imagining, for example, a “super-telemarketing instructor”. A master salesperson who travels the world teaching telemarketers how to manipulate people’s emotions over the telephone, overcome their target’s reservations and close more sales of useless energy-sucking consumer gadgets. He’s in big demand, regularly flying across the world to train aspiring telemarketers. In doing so he’s not only promoting and perpetuating a business model (occupation) that is practically worthless to society, he is fueling rampant consumption and has an enormous personal environmental footprint in non-essential air travel. His job is an environmental disaster.
Note: our imagined “super-telemarketing instructor” is a fictional character but he is, unfortunately, based on reality. High-powered sales, marketing and advertising people regularly jet-set around our world selling themselves, “selling the sizzle” and driving consumerism. Much of the international diplomatic circus is merely state-sponsored sales, marketing and the promotion of consumerism in disguise.
The Rise of an Unproductive Sector
The blunt, horrible truth is that mankind’s ingenuity - a century of mechanization and technological advances - has displaced workers from productive endeavor and forced us to “invent” new jobs. Growing public service. Growing bureaucracy. Growing government. Growing legal complexity stimulating ever more new specialist occupations to decipher the complexity! (Resulting in increased compliance costs and the need for ever more money). Business (busy-ness) can no longer make a profit providing for our needs - merely meeting demand is no longer enough - business must now create new needs in the minds of the consumer.
Welcome to the world of consumerism - the land of unnecessary, unproductive jobs - welcome to the grand illusion of debt-based money and artificial competition.
Affordable, Sustainable Housing Made Illegal!
Date Fri 18 Jul 2008 | Leave a Comment
I came by a recent copy of the Warwick local newspaper and was appalled to see the headline story was an unveiled threat by local council to vigorously pursue shire residents who were “living illegally” in sheds and other unapproved dwellings.
Local council crackdowns on non-approved dwellings are nothing new. Councils, of course, have the legal authority to take action but do they have the moral authority? Are their actions appropriate while Australia is in the midst of a housing affordability crisis? Do their actions reflect any consideration for sustainable practice?
The answer would have to be no, no and no again.
To be clear, we are not talking about non-approved dwellings built in suburbia or in zones covered by covenants that restrict type, style or material used in construction. Only the foolhardy would attempt that. We’re talking about larger rural-residential blocks and bush blocks where owners assumed they could do as they please. For the most part, these residents “living illegally” in sheds are “Aussie battlers” building on the cheap.
In past times these were people to be admired for their resourcefulness AND for their willingness to do it tough for a while. In past times it was considered responsible to live within one’s means, buying only what you could afford and attempting to be as self sufficient as possible.
Today, the scene is very different. Today, living within one’s means can mean “living illegally”. Today, we have rules and regulations (and peer pressure) that effectively force people to borrow money and live beyond their means.
Importantly, councils often justify evictions or legal orders by shifting the blame to neighbours and the wider community who have reported “illegal” dwellings because of concerns that the value of their own real estate will be lowered. Whatever the reasons, actions like reporting by neighbours, eviction and council demolition orders are symptomatic of societies driven by greed and rampant consumption - societies that have lost a sense of true value.
Building a sustainable economic system and society requires that we:
1.. Rapidly adjust government (local, state and federal) regulations that effectively sabotage or hamper sustainable outcomes.
2.. Foster rural sustainable communities (de-emphasizing real estate speculation) and that as good neighbours we respect the rights of those who are living within their means and that we NOT require them to meet the artificially high standards currently imposed.
Low Risk Renewable Energy Investment
Date Thu 27 Sep 2007 | Leave a Comment
These days interest in renewable energy is high and naturally interest in renewable energy investment has risen dramatically. Typical of societies driven by rampant consumerism all manner of con-men are stepping up to the plate to fleece well meaning investors with what amounts to little more than gambling in a highly speculative area. It’s very difficult to pick winners in alternative energy technologies.
Here’s a low risk “renewable energy investment” idea with a difference…
Some years back my wife and I bought a piece of cheap real estate just outside the town boundary of a sleepy little western NSW town. We were interested in self-sufficient living and figured that 4 acre block would be perfect. The block was brown and bare except for an incredible crop of thistles as thick as the hairs on a cat’s back.
