My Beauty Best Teacher

From Spiegel Online- Prostitutes Offer Free Climate Summit Sex:

Copenhagen's city council sent postcards out to 160 Copenhagen hotels urging guests and delegates to the UN Climate Summit to 'Be sustainable - don't buy sex'.

In response, Copenhagen prostitutes are up in arms, saying that the council has no business meddling in their affairs. They have offered free sex to anyone who can produce one of the offending postcards and show their Summit identity card, as a way to reward those who disobey the city council.

Let me state for the record that I do not in any way approve of prostitutes or frequent prostitutes. That being said, I don't understand the position of the Copenhagen city council- why is buying sex not sustainable? Sex is a renewable resource. When two people engage in it, it does not create a large carbon footprint. By paying for sex, money is transferred to poor and young people in society, which is usually what is meant by being 'sustainable.' It is a natural way to heat up the night without burning any sort of fuels. In every way that I can think of, it seems sustainable. Am I missing something?

What I also want to know is if the postcards that were mailed to the guests were printed on recycled paper and whether or not they were carried by environmentally friendly birds, or whether they were heavy glossy affairs sent around the world by gas-guzzling jets.

Also, why is this a problem now? Is frequent visits to prostitutes not a problem when conservative, Republican, libertarian, or right-wing groups visit Copenhagen? Or is there a considerable and noticeable uptick in business only when liberal, leftist, global warming believers arrive? It's odd- why would a postcard like that go out unless it this particular group was perceived as being a particular problem.

I guess these questions will have to remain unanswered, much like the larger question about whether or not the Earth is warming or not.

From Lindiwe Majele Sibanda in the Guardian:

Farming First calls on world leaders to take action by developing a locally sustainable value chain for global agriculture. It emphasizes the need for knowledge networks and policies centred on helping subsistence farmers to become small-scale entrepreneurs, and it proposes six interlinked imperatives for sustainable agriculture: safeguarding natural resources, sharing knowledge, building local access, protecting harvests, enabling access to markets and prioritising research imperatives...[continue reading]Watch related videos here

My WTU executive board colleague, Erich Martel (teacher @ Wilson SHS) sent me a copy of AFT President Randi Weingarten's editorial in the WaPo yesterday. Randi makes some key points on improving DC Schools. Key amongst her recommendations are the need for collaboration- (sound familiar), teacher mentoring, solid professional development, support and respect in the workplace, strong discipline and a rich curriculum, etc. Those of us involved in our local unions are often accused of not proposing solutions for reform which just isn't true. Certainly public schools and teachers unions can work collaboratively in the best interests of students and teachers. Montgomery County public schools works collaboratively with their teachers' union which by the way initiated teacher peer assistance and review. Here's what Randi had to say in the December 22nd Post, page A20 "Improving DC's Public And Charter Schools":

"The District's public school system must refocus if it hopes to make real and sustainable educational changes ("A Union of Interests," editorial, and "Charter Schools Make Gains on Tests," front page, Dec. 15).

To improve teaching and learning, school leaders and teachers must work together in a supportive, respectful environment. It's worked in Montgomery County, where superintendent-union collaboration has led to sustained student achievement. In the District, several charter schools are seeing progress because of basic but essential programs that the American Federation of Teachers has promoted for years, including a strong discipline policy, a rich curriculum, after-school and Saturday classes, and modernized buildings.

Real education reform in Washington should be measured by what is being done to improve teaching and learning. Is there a substantive plan for a rigorous and rich education? Do teachers receive mentoring and solid professional development? Are the adult stakeholders working collaboratively to achieve sustainable reforms? Unfortunately, the discussion has devolved into one issue: teacher tenure. Let's have that discussion, but it's not the only topic worth discussing." (posted by The Washington Teacher).

RANDI WEINGARTEN
President
American Federation of Teachers
Washington

K.Y. Amoako commented on the need for sustainable job growth in Africa "...The creation of decent jobs that can be performed by poor people is the single most effective way to reduce poverty in Africa,' said...According to ECA, some 8 million jobs must be created each year to satisfy the growing number of job seekers..."

