H and I went to The Whitlams concert yesterday, they were playing together with full Queensland Orchestra. Was great!
Tim Freedman, never short of political opinion, noted:
This country is not an economy;
it’s a society.
So what did I vote? I don’t mind telling. Howard didn’t get it… his party never would, I’m a lefty ;-) I put Greens on top to make sure they get the additional electoral funds, and then through Democrats to Labor.
I don’t believe there’s a balance to be struck between long term environment and economy – you can’t half screw up the environment just to maintain some ugly economic aspects that need fixing. You take the environmental requirements as a given, they’re not tweakable. Then within that fact of life, you work out how to best do things. Well, that’s what I reckon anyway. Vote what you will!
Phoebe, all 2 1/2 years old, does have something to say on this: “Howard’s no good” ;-)
While it is true the the economy should not come before the society, the economy should not be neglected because society and the economy are very tightly linked.
One only has to look at a country like Zimbabwe where short term political gains supposedly to improve the society (taking farms from white landholders and giving them to war veterans) has well and truely destroyed the economy.
The Zimbabwe economy was destroyed in a couple of years, but will take decades to recover.
Not disagreeing – I may be a lefty, but I’m also a capitalist entrepreneur ;-) I don’t believe that’s a contradiction.
We shouldn’t neglect the economy – but pretending that destroying the planet can be subject to compromise seems like a very bad idea to me. Gravity makes things fall down even if you don’t want it to…..
Taking the environmental and societal necessities as a given, this can focus attention on how to best approach the economic issues.
Being a green-oriented business consultant for IT-oriented entrepreneurs of all colours, I support both your statements and your distribution of votes.
A country needs an economy (as does a union of countries, no matter on what grounds the union was based), but it should not be mistaken as one and the same.
Destroying the environment – or polluting it in a way that means the fallout will be “someplace else” – is a classic case of the ‘tragedy of the commons’, i.e. where regulations between entities, be they economical or constitutional entities, states or countries, should be agreed on in a way that extends beyond trade and customs issues.
Social necessities – and some legal base for individuals and corporations – might not be a given, so checks and balances have to be applied continually to these fields as well.
Digital freedom and OSS are another topic for the information age – and a wide base for creative commons and open content, unhampered by bizarre DRM/software patent lobbyists.
From where I stand, and in view of your 2yo and my 4+8yo, voting green is a good choice on all of these accords – and good for the economy.