Family and friends joked, calling us “visionaries”. What they really meant was nobody in the entire galaxy could see the potential apart from us - and that was precisely the reason it was cheap. Turns out there was another reason why it was cheap…
When we got the quote to get the power on we were staggered - the simple connection wasn’t so simple - the quote had the tone of a ransom note! $34,000 for grid connection - take it or leave it. Had it been a bush block with power at some distance we would have been prepared but this particular block had mains power along 2 sides.
According to the local electricity authority our installation was the tipping point. We would foot the bill for the required transformer upgrade. To put it more accurately, we would have to provide the infrastructure required to provide ourselves with the service!
We made the decision to go alternative energy with a stand-alone combination solar wind power system. The wind generator was a converted comet 3 windmill chosen because we had a poor wind site - the high solidity ratio of conventional windmill style provided a high torque, low start-up-speed wind generator. 8 solar panels, 1300 Amp-hour batteries and inverter were added. We lived off-grid for 7 years with a system that powered all mod cons including 240 volt refrigeration. The alternative home power system cost around $20,000.
When we sold and moved at the end of the seven years, the cost for electricity connection had miraculously decreased from the original quote of $37,000 to a mere $1,300! We were able to move on then taking all our alternative energy equipment, having saved the $37,000 and capitalizing on the mere $1300 connection fee and achieving a good price for the property.
It’s a sound strategy: purchase a bush block currently unserviced by the grid and simply wait. Blocks unserviced by the grid are marked down in value and relatively cheap. There are dozens of areas within Australia and no doubt other countries where the idea is a sure fire winner.
APEC Meeting - An Orgy Of Consumption
Date Mon 17 Sep 2007 | Leave a Comment
Australian prime minister John Howard and his world-leader bureaucrat buddies have just demonstrated their utter contempt for the real environmental issue and the “common” people of the world. It’s disgusting…
These world leaders attending the APEC meeting have just squandered around $700 million on little more than pomp and ceremony to massage their already monstrous egos. These skilled manipulators of people believe they’re entitled to live the high life at huge expense to their constituents and the environment. International travel, fine foods, fine wines and mind-bogglingly expensive security measures are essential fare for these irresponsible leaders bloated by their own self-importance.
The claimed cost of the APEC meeting is $320 million of which $170 million was for security alone. Add the cost of the interruption to Sydney business which business groups estimate at over $300 million. Now add the cost of international flights and security for these leaders and their entourage. There’s the $700 million. So what? It’s only money… or is it?
In this delusional world of fiat money created out of thin air and then lent to attract interest, $700 million seems like nothing. A mere trifle. But this is not just monopoly money. The dispensing of this fake, debt-based money costs the environment big time.
Every dollar squandered by these environmental vandals must be earned by taxpayers. To earn money, the majority of taxpayers are forced to commute, compete, produce, mine, extract, manufacture, consume and pollute. Further, these taxpayers must create new markets, create demand through advertising and generally participate in “economic growth” that is trashing planet Earth and people’s lives.
APEC meetings are an orgy of consumption thinly disguised as “management” of the Asia-Pacific region. These elitist world “leaders” with their snouts in the trough are totally out of touch with reality. Instead of leading by example they’re promoting the rampant consumerism that drives environmental destruction and perpetuates debt-based money.
Rampant Consumerism
Date Mon 4 Jun 2007 | Leave a Comment
There’s no doubt that the Australian government is dragging its feet on the environment. And it’s highly likely that we’ll never see an adequate response to climate change and environmental degradation until we the people demand it.
Typical of governments blinded by their desperation to be re-elected their focus is still on “economic growth” and maintenance of our “current living standards”.
What we hear from Howard is that “his” government wants to take a “measured approach” to climate change that will not impact adversely on the Australian economy or our “standard of living.”
John Howard carefully measures everything he says. He’s the consummate, “clever and increasingly cunning” politician. What he is doing here is attempting to reinforce the notion that we’re doing well.