Faith And Sustainable Technologies combines appropriate technology and spirituality in its development approach.They:

Provide teaching and training of appropriate technologies including but not limited to:
a. Reducing deforestation by encouraging the use of solar energy and biogas.
b. Construction and use of slow sand filters and water purification techniques to reduce water borne diseases.
c. Construction, use and maintenance of low cost water pumps for irrigation.
d. Manufacture and use of compressed earth blocks to build permanent structures for
housing etc…
e. Use of bio-digesters and composting techniques as methods of waste management to reduce the spread of disease and improve crops.

Dambisa Moyo in the WSJ:

Few will deny that there is a clear moral imperative for humanitarian and charity-based aid to step in when necessary, such as during the 2004 tsunami in Asia. Nevertheless, it's worth reminding ourselves what emergency and charity-based aid can and cannot do. Aid-supported scholarships have certainly helped send African girls to school (never mind that they won't be able to find a job in their own countries once they have graduated). This kind of aid can provide band-aid solutions to alleviate immediate suffering, but by its very nature cannot be the platform for long-term sustainable growth...[continue reading]

Ferial Haffajee writes:

Increasingly we must realise that aid is not the answer -- or at least not all of the answer. There is no argument for immediate self-sufficiency. Not for the hungry people of Zimbabwe. Not for the displaced people of Darfur. Aid for humanitarian purposes is and will be necessary in Africa for the foreseeable future. But securing stability and sustainable wellbeing must come through other means.
What might those be? Fair trade and debt relief offer a far more sustainable path towards security and development...This will require much better terms of trade...If the barriers to entry into wealthy markets are lowered, investment could increase and employment could grow...In addition, our continent needs to harness its diaspora as India has done...Remittances should be leveraged: every year a whopping $100-billion is transferred by migrants to their home countries. In some areas, these remittances are paying a development dividend.

via YaleGlobal

Mutumwa Mawere recently addressed the Nigerian diaspora he stated:

...There are countless examples of African entrepreneurs and professionals who have substantial amounts of money in Africa but it is evident that the prosperity has not been democratized to the extent of creating an African ownership class able to take the continent’s majority into a new and dynamically positive direction underpinned by new values of work, combined with saving, investment and an ownership mentality. It is also important to underscore that there is a distinction between being “rich” and being “wealthy”.
Yes, some Africans have made money but because financial literacy and “platinum rights” was not stressed as much as a sense of public justice and civil rights were by our founding fathers and we did not keep it (the money) and we certainly we did not grow it.
Many have made money but no one has really taught us how to keep it in our communities.
Imagine, after 13 years of South Africa’s democratic dispensation, we still do not have a new mutual for blacks? No one taught us about financial literacy and the basic tenets of a free enterprise system that appears universally to capture the imagination of many progressive and successful nations.
The challenge of understanding the free-enterprise system and making it work for the majority of Africans has to become a core part of any conversation among Africans concerned about wealth creation and creating sustainable wealth addresses for Africans. Most of our wealth addresses are not assignable and transferable let alone from one African generation to the next.
Any successful nation building enterprise must necessarily be sustained by a healthy, robust and growing tax base and not foreign aid. Africa’s post colonial budgets still remain principally funded by bilateral and multilateral sources of finance.
Africa must create its own dominant class of very successful entrepreneurs, at all levels. We should have our own wealth builders and not become a continent specialized in distributing other people’s wealth.
As we approach the 47th birthday of Nigeria, we must focus on converting ourselves from cash economy customers into banking (our own banks), tenants into homeowners, small business dreamers into small, medium and large scale business owners, minimum wage workers into living wage workers, economically illiterate into economically empowered citizens.
Many of us are consumed with directionless conversations that are primarily focused on what governments can do for us and not what we can go for ourselves. We tend to be good at being against something and not for something.
Literacy can be a sustainable instrument for poverty eradication. They often say that when you know better, you tend to do better.
Any when Africans know better, I have no doubt that we can transform ourselves from islands of affluence to oceans of hope and prosperity. We have not invested much in literacy and integrated the literacy challenge in our post colonial agendas.

