Jobs or Life

Recently I went to watch Ron Paul speak in front of the LBJ Library at the University of Texas at Austin. The first thing I noticed was another dumbass kid in uniform straight out of Basic Training talking politics in front of a camera and before I could stop him, there he went with his opinions and there his career went with them. Many outside of the military don’t know that as a solider, you are not allowed to have a political opinion because your boss is the Commander and Chief and it’s a conflict of interest. The ones that do have opinions, no longer have military careers. Although I am in complete agreement to bring all troops home as Ron Paul stated that evening, the last thing we need to do is decrease our military to non-existence.  There are already too many enemies of this country because of past actions made, that to not have a substantial military would put us all at risk.

I knew Ron Paul was a little out there and his ideas were a little extreme at times, but I didn’t realize that his Economic policies are in direct conflict with my Environmental Science beliefs and actions that I am taking to make the world a more sustainable place. Ron Paul is a free market idealist, and believes that government should stay out of big business and not have any restrictions. If we did that then it would expedite the process of global climate change, deforestation and toxins being pumped into the water. This would ultimately destroy the free market in which Ron Paul is fighting for because without resources, you have nothing to bring to the “market”. I feel that the government is already too blind to the problems the world is facing today and has put big business as a priority over human health. It’s not more or less government interference that is needed but intelligent politicians that don’t use policies to manipulate government actions to make a profit but fight for the sustainability of our entire race.

Bags, Bags, Everywhere

In the my news now blog titled “ban of the bags”, the author highlights the much heated discussion of plastic, single-use bags and how they will eventually be charged for in 2014 if consumers continue to use them in the future, in Austin. The author makes some good points and brings up a discussion that many did not know was a part of the equation, the waiving of fees of “banned bags” for low income residents on food assistance programs.

However, in quoting an article from the Austin American Statesman, the author failed to use a current article after the actual bag ban was passed in the early morning hours of March 2, 2012. In no current article does it discuss the waiving of the fee for those on food assistance programs. In fact, it was only after doing some research and visiting the Austin City Council’s website that I found the full details of the bag ban, which only exempts food pantries, not all those on food assistance. Obviously, by the time someone needs to visit a food pantry for assistance, paying for a bag to put the food in should not be something they need to worry about, and the Austin City Council understood that. Also, the one year implementation guideline completely went away with the final vote, so the ban goes into effect in 2013.

One of the biggest issues that many have not yet thought about in this discussion though is the fact that the price of using a plastic or paper bag, after the ban is enacted, is determined by the retailer. “Consumers will be able to choose the type of bag they would like to use at retail counters in Austin: Reusable bags that you bring from home at no cost. Plastic bag, 4 mil in thickness, with handles. Retailer sets the price of the bags. Paper bag made of recycled content, with handles. Retailer sets the price of the bags. Purchase another type of reusable bag from the retailer. Retailer sets the price of these bags.” What happens when no one tells the consumer until they have already purchased the goods at Target, that they have to pay $4 a bag? The Austin City Council wants to stay out of the discussion of costs the retailers change, and I agree, but they should have also at least set a cap on the maximum amount a retailer could charge, since they reduced the implementation time, and also took paper bags out of the equation.

These are a few of the issues missed by the author that would have added a lot of weight to the argument. In the end, all consumers should be responsible for paying the bag fee if they choose not to comply, but all retailers should also be responsible for not making them pay, in more ways than one.

Quit watering your damn yards!

Texas needs to stop growing because it can no longer support itself with the resources that the state can provide. The main factor for needing to limit growth in Texas has and will always be water. Water is the number one necessity needed for humans to stay alive, crops to grow, and livestock to stay healthy. Due to global climate change and burning of the Amazon for the past ten or so years, Texas summers have broken record temperatures and droughts have just gotten worse.

Last summer, Texans got a glimpse of what’s to come for the future, and just how bad things can get if they continue to use and waste water at record amounts. One of many areas to run out of water is close to Austin, the Capitol of Texas. The Spicewood Beach area for a while had been selling their water to other areas needing water. They then found themselves not only unable to sell water, but running out of water for the people who live in the community and need it to survive. Because of ill planning, Spicewood Beach and others had to then have their water trucked in, rising rates to make the water even more expensive and putting pressure on local areas low on water as well.  Spicewood Beach was officially the first town in Texas to run out of water which was not an accomplishment that many had wanted to be known for. With all of Texas being in a drought, no one really had water to spare, and yet water was being trucked all over the state in what became a vicious water transfer cycle with no end in sight.

Katherine Hayhoe with Texas Tech University says “What climate change is doing is its increasing our temperatures and higher temps means faster evaporation. So you need more water to provide the same amount of irrigation for crops, which is what you’re seeing here in Texas, and many places around the world.”

I heard in the news today that Disney is looking to expand into Texas for a new theme park. Is that what Texas really needs, another theme park which wastes tons of water during the peak summer season? “But it creates jobs” many would argue, “It would help the economy”. If Disney put their new park in a state with plentiful water supply, then we could move the already overpopulated crowd of residents in Texas to that other state. If we keep bringing in Big Business, in the next 10 years Texans will be paying triple prices in water because it will have to be imported from other states.

Some say drill the wells deeper but all that is going to do is drain water quicker. The problem is there is no regulation on underground water supplies, and aquifers so people can use as much as they want. Others would be limit population growth, or actual punishment for those who don’t abide by water restrictions, but for those, someone has to regulate it at all times. One of the best suggestions to fight the water shortage has been rain water harvesting, but if all Texas harvest the rain water, what will replenish the lakes and aquifers?