“We’ve never had it so good” he tells us. He cites our current economic situation as a testament to “his” government’s economic credentials. But let’s quickly explore those economic credentials and our current “standard of living”…
- Australia is in the throes of a housing affordability crisis.
- Australia continues to import more than it exports despite a 10 year resources boom
- Australia is essentially living on borrowed money with growing foreign debt currently around $530 Billion
- Australia’s gap between rich and poor is widening
Those 4 economic indicators alone indicate that we are not in good shape economically.
Howard appears to subscribe to the philosophy that if he simply keeps saying everything’s good… everything’s good… everything’s good… everything’s good that somehow the people of Australia will be mesmerized into believing it.
The economy is not good. It merely appears good. It’s only an illusion that rampant consumerism is creating.
It’s fair to say that we are currently participating in an orgy of consumption that masks the underlying problems.
The Real “Standard Of Living”
If we take the emphasis away from rampant consumption and ownership of material possessions surely it’s hard to conclude that our living standard has improved in the last 30 or 40 years or that it is even “high”.
Truth is that the well-being of a society is not really represented by crude measures like mathematically derived standard of living indices. The true well-being of a society must take into account more subjective human ideals to arrive at a measure of the quality of life.
How does Australia fare in that respect? One need only look at a few facts…
- Australians are carrying high levels of personal debt
- Housing affordability is low - more and more Australians simply cannot afford to buy or even rent a home.
- Australian suicide rates are high.
- Australian divorce rates are high as families succumb to financial pressure.
- Australians are under-employed. Despite government claims of low unemployment the reality is that more people are working part-time and casual positions.
- Australian job security is low.
- Australian families now need two incomes to make ends meet
If you cast a critical eye over the Australian “quality of life” you will not see any real improvements over that which our system offered some 30 or 40 years ago.
Our governments obsession with economic growth and the maintenance of a “high living standard” in material terms is directly responsible for environmental degradation.
The Australian government is still actively promoting the accrual of material wealth i.e. rampant consumerism despite all the warnings nature and science are now sending.
The Right Response To Environmental Degradation
The root cause of environmental degradation is quite obviously rampant consumerism without regard for the environment. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to see it. Accordingly, education campaigns to help curb our insatiable appetite for consumer goods would seem to be the first place to start.
Instead we see a government whose primary focus to date has been carbon trading and other means to “offset” the release of carbon dioxide within some framework to make the continued production of carbon dioxide more palatable.
While it’s true that over time, carbon trading will raise the price of consumer goods and ultimately curb buying (in theory), Carbon trading is a bandaid that doesn’t address the core problem of rampant consumerism.
Why are we not seeing education campaigns with a clear message that our current levels of consumption are unsustainable?
Surely it’s simple to run community service announcements that encourage less consumption. Consumer manipulation through advertising is such a trivial matter. After all, advertising drives rampant consumerism so it can surely counter the same.
Government is clearly missing the point on climate change. A secure sustainable lifestyle cannot be built around rampant consumerism.
Australian Government Reform
Date Sun 27 May 2007 | Leave a Comment
The Australian Political scene is ugly. People’s opinions don’t count anymore. We’re not consulted. We’re actively ignored…
Iraq springs to mind here. Our government was sent a clear message at the time. “Not in our name” was the cry.
When questioned Howard’s response was “The mob haven’t made up their mind”. To me that smacks of disdain for the voters and general public.
Howard classifies us as the “mob”. As if we’re somehow unfit to make important decisions. Unfortunately that mentality is rife throughout our government. Governments think they know best. Should you try to engage in the political process and offer a view or solutions you’ll be politely patronized and told - “We’re looking into it… rest assured we’ll make the right decisions for our country.”
It’s not their job to think anything or make decisions. Their role is to represent us and act on our decision. Nothing more.
An issue as serious as a war in foreign lands should be decided by the people. We should have been consulted.
The current Australian political system is deeply flawed. There is NO way for us to have our say. Government points to elections as the means for expressing our wishes - Howard has even claimed a “mandate” from the electoral process. But the process is deeply flawed.
Our only effective vote (a mandatory one at that) is a choice between two parties. Labour or Liberal. We are told to select a raft of policies from one side or the other.