Any nation is as good as the interests that inform it. The only power we have as Africans in any field on endeavor whether it is in politics or the wealth game is the power to organize ourselves. One hand cannot clap but two hands can surely make a noise.
Why then is it the case that we have not been able to use our collective spent to our advantage? Many of our African governments have benefited from the financial illiteracy of Africa’s intellectuals. Africa has invested in human capital and yet such investment has not been able to provide any leadership on the bread and butter issues.
Surely, it is evident to all of us that any consolidation of our pain and opportunities can create a critical mass that is missing in action. Imagine if all Nigerians resident in South Africa could consolidate their mobile phone expenses into one pool, how much impact would they have in the South African economy.
Equally, if all Zimbabweans resident in South Africa chose to use one bank, how much would that bank be worth? Even the obvious things that Africa needs to do are not so obvious to our leaders.
I think it is self evident that the poor need the rich in as much as the rich need the poor. Can you imagine a nation of only poor people with the same means and possibilities? On the key ideological questions, we have heard many people argue that a free enterprise system is not suited for Africa and many of our governments in Africa have perfected the skill of creating ideological and theoretical entrepreneurs/bureaucrats without asking the question whether in fact if all the rich people were eliminated, Africa would be any better.
The post colonial experience has confused many of us to the extent that we are now looking for intelligent leaders to govern us when leadership may have little to do with intelligence. Even in a family, it would not be normal for all the children to be the same. Those who do well in one generation inspire the next generation to do better.

Is Africa’s future safe with a system where the state thinks for its citizens or where the citizens think for themselves and act in their own self interest? Many believe that governments (created by the same citizens) can and should be expected to lead the anti-poverty crusade and yet human history has not given us any good examples of governments acting in the interests of citizens who are not in government.

We must take ownership of our destinies and we must be the change that we want to see in the continent. No one else is going to do it for us. We must sell ourselves as worthy of investment and we must change our attitudes because in the final analysis, our attitude to wealth determines our altitude.

Anyone can make money in a growing economy than can be stolen in a decaying and dysfunctional system. If we look at Africa’s unmet needs, then we can appreciate the possibilities that exist in the continent and yet we think and act in a fragmented and confused manner. Those who should ordinarily lead appear to be visionless preferring to focus on yesterday (which is gone) and not on actions that create a better Africa.
Before we can think of creating an African pool of wealth, we need to understand the meaning of wealth. Wealth has come to mean an abundance of items of economic vale or the state of controlling or possessing such items and encompasses money, real estate and any personal property.
In many countries wealth is also measured by reference to access to essential services such as health care or the possession of crops or livestock. Accordingly, an individual who has accumulated wealth relative to others is often described as wealthy.
Therefore, wealth refers to some accumulation of resources. In light of the above, Africa is not recognized as a wealthy continent because of the inferior relationship between the majority of us and items of economic value. We are generally challenged in the resource accumulation enterprise...

photo courtesy of ZimDaily

At the African Executive Fred Kwoba writes:

There is no sustainable way to poverty reduction unless Africa widens the base of economic participants. When knowledgeable people speak of indigenous capital ownership as the sine qua non of sustainable development, they point to the right solution. I have in mind a specific new development paradigm, based on broad participation of the population in market driven economic activities. This paradigm is discussed thoroughly on DeniAfrica.com where it does not only postulate but provides a road map of how Africa can create millions of entrepreneurs and business asset owners and not just a handful of millionaires. The ingenuity of this concept, called Direct Expatriates Nationals Investment (DENI), is to widen the base of Africans participating in the revival and stimulation of their economies...[continue reading]

Related articles by Zemanta

• Unlocking Potential

Catherine A. Odora Hoppers asserts:

Africans need to move firmly towards acknowledging that knowledge primarily rests in people rather than in ICTs, databases or services, and thus that for Africa the challenge has to be that of how to build on local knowledge that exists in its people as a concomitant to working with global knowledge and information.
“As we survey the wreckage and note the unprecedented evacuation of billions of people from the arena of substantive innovation essential to their existence, we need to turn with force to the task of redefining key concepts such as ‘innovation’, its link with the goals of building sustainable societies and cognitive justice as key to the attainment of the long-term, and sustainable development,"...[continue reading]

Nubian Cheetah writes?

As great as the BOP is, it a little flawed in that it does not really address the most important issue in development: how can the poor make a sustainable living in emerging markets?...how can we enable the poor to generate income and make it a sustainable revenue stream?

