2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I, too, have wondered a lot about this.  Recently I ran across an interesting book (after reading an article by the author, David Schweikart,  in the WorldWatch magazine) called After Capitalism, in which he talks about a slightly different model for economic development which is not dependent on population growth (at least theoretically!), and I know that people like Herman Daly and Hazel Henderson are working on nongrowth models of economic development.  I think there are many others, but I haven't taken the time to track them down.  If we really provide full health care and economic equality for women, it appears that population growth would lessen pretty quickly, and that would seem to dictate the emergence of different economic models.  If we don't move against forced childbearing for women and for adequate healthcare for women and children, it would seem highly probable that death rates will rise dramatically and that will lead to some pretty severe economic outcomes.  Either way, economic models as we are currently opertating are pretty unsustainable!  It is a fascinating question academically--and a vital one for each of our lives! 

Hope Mr. Gore has some input on this!

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context

Dear Mr. Gore,

I am enormously appreciative of the work you have done to raise awareness of the facts about climate change and our urgent need to take action to moderate it. 

Your new book looks excellent from my first look through, and I am looking forward to reading it more thoroughly.  I was well impressed when I read "Earth in the Balance" and voted for Bill Clinton because he had the good sense to choose you for his vice president!

I would be interested in hearing from you a comparison of your approach with another outstanding presentation of actions needed to defend our world, "Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization" by Lester Brown, the eminent environmental scholar.  It seems to me that his books and yours complement each other well, with some interesting differences in emphasis.  You primarily emphasize climate change, with additional information on areas such as water, crop land, population, et al.  Lester Brown primarily emphasizes water, food, population, soils, and also the important interactions with climate change.  Anyone reading your book would surely appreciate Plan B, and vice versa, and I would be very interested in hearing your comments about similarities and differences in approach.  Clearly, both of you stand for facts and realities, rather than denial and ignorance, and neither of you receive any support from ExonMobil!

Thanks for your true patriotism and courage--for our country and our world!

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context