Sections
Home » Issues » A Resilient Community » 10 Ways to Solve the Jobs Problem
 

10 Ways to Solve the Jobs Problem

Imagine a no-holds-barred “summit” that comes up with ideas to solve both our job and environmental problems. What might it come up with?

bicycle repair

Photo by Alex Ferguson

As the midterm political season heats up, one word on every politician’s lips is “jobs.” And for good reason. People are hurting—they can’t pay their mortgages, send their kids to college, pay their dental bills. Young people are wondering if they have a place in the work world. 

So the economic pundits cheer when car sales go up, housing starts rise, consumer confidence strengthens. But as the oily ooze in the Gulf tars yet another beach, we all sense something is terribly wrong. We can’t keep tearing up the planet to keep ourselves employed. There must be another way. 

So—imagine a no-holds-barred “summit” that comes up with ideas to solve both our job and environmental problems. What might it come up with?
Here is my starter list. You can add your own ideas in the comments to this article on the YES! website.

 1. More farms, less agribusiness. Agribusiness substitutes chemicals and machinery for labor and employs remarkably few people. Small organic farms are far more productive per acre and bring the people back.

 2. More repair, fewer products. Instead of tossing those shoes, that toaster, that computer, let’s fix them—and employ repair people in the process.

 3. More recycling, less mining. Ray Anderson of the Interface flooring company says we already have enough nylon to meet the world’s carpet needs forever. The same may be true for aluminum, steel, copper, and other easily recyclable materials. We just need good systems for recovering them.

What if we stopped subsidizing advertising with tax breaks and focused on educating people to lead satisfying lives?

 4. More renovations, less construction. Our nation has 129 million housing units. We build new ones and let old ones deteriorate. How about renovating what we have and in-filling our cities to use existing sidewalks, gas pipes, water mains, and roads?

 5. More restoration, less destruction. Whether it’s forests, Superfund sites, or oil-laced wetlands, it’s time to restore. Some restoration can even pay for itself, as in restoration forestry where folks make products from the fire-prone, small-diameter trees normally considered too small to market.

 6. More bike paths, fewer highways. They both cost money, but one is good for our health and good for the planet. What’s not to like?

 7. More local businesses, fewer megastores. Locally owned stores employ more people per goods sold and you can often talk to a decision-maker about your purchase.

 8. More dishwashing, fewer throw-aways. What if we got rid of all the disposable containers in fast food restaurants? At my friend Ron Sher’s Crossroads Shopping Center near Seattle, the food court vendors share a common crockery supply. No trees needed. It works.

 9. More education, less advertising. Let’s face it. Advertising is about making us feel inadequate for something we don’t yet have. What if we stopped subsidizing advertising with tax breaks and focused on educating people to lead satisfying lives?

10. More clean energy, less fossil fuel. Here we do need new stuff—wind turbines, solar panels, insulation, passenger trains. Politicians are providing some—though not enough—funding for these sources of “green jobs.” It’s the other items on this list they’re not even talking about—but need to.

You may be thinking that my list isn’t realistic because these options cost more or depend on government funding. But that’s partly because governments subsidize oil, agribusiness, nuclear plants, ports, highways, advertising, and other unhealthy choices.

So the next time you hear a politician talk about jobs, try comparing the solutions offered to this list. By breaking out of the narrow range of options that keeps policy discussions stuck, we can create jobs that not only sustain families, but also build community and restore the living systems of our planet.


Fran Korten, 70pxFran Korten wrote this column for A Resilient Community, the Fall 2010 issue of YES! Magazine. Fran is publisher of YES! Magazine.

Interested?
A Resilient Community
YES! Magazine encourages you to make free use of this article by taking these easy steps. Korten, F. (2010, August 06). 10 Ways to Solve the Jobs Problem. Retrieved February 03, 2012, from YES! Magazine Web site: http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/a-resilient-community/10-ways-to-solve-the-jobs-problem. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons License


You won’t see any commercial ads in YES!, in print or on this website.
That means, we rely on support from our readers.

||   SUBSCRIBE    ||   GIVE A GIFT   ||   DONATE   ||
Independent. Nonprofit. Subscriber-supported.