Mauro de Lorenzo writes:

Entrepreneurial philanthropists provide credit and business education to small-scale entrepreneurs, mentor and finance small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), offer strategic advice to governments that want to improve the competitiveness of their exports and investment climates, and devise innovative ways to demonstrate "return on investment" in traditional philanthropic projects. They are entrepreneurial because they tend to believe that profitability and accountability are the best form of sustainable development and the best strategy for poverty reduction; they are philanthropists because they are private actors who do not themselves seek to make money from their efforts. Moreover, they have the potential to outflank often moribund development agencies and state-funded NGOs by demonstrating that enterprise solutions to poverty are possible, scalable, and sustainable...[continue reading]

The thought crossed my mind that Barack Obama's cabinet might be the worst collection of knaves ever assembled. Right now people are talking about how his choice for Treasury, a department that overseas the IRS, owes thousands in back taxes. Last week the conversation was about his choice for State, a department who is supposed to represent us overseas, is one of the louder proponents of the "United States sucks and is the root of all problems" theory. His choice for Energy is a guy who is going to focus on making less energy to combat so-called 'global warming.' Obama's nominee for Attorney General thinks the US is guilty of torture- thanks for that- and heck, there was even a rumor that he was considering Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm for Commerce Secretary (for those who don't get the irony of that, Michigan has had the worst commerce in the country for years, and it's getting worse). Talk about hiring the wolves to watch the hen house!

Then I did a little bit of research into Obama's nomination on his Labor Secretary, Representative Hilda L. Solis, a Democrat from the Union of Soviet California Republics. Apparently- surprise surprise- she's a communist!

An article this past weekend in the Communist Party USA's People's Weekly World Newspaper welcomed Solis and quoted known socialist leaders calling her a "great choice" and an "outstanding" selection with "a life-long commitment to working people."

This past June, Solis sent Elana Henry, a caseworker from Solis's East Los Angeles office, to represent her at a forum on worker's rights organized by Socialists International. Solis also reportedly sent a representative to a major event of the Communist Party USA.

The Communist Party's newspaper documents that on June 20, 1996, Solis sent Antonio Aguilar on her behalf to present an honoree at the Party's Southern California Friends of the People's Weekly World tribute.

So, the new labor secretary is going to pursue the communist agenda for our workers. If you still retain the capacity to be scared to your very bones for the future of our nation, that should do it (I'm numb with shock myself). Get ready for policies that encourage less production, government induced disasters, inhuman policies, and a generally suckier world to live in- that's change you can believe in, although I hope it doesn't happen.

Oh yeah, and Obama's personal pick for climate czar has socialist ties. I'm just going to quote the article from the Washington Times that I found, just to scare you-

Until last week, Carol M. Browner, President-elect Barack Obama's pick as global warming czar, was listed as one of 14 leaders of a socialist group's Commission for a Sustainable World Society, which calls for "global governance" and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change.

By Thursday, Mrs. Browner's name and biography had been removed from Socialist International's Web page, though a photo of her speaking June 30 to the group's congress in Greece was still available.

Socialist International, an umbrella group for many of the world's social democratic political parties such as Britain's Labor Party, says it supports socialism and is harshly critical of U.S. policies.

The group's Commission for a Sustainable World Society, the organization's action arm on climate change, says the developed world must reduce consumption and commit to binding and punitive limits on greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr. Obama, who has said action on climate change would be a priority in his administration, tapped Mrs. Browner last month to fill a new position as White House coordinator of climate and energy policies. The appointment does not need Senate confirmation.

Okay, how many things are just wrong about this? Socialist. Cover-up. Policies. No confirmation. Look, if she was a proud socialist that would be a different matter- but like Obama, she tries to hide her background so she can achieve her agenda through stealth. And why in the world would you appoint someone who wants the US to lower production, reduce consumption, and give power to world organizations to your cabinet? Is anyone taking bets on if the Constitution burns his hand when he swears in on it at inauguration?

By the way, since when did our nation need more czar's- doesn't someone who takes his name after imperial Russia run directly at odds with our tradition of a free country? I wrote about this before, when Obama said he was ready to rule us from day one, and it scared me then and scares me now. The irony is that Obama appoints a bunch of czars to rule us plebs, but on the other hand, hires a bunch of communists and socialists to do so, who worked to overthrow the czars, and then became the very people who replaced him. In Animal Farm, what did the pigs turn into again? I wrote about it once before. But I digress- my point is, Obama is going to be bad for our country not so much because of what he does, since his track record shows he does nothing, but because of who he chooses to associate himself with.

