Apr 29 2011: I said IN MY CITY, 80% of landfill trash is construction waste. It was reported in the local paper about two months ago. If I remember correctly, it was in an interview with the chief trashman (whatever he is called!) I have no idea whether the statistic applies to other places.
Apr 28 2011: Tim: Surely one of the problems of government-run retirement plans is that they don't actually take the money and invest it, but rather rely on tomorrow's workers to generate enough cash to support today's workers when they become tomorrow's retirees. Only a small portion of the premiums paid for Canada Pension Plan are actually invested -- interestingly, mostly in real estate and the stock market. I don't know the US numbers, but here in Canada the system was developed at a time when there were 8 workers for every retiree. Today there are 3. In a decade there will be two. How sustainable will the system be then?
The people who do have good retirement packages are civil servants (indexed pension at about 60% of the average of their three best years), most unionized workers, and some large-company workers. With civil servants (including police and miltary) now representing (I believe) about 25% of the workforce, the same issue will apply, as their system is also unfunded. If inflation grows to anywhere near what it theoretically should given the recent spate of "quantitaive easing", we could have a time bomb on our hands.
Apr 28 2011: Is it possible that the education system might learn something here from business -- ie: the concept of continuous improvement, kaizen? Deming's philosophy was always that it really doesn't matter how well or poorly you did last month, the important thing is to analyze what you could have done better. For that reason he hated extrinsic motivators and targets (cf. tests in school?).
Apr 27 2011: Nobody has yet discovered or developed a more efficient way of transporting large amounts of potential energy in small volumes and weights than gasoline and diesel. Electric requires heavy batteries that are environmentally unfriendly, and hydrogen for fuel cells is dangerous and expensive. So my guess is that oil will become reserved for mobile applications (cars, trucks, ships, etc.) because it has the right properties, ever more plentiful natural gas will be used for stationary applications (electricity generation, home heating, factories, etc.), and fringe energy sources -- wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, etc -- will be used for point-of-use and small scale applications (home solar panels, community wind farms, and the like). This will be driven not by regulation but by market forces; as oil becomes harder to extract, its price will rise so it will be used only where it makes sense. As long as fracking becomes environmentally acceptable, the United States has over 100 years of available natural gas, and that is just from known reserves, so there is lots of time to refine alternative energy sources. Gas is easily transported through pipelines, so it makes sense to develop the infrastructure necessary for its more widespread use in static applications. But any time you try to use agricultural products for fuel, you screw up food production, either by diverting a food (corn, say) to fuel use (ethanol), or by, as Jonathan says, using land that could better be used for food growing.
Apr 27 2011: "When you "reuse" bags to pick up after your dog you are still throwing them away and adding doggie discharge in the landfill as well. You could use paper and dig a hole. If you do not have a place for the waste, you should not have the animal that generates it."
A plastic shopping bag is made from one small drop of liquid. It's contribution to the landfill is so small as to be irrelevant. (In my city, 80%+ of landfill trash is construction materials.) The dog poop inside the bag decomposes within a few days of the bag decomposing. The typical supermarket bag is already made with recycled plastic and starts to break down within about three months of burial. You can't use a paper bag because the plastic bag acts as both the glove for picking up and the container for what gets picked. Try that with a paper bag.
The focus of reduce-reuse-recycle nazis on supermarket bags is utterly misplaced. They are a trivial part of the problem. Banning them or charging a nickel apiece is just a way for meddlesome liberals to feel sanctimonious while avoiding the real problem.
BTW, you can burn plastic for fuel. I saw something recently. You'll have to Google it because I forget where I saw/read about it.
In my area, the sorting of recyclables is done by learning-disabled people. (Is that the PC phrase?)
Apr 27 2011: OK, but I'm not sure that inviting someone to speak is "promoting" their ideas or what they do. Without getting into whether we SHOULD have a military, if we do have one I would just as soon learn a little about what goes on in the minds of the people who lead it.
Ditto the Don, ditto the researcher, etc. I would probably have invited Hitler to speak.
Apr 27 2011: Interesting question with some good suggestions.
I have never had a particular problem implementing change in my life, whether it was emigrating to a new country or starting another business after the first one went phht. (My two biggest challenges were to stop biting my nails and to quit smoking!) Maybe some people just naturally find change easier. But one technique I have always used, no matter whether the upcoming change is big or small, is to visulaize myself AFTER the change has occurred. "I am an ex-smoker." "I used to bite my nails." "I used to work in a cubicle for somebody else." "I am an ex-Brit." And so on. Then I just stick with that thought until it becomes reality.
Apr 27 2011: Oh, Debra! You ask me not to "bother repeating (my) phrase", but here you go again sounding like a broken record, stating the same thing you have stated dozens of times before.
I accept that there are bad people out there. It makes no difference what 'system' we have, there will always be bad people out there. There will be people who break the law. There will be those who allow unfettered greed to guide their lives. There will be those who game the system. There will be those whose success comes at the expense of others. But why, oh why, do you assume that MOST people who have achieved any kind of financial success are like that?