Reader Comments

Regarding #7

Posted by Gunter Pfaff at Sep 02, 2010 02:56 PM
We not only need more smaller businesses but more smaller food producers. When we were making tempeh on our small organic farm in MI years ago, our competition was trucked in frozen both from the east coast and the west coast. We would also like to see more worker owned shops that work together to get greater stability in the market place. People would be more motivated, customers would get to know you and you could create a brand by cooperation and save money by doing some things with bulk purchases......www.makethebesttempeh.org

Idea for Summit

Posted by d. at Sep 05, 2010 07:16 PM
I had a good idea I thought to enable the green ideas to take hold in politics by increasing the vote through a party called The Tolerance Party but someone rejected it told me they were not interested. The Party would have been a multi religious one also including the idea of stopping Global Warming and tolerance for marxism and other forms of socialism and also tolerance for citizens who did recreational drugs becauseto criminilize such behavior infringes in liberties.
They party would also be for Tidal Power worker owned power stations.

I thought since people complained in an opninion piece about other parties like The Liberal Partt they would respond well to the suggestion.


Reduced Work Hours

Posted by Alyssa Johnson at Sep 02, 2010 05:49 PM
Some links from John de Graaf on that note:

Work Less So All Can Work, John on Uprising Radio Show: http://uprisingradio.org/home/?p=15457

Working Shorter Hours 'Protects Climate, Job Market' on EurActiv.com: http://www.euractiv.com/en/[…]mate-job-market-news-497346

And more from Juliet Schor's blog:
http://www.julietschor.org/[…]/

We're subsidising advertising?

Posted by Jeanmarie at Sep 02, 2010 09:06 PM
LOVED this article. #9 took me a little by surprise. We're subsidizing advertising? How's that? I always thought advertising was subsidizing broadcast TV and most magazines, but are there advertising tax breaks or something? Never heard of this.

Subsidizing advertising

Posted by Fran Korten at Sep 02, 2010 11:18 PM
Jeanmarie - glad you liked the list. Regarding your question on #9, advertising is deductible as a business expense, and hence reduces a firms profit and its tax liability. So that's the tax break that firms get for advertising. Thanks for asking. Fran

subsidizing advertising

Posted by Jeanmarie at Sep 03, 2010 12:32 PM
Thanks for the clarification, Fran.

That's not very logical

Posted by Andrew Jones at Sep 29, 2010 10:10 PM
Advertising *is* a business expense, just like expenditure on factories, transportation, workforce, etc. Money spent on advertising is money that doesn't get paid out as profits, and since we choose to tax business profits (not, for example, revenue) we shouldn't tax advertising as if it were profits. This is pretty basic stuff that you're getting wrong, if your underlying argument is sound, why back it up with untruths such as this?

more....

Posted by Jac at Sep 02, 2010 10:37 PM
people who think these things are better and are willing to change themselves and their lives for them

joblessness

Posted by Miki Wright at Sep 03, 2010 04:59 AM
Mandatory 4 day work weeks and mandatory vacations. No more working one person half to death to do a job. Hire two people instead to cover the hours.

Job Sharing

Posted by David Kendall at Dec 11, 2010 10:24 PM
I tend to agree. But it's reasonable to assume that splitting the job also means splitting the income. If this is true, then job-sharing is not a viable approach in today's economy.

The best solution for this problem is probably a Basic Income Guarantee for every citizen regardless of employment status. This "leisure dividend" is not government subsidized sloth, as many seem to assume. It is perfectly justifiable pay for non-market activities that are at least as essential as any market activity, aka "employment".

Such non-market activities include job sharing (as mentioned above), involuntary unemployment, child-rearing, continuing education, retirement and being disabled. Note that I didn't say "caring for the disabled" which is actually a market (employment) activity. Rather I said "being" disabled, which tends to be a lot more work than most people realize, and yet it is a non-market activity.

Having said all that, I'm not at all convinced that job-sharing is necessary in a world where repairing the wreckage of capitalism is easily a full-time job for every human being on the planet for at least the next century. But this estimate also assumes that communities throughout the world will begin now to eradicate unemployment on a large scale through the values and methods successfully implemented by the Mondragon cooperatives in Spain.

Since this is obviously not the case, my original time estimate can be extended by at least a couple more centuries and compounded by immeasurable strife before we arrive at either job-sharing or a Basic Income Guarantee.