From Tradewinds:

Six thousand artisanal fishermen in Kayar, Senegal are fighting back against West Africa’s perilous trend toward depletion of fish and seafood stocks with an innovative system of community-based fisheries and environmental management. By establishing and enforcing catch limits, Kayar’s fisherman have increased profits, improved hygiene at landing and processing sites...[continue reading]

For further information take a look at the work of WASSDA which supports the sustainable development of the West African fisheries and seafood sector

From the The Karatara Project website "...Handouts and charity are NOT the solution for poverty and other problems in Africa - that’s been proven over and over.What Africa really needs is education and enterprise that transforms communities so that they believe in themselves and thrive through trade; not merely survive from aid. This project is all about teaching smart, ‘green’ sustainable wealth creation and profitable business.Africa’s wealth is already here, and we need to unlock it by bringing new thought leadership and truly sustainable enterprise to the people of Africa..."

Liberals, including those who have seized control of the modern-day Democratic Party, often talk fondly about China and its economic model. But what they fail to recognize about the economic model employed by China is  that it is inherently unsustainable because of its current methods of energy generation. Oh, I know many watermelons (people who pretend to care about the environment just to advance their statist communist desires) like to talk about China's wind power, nuclear power, solar power, or hydro-electric power, but in reality, the majority of China's energy production comes from coal.

Energy production from coal production does not have to be environmentally damaging or harmful to those who work in the industry. In nations like the United States, where there are clear property rights and freedom of labor, workers are treated better, the environment is better protected, and businesses are free to produce as much coal safely as possible in order to maximize profits. For example, there are only about 30 people killed per year in coal mining in the United States, and the United States has embraced clean coal technology which does a much better job of controlling emissions. The United States has made the difficult transition from energy generation to sustainable energy generation, and only needs to continue and expand its efforts in oil drilling, coal mining, and nuclear technology in order to become the cleanest and safest energy producer in the world.

Sadly, environmentalists in America have a different agenda. In their noble desire to make the world a better place, they are putting in place policies in America which force it and other nations to obtain energy from nations around the world that are producing energy in destructive, deadly ways. Rather than encouraging the expansion of safe, natural, and efficient methods of energy generation such as oil, coal, and nuclear, they are forcing America and nations that could be buying energy from America to turn to nations like China for energy generation and resources. And the end result of these environmentalists policies is a world that is less safe, less secure, and were more people die.

China currently generates around two thirds of its electricity from coal-fired power stations, and is the process of dramatically expanding its coal-fired capacity in recent years with the introduction of 562 new coal-fired plants- in fact, an average of two new plants were being opened every week. China uses this coal-production to satisfy its own energy needs and also export energy to other nations.

To sustain it economic growth and growing energy needs through coal power, China is paying a heavy price. Thousands of people die every year in coal pits, premature deaths due to indoor air pollution is at 420,000 per year, deaths due to outdoor air pollution is estimated at around 300,000 deaths per year, and rural populations in particular are suffering from a range of diseases related to coal production, including arsenic poisoning, skeletal fluorosis (over 10 million people afflicted in China), esophageal and lung cancers, and selenium poisoning. A report by the World Bank in cooperation with the Chinese government found that about 750,000 people die prematurely in China each year from air pollution.

China's economic model, which people like the head of the SEIU say should be the future of the United States, is unsustainable and killing its own people. It's model emphasizes state control of people and businesses and the de-humanizing of both. It is a model which stands in marked contrast to the economic model of the historical United States, a model which emphasizes little state control, more liberty given to people to make free economic choices, and strong individual and business property rights, and is a model that embraces the humanity of life. We can see the difference in the two models when we look at China's coal mining industry and electric power generation, and see the difference in the contrasting visions.

Elections have consequences- in the coming elections for US President, Senator, Representative, or even at the local level, ask yourself whether the candidate you support has a vision of the future that pushes for more state control over people's lives or less state control. Those who push for more state control will boast of the economic growth in nations like China- while ignoring the enormous cost in terms of human life and damage to the environment. Those who push for less state control over people's lives will point to the United States, which in contrast to those with state control have much better records on life, liberty, and wealth creation- although not perfect, because man is not perfect.

