...However, neither allowing the economy to deflate further from here via austerity, nor throwing more debt-marked stimulus will solve the present day problem. For the United States, along with the rest of the developed world, has reached a boundary in energy... TheOilDrum
Friday, July 30, 2010
at 12:46 PM
Friday, July 23, 2010
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Divorce Your Car!: Free Public Transit: "Among ideas for recovery -- from the Gulf spill, from oil addiction, from our economic doldrums – more investment in transit is near the top of the list. Now here’s another suggestion to layer in: make this free transit – with no fare charged at the point of use."
at 10:06 PM
Monday, July 12, 2010
Public transport MUST be free, it makes absolute sense. Here's why. Most of the costs of auto-sprawl are borne by society collectively, including many of the hidden costs: infrastructural, pollution, fuel subsidies, health/medical... For Vermont, it should be put to the people to decide whether free & universal public transport is of value to our economy.
How to pay for it. Democrat/Republicans desert us, after paying lip service to public transport as a vote-getting scheme. To pay for it, Vermont has to tax back the profits of natural resources and land speculation, the 'Commons'. Over a billion a year goes tax-free into corporate pockets this way, just in Vermont. And then there's Vermont's $1.5 billion pro rata share in the US military. If Vermont becomes an independent republic, we can use that $1.5 billion here in Vermont, instead of on wars and 700+ military bases worldwide. We can _really_ be green, rather than a dog-and-pony-show for tourism and real estate sales.
at 8:56 AM
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
...He points out: "For mortgage lending, we have made almost no progress on incorporating energy and transportation costs into underwriting. When lenders evaluate or not whether borrowers can reliably make payments on a median mortgage of about $150,000 (or 80% of a median house price of about $180,000) they continue to ignore the 30-year commitment to pay some $300,000 in transportation expenses for a house located in suburban sprawl, and another $75,000 in utility costs."
"While these cost obligations are not contractual commitments, they are in practice real issues that affect whether or not the borrower can make their payments. Think about it. If you are in financial distress in Chicago in the winter, and you can't pay both your mortgage and your heating bill, which will you pay first? If you live in sprawl and need your car to drive to work, or look for a job, which bill will you pay first, your auto loan and gas or your mortgage?..." TMC Net
at 10:35 AM