Our political system is downright dumb. There’s no means for us to cherry-pick the best policies and ideas. We are effectively divided over a non-issue. All we get to decide is which party is at the helm of our current dumb system!
Australia requires urgent reform to the political process but it’s not on their agenda. Politicians and bureaucrats have their snouts in the trough and they don’t want to change the situation.
They offer up all kinds of reforms but never political reform. It’s not an option. Australians have been hoodwinked by a very clever campaign directed by big business.
The following quote from The United States Banker’s Association magazine of August 1924 spells out the real agenda…
“Capital must protect itself in every possible way, both by combination and legislation. Debts must be collected, mortgages foreclosed as rapidly as possible. When, through the process of law the common people lose their homes, they will become more docile and more easily governed through the strong arm of government applied by a central power of wealth under leading financiers. These truths are well known among our principal men who are now engaged in forming an imperialism to govern the world.
By dividing the voter through the political party system we can get them to expend their energies in fighting for questions of no importance. It is thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves that which has been so well planned and so successfully accomplished.”
It’s time for Australians to speak up. Demand accountability from Governments. Demand that government be restored as the servant not the master.
Building A Non-Sustainable Economy
Date Wed 23 May 2007 | 1 Comment
The Australian government is building an unsustainable economy.
As GST increasingly becomes the revenue base for government we are confronted with a serious dilemma…
Rampant consumerism is the primary cause of environmental degradation. Yet thanks to the GST the government now has a real vested interest in us continuing to consume and degrade the environment in the process.
Talk about conflict of interest!
Governments are telling us the economy is in great shape… Inflation is low… Interest rates are “low” and stable. They’re practically coaxing us to spend these days. Consumer sentiment is up.
Our government is actively promoting consumption because the more we spend the more they get. It is that simple. The Australian government is now hooked on GST revenue.
Successive Australian governments have been seduced by “global interests” and bought the lie of false money and rampant consumption. They’re now attempting to run a consumer economy just like they do in the good old US of A. (It’s not only their wars we copy).
They’re building an unsustainable economy where our spending props up the system. Never mind that we can’t afford it. Never mind that we’re living beyond our means to the tune of $550 Billion in foreign debt. Never mind that rampant consumerism is destroying our planet.
Buy, spend and consume - it’s good for the economy is their mantra. So where is their “real” response to climate change and environmental degradation? The two ideas are at odds here.
How can the government effectively combat environmental degradation when it is hooked on the revenue from us spending and consuming? It simply can’t.
Governments, Bureaucracy and Sustainable Living
Date Tue 22 May 2007 | Leave a Comment
When you boil it all down sustainable living is about efficiency. That’s why no serious discussion about sustainable practice can ignore the rise of big bloated governments and their attendant bureaucracies.
Fact is the institution of government is directly responsible for unsustainable practice.
The French philosopher and libertarian, Bastiat, said it best:
“Government is the myth whereby one half of the population live off the other half.”
That’s precisely the problem faced by all so-called developed economies and the world at large. We are seeing the sickening, debilitating rise of an unproductive sector.
An ever-growing percentage of our workforce is engaged in a whole range of unproductive pursuits; administration, ensuring compliance, rubber-stamping, pen-pushing, bean-counting and big brother style tracking of others.
Big bloated governments have a natural tendency to drive the growth of non-productive “work”. Their focus on “full employment” or low unemployment as an election aid means they do not consider the intrinsic value to the community of the jobs created. To them it’s job creation and simply a numbers game – a job is a job.
But the reality is we’re seeing an explosion of administrators and public servants paid reasonably well for doing unreasonably little of real value for the community. They’re given perk packages, government cars and travel allowances to abuse. All in the name of job creation and low unemployment.
It’s essentially a grandiose public dole scheme that’s open to abuse. And abused it is…
The government sector suffers from entrenched cronyism and jobs-for-the-boys mentality that ensures further growth of the non-productive sector.
What we are seeing is an explosion of parasitic bureaucracy and over-regulation that stifles creative enterprise and produces vast inefficiencies. Big bloated governments are unsustainable. Tell them to get a real job.
keep looking »