All of the ideas in this article are good ones, and plenty of others could be added to the list. But I rarely hear these ideas discussed in association with cooperativism. Moreover, I rarely hear cooperativism discussed in association with eradicating unemployment. To transform the world and achieve social justice, all these disjointed movements must be interconnected to arrive at an organic whole.

10 Ways to Solve the Jobs Problem

Posted by Diane at Sep 03, 2010 08:21 AM
More public transit, fewer cars. It should probably be built systems like light rail since bus routes are too easy to change or eliminate. A permanent system would encourage development around stops or stations and, one hopes, reduce greenfield development.

Regarding Green Field if not town name

Posted by d,m. at Sep 14, 2010 06:22 PM
I note a field was dug up to create a space for a new school in a place which had enough already and this happened around the time accusations of vandalism were made against two people in relation to an older school in another direction.
A recent article in the news claimed someone called The South Port vandal vandalized that area again. I note that this is a town with a Wal-Mart and a mall and that in south port there were many empty store fronts so wondered who was left to complain. I also did not see much damage there.

Advertising itself is not the problem

Posted by ricki at Sep 03, 2010 11:56 AM
My friends in the advertising business are some of those losing their jobs and homes. There is advertising for good products and bad. Educating people about all of your great suggestions through an ad is not, in itself, a bad thing. Companies need regulation to stop them from doing harm, and incentive to do good, and good advertising will follow.

Marketing

Posted by Skipster at Sep 03, 2010 02:46 PM
A more appropriate alternative would be to put a cap on the amount a company's advertising budget can be deducted. Tie it to a percentage of profits. Progressive companies benefit from these tax deductions as much as the Nike and Coca Cola's.

advertising

Posted by Jake's mom at Sep 07, 2010 09:59 AM
I agree with your comments about advertising...in itself it's not a bad thing. I's a way for a business to communicate their service/product. And it's trading money for good and services that stimulates the economy. When that stops,the economy stalls and takes a nose dive

3 main ideas missing

Posted by H Titan at Sep 03, 2010 02:43 PM
1. More 'MADE IN USA' production, less globalization. Use trade tariffs to equate foreign labor costs with domestic labor costs. This still encourages better made foreign products to compete in the US market. All "free trade" agreements have resulted in trade imbalances against America and in favor of low labor cost, low environmental protection countries and the multi-national companies that employ those workers.

2. More domestic spending, less defense spending (the offense part). New stimulus spending should exclusively use US products and services, unlike the previous stimulus spending bills.

3. More regulation and competition, less corporate bailouts. The US government can take the lead of other nations and compete directly in health care markets (e.g. Medicare buy-in option) and credit markets (e.g. direct mortgages from Fannie Mae, SBA loans, Sallie Mae student lending etc.) and a federally run network of gas stations (like PetroCanada in Canada). Federal deficits, what deficits? Austerity programs? Who needs them?

Agreed, but avoid exploitation!

Posted by Aria DiSalvo at Sep 09, 2010 08:14 AM
I think your three points are valid ideas we should move on, in addition to the article's. I feel honored to work in a small company that values locally-made products and promotes job creation for our neighbors. I look forward to the day where I can easily make purchases beyond food, homegoods, (and custom merch! www.ethixmerch.com), and trust the sources.

But a word of caution to all the "Made in USA" proponents- just because something is made here, labor rights and environmental standards are not guaranteed. We need unions, eco justice groups, and other NGOs to be a part of this conversation.

We also need to not forget our neighbors in the Global South, whose lives we have disrupted through our government's policies. How can we also support those internationally, while we work to sort out solutions here? And what can we learn from those who have faced recessions far worse than ours, to help us simplify what we think we need?