And for readers of my blog around the world, this applies to you as well- although China's economy is growing, there is a real cost to humanity for their growth, and in the end its statist economy will collapse like the Soviet Union's did. Only economic models that give more power to people and more freedom to individuals and more rights to businesses and corporations and individuals are successful in creating wealth in a sustainable manner while protecting life and liberty. You have a real choice to make in your nation too- state control for short term unequally distributed wealth, or less state control for longer term more equal distribution of life, liberty, and property.

For those who are interested in reading more about China and its coal production methods and coal-powered economy, I suggest you check out an article called China’s Dark Power.

Cosmos Education aims to inspire, empower, and engage young Kenyans in science education and to foster critical thinking that will serve as a life skill...We focus on science and technology education and the role of science and technology in health, the environment, and sustainable development. Our model is grassroots development from within; we want the youth in developing regions of the world to decide how their nations develop-organisation website

Jeffery Sachs contends that:

Proper risk management is critical to the farmers' well-being and their financial viability since it increases their creditworthiness and thus allows them to make investments in high-yield activities such as higher value-added farming (using fertilizer to plant their crops). Engaging in these activities greatly diminishes the likelihood that a farmer will fall into poverty.
Citing the success of other financial schemes like micro-finance in boosting the lives of destitute farmers, Sachs raises the concept of micro-insurance as an instrument to further the progress already made. Micro-insurance as he envisions it, unlike traditional crop insurance, would have the effect of improving the fortunes of both the farmers and the companies involved and carry little risk.

via TreeHugger

The good news about the budget for fiscal year of 2011 is that it did not set a record for the largest deficit ever. No, that record was set in 2009 at $1.412 trillion, when the Democrats who controlled Congress from 2006 passed a budget that lame-duck moderate Republican President Bush then signed into law- a budget that included the bank bailouts of a trillion dollars. 2011 was better than that awful year for governance- but only by a little bit, as the final deficit for fiscal year 2011 came in as the second highest deficit in the history of our nation, $1.299 trillion.

The Republicans are not blameless in this deficit- they have been in control of at least half of Congress since January of 2011, so they own most of this budget that resulted in the second highest single year deficit in the history of the United States- at a time when we're not fighting any new wars, not building any sort of major monuments, not engaged in any sort of national race for space or atomic bombs, and no longer passing massive stimulus bills and bank bailouts at the height of a major crisis. Nope, this 2011 deficit is just outright bad- just a lot of blown money and spending way beyond what is sustainable, and the GOP was party and parcel to this budget.

Oh, I know that they only control half of Congress and don't control the Presidency or the bureaucracy and walked into this mess- but if the GOP wants to blame Obama for the mess he has caused than it is only fair that they take a good share of the blame for the 2011 fiscal deficit. The 'budget deals' they signed into law were bad deals, and any GOP Congressman who stood to vote for those or who urged new spending programs should be held accountable.

Tea Party people, this doesn't mean that the GOP is just as bad as the Democrats or that there needs to be a third party- no, it means that the GOP must be held accountable in their primary elections by facing true conservative challenges and must be made to answer questions regarding their votes.

As must though as the GOP is not blameless for this utter disaster in governance, the Democrats are to be held in full blame for passing on these massive debts to our children and doing such a utter rotten job of managing money.

Democrats controlled the House of Representations from 2006 to 2010 (and apparently the fiscal year goes Oct-Oct, so they are to blame for the 2011 deficit from Oct-Jan), and controlled the Senate from 2006 to today so are to blame in full for the deficit of 2011. And US President Barack Obama is a Democrat and has been President since 2010, so shares blame for this as well.

The deficit in 2011 was $1.299 trillion.

The deficit in 2010 was $1.293 trillion.

The deficit in 2009 was $1.412 trillion.

The wrath of voters should fall on anyone part of this horrible mismanagement's in the ship of state, and since Bush and many of the Republicans from 2009 and prior are not on the ballot and it appears that their mistakes and bad policies have been continued and deepened and made normal by the Democrats, the wrath of voters should fall in full on the Democratic President, the Democrats in the Senate, and the big-spending GOPers and Democrats in the House who oversaw this travesty.