I attended a series of courses at Harvard Business School that are targeted at people who already own and manage successful businesses. There were about 80 of us on the course, about two thirds from the US and the rest from areound the world. Of those 80, the overwhelming majority -- maybe all but two or perhaps three -- were extremely ethical, very concerned about social issues, and trying to build businesses honestly and morally, treating their own staff well, giving back to their communities, and totally aware of relevant issues around the world. Here where I live, I am friends with perhaps 15 or 20 people who would be regarded as affluent, and among them I don't recognize a single person who fits your mold of robber baron, or whatever term you are using today. Where do you get your cynical view that rich people are, by definition, responsible for poor people's fate?
I admire your concern for the world's underprivileged, and I am sure you do your share to try and improve their lot. But I just completely fail to grasp why you are so dead set against the system we have that has delivered unparalleled health and wealth to so many millions of people, while every other system in place in the world appears to have failed. Like any other thinking person, I don't believe our system is perfect, but let's fix it, not kill it.
TEDCred score: +12.10 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: How do we reduce single use and disposable plastics in our package, production and supply streams and move towards a sustainable world?.
A reply on Conversation: The role of government
The people who do have good retirement packages are civil servants (indexed pension at about 60% of the average of their three best years), most unionized workers, and some large-company workers. With civil servants (including police and miltary) now representing (I believe) about 25% of the workforce, the same issue will apply, as their system is also unfunded. If inflation grows to anywhere near what it theoretically should given the recent spate of "quantitaive easing", we could have a time bomb on our hands.
A reply on Conversation: How do we overcome the tendency to slip back into the old routine of life - and truly capture and ACT on the lessons in talks like this?
A comment on Conversation: Would having a variety of fuels for diffrent parts of society be a first step in our current oil crisis?
A reply on Conversation: How do we reduce single use and disposable plastics in our package, production and supply streams and move towards a sustainable world?.
A plastic shopping bag is made from one small drop of liquid. It's contribution to the landfill is so small as to be irrelevant. (In my city, 80%+ of landfill trash is construction materials.) The dog poop inside the bag decomposes within a few days of the bag decomposing. The typical supermarket bag is already made with recycled plastic and starts to break down within about three months of burial. You can't use a paper bag because the plastic bag acts as both the glove for picking up and the container for what gets picked. Try that with a paper bag.
The focus of reduce-reuse-recycle nazis on supermarket bags is utterly misplaced. They are a trivial part of the problem. Banning them or charging a nickel apiece is just a way for meddlesome liberals to feel sanctimonious while avoiding the real problem.
BTW, you can burn plastic for fuel. I saw something recently. You'll have to Google it because I forget where I saw/read about it.
In my area, the sorting of recyclables is done by learning-disabled people. (Is that the PC phrase?)
A reply on Conversation: TED should invite a Mafia Don as an example of a really radical leadership style managing change in a fast moving environment.
Ditto the Don, ditto the researcher, etc. I would probably have invited Hitler to speak.
A reply on Conversation: If capitalism is so evil, why are the most prosperous coutries on earth capitalistic? China's prosperity began when it adopted capitalism.
A comment on Conversation: How do we overcome the tendency to slip back into the old routine of life - and truly capture and ACT on the lessons in talks like this?
I have never had a particular problem implementing change in my life, whether it was emigrating to a new country or starting another business after the first one went phht. (My two biggest challenges were to stop biting my nails and to quit smoking!) Maybe some people just naturally find change easier. But one technique I have always used, no matter whether the upcoming change is big or small, is to visulaize myself AFTER the change has occurred. "I am an ex-smoker." "I used to bite my nails." "I used to work in a cubicle for somebody else." "I am an ex-Brit." And so on. Then I just stick with that thought until it becomes reality.
Works for me. I hope it helps someone else!
A reply on Conversation: Can/ should innate self-interest ever be overcome (by intellect, education, etc.)?
I accept that there are bad people out there. It makes no difference what 'system' we have, there will always be bad people out there. There will be people who break the law. There will be those who allow unfettered greed to guide their lives. There will be those who game the system. There will be those whose success comes at the expense of others. But why, oh why, do you assume that MOST people who have achieved any kind of financial success are like that?
I attended a series of courses at Harvard Business School that are targeted at people who already own and manage successful businesses. There were about 80 of us on the course, about two thirds from the US and the rest from areound the world. Of those 80, the overwhelming majority -- maybe all but two or perhaps three -- were extremely ethical, very concerned about social issues, and trying to build businesses honestly and morally, treating their own staff well, giving back to their communities, and totally aware of relevant issues around the world. Here where I live, I am friends with perhaps 15 or 20 people who would be regarded as affluent, and among them I don't recognize a single person who fits your mold of robber baron, or whatever term you are using today. Where do you get your cynical view that rich people are, by definition, responsible for poor people's fate?
I admire your concern for the world's underprivileged, and I am sure you do your share to try and improve their lot. But I just completely fail to grasp why you are so dead set against the system we have that has delivered unparalleled health and wealth to so many millions of people, while every other system in place in the world appears to have failed. Like any other thinking person, I don't believe our system is perfect, but let's fix it, not kill it.
A reply on Conversation: If capitalism is so evil, why are the most prosperous coutries on earth capitalistic? China's prosperity began when it adopted capitalism.