3 Missing Ideas

Posted by Mike McGrath at Sep 14, 2010 10:48 AM
More 'MADE IN USA' production, through the use of trade tarrifs is a morally bankrupt idea. On the one hand you condemn Wall Street, which I agree with and then you try to prop up one of the the richest societies in the world by shutting out those that are struggling most. Are people from India, Pakistan Sri Lank and China not worthy of the same lifestyle as you? The US uses more none renewable energy per unit of output and gives more to the mega rich for every unit of output than almost any other country in the world. So why structure a system to reward this? Equate foreign labor costs with domestic labor costs, are you kidding me? Equate American labor costs with the poorest countries.. by giving these excesses away. Structure for the benefit of the poorest- YES- but the poorest are not Americans. This sounds like the greedy saying GIVE ME MORE CAKE Mlti-national companies that employ the poorest of the world are in their own greedy way righting a serious wrong! Or is there something I don't understand? Where is my logic wrong? I look forward to your thoughts.. basically I like a lot of your thought but this one seems awfully me centric

3 main ideas missing

Posted by H Titan at Sep 14, 2010 12:04 PM
"Equate foreign labor costs with domestic labor costs, are you kidding me? Equate American labor costs with the poorest countries.. by giving these excesses away." -- Mike McGrath

Somehow Mike did not get what trade tarrifs are. If a poorer country can produce a product at 10 cents on the dollar as compared to American production, then a trade tarrif is assessed via customs tax of 90 cents if an American is buying a foreign product. This 90 cents goes to the US government and help pay for education and infrastructure and are not "given away". If this trade tarrif is established, the production costs will become the same in both countries. All companies worldwide (including US companies) would compete on a level playing field for the American consumer. The company with the better product may start to gain market share in the US. Think Toyota, Honda, BMW in its early days. Without this tarrif, the countries with the lowest labor cost win market share by producing the same goods at lower costs than American companies. To facilitate globalization, the US has signed onto GATT and WTO agreements which forbid these kinds of trade tariffs. If you support ongoing job loss in America you will support the current little/no tarrif system.

Paul Craig Roberts has a book out called "How the Economy was Lost", see http://www.easycartsecure.com/[…]/CounterPunch_Books.html

Also please note that stimulus packages are not triggering long term economic growth in the US as was hoped by the POTUS and instead fizzled out when the money ran out as was anticipated by many economists.

Almost all office work in the US can be offshored to find cheaper labor.

Undermining Globalization

Posted by Tom at Dec 11, 2010 01:37 PM
I understand your concern re: treatment of foreign workers. But why not let the ball drop on the globalization of cheap labor and lower environmental, safety and health regulations. If such firms can't "export" as much perhaps local workers and investors can take over manufacturing and let the workers in the Phillipines, El Salvador and the hundreds of countries where corporate labor and tax dodgers - have fled take over the businesses which have only sought to exploit them. Then they too can produce goods for their own countries while undermining the conniving corporate types.

Spent Income Tax Credit

Posted by Skipster at Sep 03, 2010 02:52 PM
Instead of just an Earned Income Tax Credit...reward income earners for purchasing local, "Made In America" products by creating a Spent Income Tax Credit.

Self-sufficiency

Posted by Eco Author Christopher Eldridge at Sep 03, 2010 06:53 PM
Working at home is not only the key to both, but also the key method of super-disaster preparedness. We need larger communal type homes with sub-industrial metal and wood shops, craft and project rooms too. Being much more self sufficient is the key not to mention having accomodations that can help a friend that just lost their job!

Fran's article

Posted by Wilma Howe-Bennett at Sep 04, 2010 04:03 AM
In regards to Solution #1: Check out the INCREDIBLE EDIBLE NEWS - Todmorden. This is a completely green village in England. If these people can do this and make it work as well as it does, why can't the US do the same thing?

10 ways to solve the job problem

Posted by Elizabeth Bernier at Sep 04, 2010 05:22 AM
Implement the ideas for new "earthing' industries that will contribute to the health and well-being of all on the planet.
See chapter 16 in the book "Earthing" by Clint Ober, Dr. Stephen Sinatra and Martin Zucker.
See also:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18047442
and:
http://www.spacedoc.net/Ear[…]ant_Health_Discovery_Ever_1

The jobs problem

Posted by Steve Nybo at Sep 04, 2010 10:02 AM
The jobs problem will never be solved until the banks feel confident enough to loan money to the little businesses of America. They are confident enough to do that the Government spending spree will be over, people will have gradually gone back to work, some of these unbelievable taxes will be gone, and the whole thing will move forward. There will be new things having success and old things dying out. All these ideas will work sorta. The whole deal has to get past this burp after burp after burp. Hopefully we don't throw up our cookies then we really got a bad time to survive. I don't think that is in the future but the part about everybody getting over this distrust of the bad things that might happen is going to guarantee bad things are going to continue and until we gradually get over it. No way out but working at it dead ahead. Smile, put on your best attitude, roll up your sleeves an get your head out of the sand. It is uphill and against a cold North wind. Or something like that.

10 ways etc.

Posted by jim steeves at Sep 04, 2010 11:59 AM
All very good ideas. Now stop big rigs driving coast-to-coast or perhaps even intra-state. Use railroads for long haul and trucks from rail terminals to final destination. SAVE: Highways and stop cheating by drivers who have two sets of books and enormous fuel costs compared to using rail.
Also, tax ALL goods coming into this country even from U.S. firms located in cheap-labor and low or no environmental laws countries. No economic benefit from relocating overseas so keep the jobs right here where the consumers are.
Many more but this would be a good start.

10 Ways a railroad

Posted by Mike McGrath at Sep 14, 2010 11:00 AM
Yes lets hip more by rail. It certainly seems more energy efficient. BUT
Tax ALL goods coming into this country even from U.S. firms located in cheap-labor countries --- why, these countries are starving. It sounds like an awfully ME- centric philosophy. Are the starving in other parts of the world not as entitled to eat as you? "Keep the jobs right here where the consumers are.... maybe a little self scrifice and a slowdown in Americas rampant consumerism is exactly what the world needs-- I would rather feed a thousand than buy another made in America shiny new car built on some of the highest "real cost" assembly lines in the world. What am I not understanding? I see wisdom in one part of your response and ME - CENTRICITY in the other. Is my thinking equally flawed??
Many more but this would be a good start.

Local Complementary Currencies

Posted by Ben Mates at Sep 04, 2010 01:19 PM
Creating local complementary currencies could allow us to see and tap into the wealth of resources and creativity that already exists within our local communities. It would stimulate people to create and offer things of value (goods or services) to others in their community - offerings that are often precluded in a global marketplace of national currencies. It would decentralize political and economic power, make us aware of and responsible for the impacts of our use of resources on living systems, and create and strengthen healthy relationships - all while meeting many, most, or even all of our human needs.

In addition to local currencies.

Posted by d,m. at Sep 14, 2010 06:31 PM
Consider also ideas about how something called The Tolerance Party and Unions can help build on your idea or create space for it among others like envinronmentalism,Go Local , and co ops and socialism which means community helps by a co op type structure worker owned and health care paid in similar fashion.
Voice of fsrmers also heard. Also consider National Film Board or filmaking to help this along. You could have already had similar thoughts and if so in addition United Nations Charter for intercontinental vote can be an addition.
Seeing the news you might have ideas something to keep peace required

10 ways by Fran Korten

Posted by Patti G. at Sep 04, 2010 02:01 PM
Great article to have and items to work on. Thank you Fran Korten.

2 more ways

Posted by Auntie Sam at Sep 06, 2010 02:00 PM
Here are two more:

1) Stop subsidizing outsourcing of jobs overseas. Run call centers here. Renovate our closed factories and move production back home too.
2) Convert Detroit car factories to manufacture green power equipment, and light rail. We don't need more cars, but we do need to construct our own solar cells, wind turbines, and mass transit cars.

About that #9 ...

Posted by Sarah McUmber-House at Sep 07, 2010 10:49 AM
There is a difference, or at least there should be, between 'advertising' and 'marketing'.

Advertising is about offering your product or service, in honest and clear terms, so that those seeking it can find you. "See a need. Fill a need". It is a step 'up' from word of mouth, and still requires that you actually deliver as promised, or you don't sell more.

Marketing is a different animal - it's capitalism, pure and simple - all about making people *think* they need what you are selling, so you can *sell* more than you would be able to by relying on actual need. It leads to cutting costs to allow you to minimally fulfill your obligation while raising the price to the highest that the public will tolerate, including built in obsolescence and very short warranty periods, if at all. It moves jobs to the cheapest labor locales, and takes every advantage it can to keep from paying taxes and decent wages. It is about making the most money right now, for the investors and the top managerial positions, and the hell with the future, the people and environment. It uses up and wastes natural resources, and involves no actual investment in community.

New Economy

Posted by Naomi at Sep 07, 2010 12:29 PM
All the ideas for building a more local economy are ones I agree with. But, I also think that we should consider learnig again to sew, grow our own food, (in part, anyway) and carpentry.

With an economy build up around cheap oil... we have all become so utterly dependant on corporations for everything, thereby becoming very helpless in the process. Not to mention to near disappearance of a true sense of community along the way!

We should look back to the days when people did so munch for themselves and each other... and draw inspiration from that. I see the beginnings of a return to these more self-sufficent ways. But think we need to increase the momentum in that direction.

Re-building a more localized economy will also create lots of small businesses doing work and creating jobs IN their own communities that won't ever be "out-sourced".

mixed use property

Posted by layer at Sep 07, 2010 01:48 PM
with the crack down on mortgage lending it has become nearly impossible to get a loan on a mixed use property, especially if zoned commercial, but in terms of creating rich, diverse and local community experiences mixed-use units are a huge step in the right direction. making loans more available for mixed-use would help encourage small businesses owned and run by people in the neighborhood and support potential entrepreneurs who don't want to have to choose between owning a home and opening a business.

Creating sustainable employment for life

Posted by Karen at Sep 11, 2010 01:29 PM
Fran, this is an absolutely brilliant article, full of the most positive ideas.
I have been gathering positive ideas and concepts for many years because as a futurist together with my husband who is a retired senior economist (who doesn't think the old system has any merit) we felt that there would come a time when people would need alternative new, more sustainable ways to live and exist.
Our book "AlterQuest" is full of a myriad of practical, new, innovative ideas for life in the 21st century. We have gathered concepts which have been used successfully to make life better for people in communities all over the world. This is positive and inspiring and makes you realize that there are better ways to live on planet Earth.
We have also make the AlterQuest network www.alterquest.org which encourages folks all over the planet to come together to create a global think tank of regular people so they can use their creativity and knowledge to come up with even more methods of thriving into the next millennium.

Here are some ideas in our book:

www.fairtrade.net Fair trade for local producers which cuts out the middlemen.

www.ithacahours.com A community monetary system, used to create jobs and keep the money local.

CSA. Community pays farmers to grow food in return for a supply of produce. www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/csa/ started in Japan. Consumers give farmers funds to allow them to keep farming then the shareholders get compensated with weekly food.

Start a farmer investment scheme. Here local people can pay a portion to a farmer so he can have enough money to buy the seeds and produce the crops for the next season. This way, you pay him, he grows the food which you need and then he repays you with a package of fruit, vegetables, meat, eggs and milk each week. This system is already in use in other countries and is a win-win situation. www.umass.edu/umext/csa/about.html
 

Efficiency and jobs

Posted by Auntiegrav at Sep 13, 2010 06:50 PM
People don't need jobs. They need food, clothing and shelter. Once those needs are met, they need to relax and live well. Great suggestions above, and I only want to add these points:
1. If it's a "job", it isn't green. Living in a sustainable way that gives back more than we take from the universe (net usefulness) can't work if someone is making a "job" for you from exploiting resources at a "profit".
2. Someone recently said (I forgot where I read it), "The best human efficiency device has already been invented; it's called a town."
The town needs to be the center of any discussion of humans being useful to their own future and the future of the planet. That IS what we are talking about, right? Humans being more useful than consumptive? Oh, I thought that was the point of life.

Tax fairness

Posted by Auntiegrav at Sep 13, 2010 06:57 PM
The decisions people make about their future take place mostly at one place: the cash register.
All taxes should be sales taxes so that the true cost of consumption is reflected where people can change their behavior.
I suggest adopting the FairTax plan ( http://www.fairtax.org ), and raise the rate until the air is clean. A prebate makes it progressive.
Read up.
Sales taxes are a lot more progressive than a dead planet, and eliminating the tax cheat code as a business method would do wonders for many of the things above. Relocalization is the FAILURE mode of sales taxes (black market). The success mode is described above.

Rebuild the railroads

Posted by Elanne Kresser at Sep 13, 2010 08:17 PM
Rail is the most efficient form of transportation and it's beautiful and romantic to boot. Subsidize the railroads, and put people to work rebuilding North America's rail transportation system. Stop the mad carbon footprint of generating air miles.

more urban agriculture less trucks

Posted by Sabra marcroft at Sep 14, 2010 01:16 AM
The banks don't care how little the foreclosed houses go for at auction. They are getting paid the full value of the mortgage. Get together with others, fundraise and buy a house with lots of gardening room for cash. Turn it into a neighborhood farm and community center. You can run the farm community garden style, or hire a farmer. Income from the farm can be used to pay back the investment, shared among the participants, or some combination of the two.

local business

Posted by deborah barnes at Sep 14, 2010 08:21 AM
We need a way to pool our resources, money and talent in order to start up these new local businesses. Like co-op and biz partner networking/brainstorming and actualizing "means" within communities in order to buy the properties and get these new ideas up and running. Relying on the established infrastructure will not yield the results we need now.(interest rates and investment returns that exploit rather than nurture) A new economy must be based on socially just, environmentally sound businesses that are economically viable and the service and/or product should be useful, ie will enhance, enable, educate or open up the new paradigm. We need new paths in order to compete with the old biz as usual blockade.
Self reliance and skill building are good, but our social lives need to broaden and expand in order to develop communities. Eco systems are about relationships after all! To play on with that metaphor - bio diversity is good in nature and so diversity is good in businesses and small biz and entrepreneurs rock with that!!!.

green jobs

Posted by Paul Glover at Sep 15, 2010 06:21 AM
I've written the book Green Jobs Philly, which emphasizes grassroots neighborhood action that lowers living costs, employs neighbors to build and install simple technologies, while cleaning water and air.

http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/paul5gloveratyahoodotcom

Bottom line: stop acting like the world is disposable.

Posted by david at Sep 24, 2010 06:12 AM
Almost every item on the list is about our commitment to a disposable world. We got spoiled and lazy and somewhere got convinced that it's unacceptable to use an item more than once.

When the mindset changes to CELEBRATE (and maybe reward?) care, maintenance, and quality products that are built to last... we will once again be in balance.

More education .... less advertising

Posted by Reenie at Sep 27, 2010 03:04 PM
What sort of education? Do you mean consumer education about the products/stuff being bought and used? Who will do it? The info on, say, Comet Cleanser, and how it releases 146 polluting particulates, is found on the Environmental Working Group Website. But not everyone goes there. Plus, do the users of Comet know that it contains 7 ingredients I believe that are known toxic/carcinogenic. There's so much the average buyer isn't aware of; how many products, like the popular plug in air fresheners which contains toxic dichlorobenzene, liquid hand cleaners which commonly contain a pesticide which gives it it's antibacterial properties, and even so called healthy toothpastes sold in health food stores which contain sodium lauryl sulfate...an ingredient used to clean grease off garage floors. Goodness, I have done a lot of research over the years, and tried to share it without sounding like a crazy alarmist. Each product that we love and regularly use should be researched by you or hire someone to do it. There is little regulation in the US about what goes into the stuff we use. Did you know that computers sold in EU no longer contain lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium. Not allowed there. But it's currently ok to have them in computer sold in US (see EXPOSED a book by Mark Shapiro). Or read ECOLOGICAL INTELLIGENCE by Danial Goleman. Wondering why not to use bleach? Read PANDORA's POISONS by Dr. Joe Thornton. Or for information on endocrine system disruptors (such as BPA in those slick paper cash receipts) read OUR STOLEN FUTURE by Theo Colborn. There's a lot of good facts out there by reliable sources. It takes time to read them and understand why living a SIMPLE life is best.

Many hands, less overtime

Posted by Joe B at Oct 13, 2010 06:43 AM
  A change I would suggest is a mandatory 32 hour work week maximum. Overtime required at a minimum double time after 32 hours, as a pointed incentive to get more people sharing in the pie. Repeal laws allowing salaried positions with no time constraints. Since unemployment is really running about 20% to 25% and we really don't need more people making more stuff. Reducing the work week and spreading the available work across more people would spread the stuff across more people.
  I see the current economic issues as one of distribution and sharing, not growth. As noted by David Korten in his interview, we have quite enough wealth as measured by actual stuff. The real issue is how do we enter into a system that gets the stuff to a legitimate human need rather than an ephemeral want or some type of counter productive make work. All of Fran's suggestions skirt around the issue by suggesting people change what they do when they go about dealing with stuff rather than how we go about dealing with each other. Many of the other articles do address this basic issue of dealing with each other rather than with stuff. I'm surprised Fran's does not.
  I'm not sure this makes sense, so just leave it at my suggesting the adage that "many hands make light work" rather than "few hands with all the work make for a disfunctional unhappy wealthy few". The articles in the issue did this well.

my thesis on sustainable economies

Posted by Natstar at Oct 19, 2010 03:26 PM
Greetings lively discussants

I love the 10 Ways that Fran has shared with us and I will use them in my thesis research for my MA in Environmental Education and Communication.

Genuine sustainability (or Transition's "resilience") requires a consideration of new social and economic structures before we can authentically address the ecological aspect. So...

For my thesis research in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada I intend to host community dialogue events (World Cafes) at a community college. We will envision a socially and economically sustainable city and work backwards to see what jobs would have to exist and how we could support their start-up. As it stands many careers that are needed for sustainability aren't economically viable. Through co-operative efforts and finding unconventional allies (such as the school's marketing students) we may come up with some solutions.

I'm tired of the "green" talk and am ready to engage more people in holistic dialogue for realistic action. Sustainability means a richer, better life and closer knit communities, doesn't it?

Natstar

Population stabilization

Posted by Rhett Zyla at Nov 08, 2010 10:56 AM
All the points mentioned by Fran Korten are notable, in addition to many of the reader-submitted comments. One point that is missing in Korten's article (and absent from others’ comments) is population stabilization.

The concept of population stabilization is, unfortunately, a topic most desire to avoid openly discussing. Population growth constantly pushes the consequences of any level of individual consumption to a higher plateau, and reductions in individual consumption can always be overwhelmed by increases in population. The net effect is that overall resource use continues its upward climb. Historically, the United States has added some 3 million denizens per year to its roster.

Even with technology assisting to accommodate more people, at what cost does the technology come? Genetically modified foods; massive use of pesticides; continued food imports (from countries that clear tropical forests to grow commodities that we (Americans) consume; increasing oil and commodity imports. If that is not all enough to consider, do we want our children living among a new “China” - America with a population of nearly one billion individuals by the end of the century?

I’m advocating for common sense on the part of the American government and the people to recognize that the combination of high immigration and high domestic birth rate is unsustainable for the survival of this nation. Unfortunately, the desire for “economic growth” – the apparent road to personal happiness – and the continued expansion in commodities production, consumption (and discarding) resonates to this day. Moreover, this economic growth is perceived to require more workers to support the vast numbers of retiring baby boomers. At some point, we will have to bite the population stabilization bullet, preferably sooner, rather than later. If we don’t do this, nature, in some malevolent manner, will do it for us.

economics

Posted by harriet cooke at Nov 23, 2010 06:17 PM
Seems one of the major issues is enough currency to fund public sector work needs and the work that non-profit organizations are doing to fulfill services for the common good.
    How about instead of banks being the only currency makers, that we create a state level public health financial agency (bank) that creates local currencies in exchange for necessary services? Currently new currency is created for new business with the creation of debt. Why not create currency without debt? Currency that could be used to pay state taxes, utilities, state school fees, food, rent, mortgages and any local business that values state industry?
   

Job Creators

Posted by Tom at Dec 11, 2010 01:45 PM
But don't forget the need to re-build the infrastructure of the country. Finding investment and funding to manufacture and build the growing number of proposed high-speed rail system projects around the country is a job-creator of the nth degree. So what if the Republican governors of Ohio and Wisconsin don't want the money (NYT-a couple weeks after the election). Federal funding can and already is being re-distributed to governors and states with foresight.

realistic

Posted by Hanna McCown at Jan 25, 2011 03:42 PM
this sounds totally realistic to me and absolutely wonderful. You should be in charge. It is common sense approach. But then I'm a dreamer. I'd be totally on board and right beside you. For now I'm just starting right where I am here at home and in my community.

realistic

Posted by Fran Korten at Mar 30, 2011 05:17 PM
Hanna -- thanks for your enthusiasm. And you are so right--the place to start is in your community. As we link up communities that have a new vision, we gain momentum, and then the politicians can leap in front of our parade and help us change the rules so it all becomes easier. Go, girl!

People Who Love YES! Find Out Why... Subscribe Today

Personal tools