I am really at a loss for words since seeing this commercial for the first time a few weeks ago.
We are a nation of consumers. And there's nothing wrong with that. After all, there's a lot of cool stuff out there. The trouble is there's so much cool stuff it's easy to get a little carried away. If that happens, this material world of ours can stop being wonderful and start getting stressful.
But what if a credit card company recognized that? What if they admitted there was a time to spend and a time to save? What if, instead of encouraging us to spend more, they actually helped us spend smarter? Maybe then we could have a better quality of life and be in a better financial position while we're living it. We could have less debt and more fun. And this material world could get a whole lot brighter.
And there's nothing wrong with that. Really? Seriously?!?
Apparently this must work. If you appease my guilt about buying that pair of shoes, or the latte, or the trip to the Caribbean, instead of supporting my local soup kitchen, animal shelter, after school program or even the starving child in Africa ... if you appease my guilt, I will feel better by waiting to buy the shoes on sale.
Maybe if we spend smarter my life will be better and I will enjoy it more. Materialism and spending and consumerism aren't really that bad, right? Or maybe just a necessary evil that we can spin to suit our fancy.
What if we instead found a different adjective to describe the nation? A nation of peacemakers. A nation of those who serve the neediest in our midst. A nation of honesty and love and reconciliation and compassion. What word would you want?
I try to recycle. I put my Tim Horton's coffee cups (and lids!) in the recycle bin. I don't get flyers anymore. I try to reduce product packaging. I opt for reusable shopping bags or reuse/recycle the ones I have.
In order to recycle, especially plastics, I have signed up with a curbside pick-up program since there isn't a citywide program to divert items from the local landfill.
What I'm trying to find now is a community compost site. My current accommodations are not particularly conducive to having my own compost bin. I'm tired of tossing food scraps and dryer lint in the trash. Does anyone have a compost bin I can contribute to?
I went to see Wall•e yesterday. Pixar rarely disappoints. I think because they are so adept at personifying their characters. Toys, animals, monsters, cars or robots ... they all emote. So, of course, Wall•e and Eve are adorable. Spoiler? (hover) Of course, I appreciated the literary genius of naming the starship Axiom and the world corporation Buy n Large. (Yes, Pixar created a website for them.)
But what the movie truly reminded me of was "The Story of Stuff." Have a peek if you haven't seen it before.
This land is your land, This land is my land,
From Bonavista, to Vancouver Island
From the Arctic Circle to the Great Lakes waters,
This land was made for you and me. The Travellers
What land do I live in? Are there parts of this land that I do not want? This is the city I live in:
Thirty per cent of residents depend on government assistance. Local food banks deal with more than 3,600 requests a month. The health authority, which last year distributed 1.8 million needles, estimates there are more IV drug users per capita than on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Girls as young as 11 or 12 regularly work the stroll. [The] high incidence of break and enters, car thefts, street robberies and violent assaults has placed the city at the top of Canada's urban crime rankings for nine of the past 10 years. Canada's worst neighbourhood
One of the most frustrating bits of being in Africa was the constant pull to tourist land. It was my messed up re-entry reverse culture shock. I was so happy to be back yet had a feeling near guilt every time I walked to the gas station for ice cream, took photos of monkeys or checked my email.
Now I'm back and living, you guessed it, in tourist land. I have done nothing to address the social injustices in my own community.
The pull to return to Africa is like a magnet; every fibre of my being longs to be there. But God said wait. Your time is done. But it seems like it would be so easy to go back. And because it seems that way, I wonder if it then becomes the easy way out. (And besides, God said wait.)
what am i waiting for? oh GOD, what am i waiting for?
Our enormously productive economy… demands that we make consumption our way of life, that we convert the buying and use of goods into rituals, that we seek our spiritual satisfaction, our ego satisfaction, in consumption… We need things consumed, burned up, worn out, replaced, and discarded at an ever increasing rate.
- Victor Lebow, 1955
The quote was recently featured in a video at The Story of Stuff. The video might seem a bit long (20 minutes) but it might just get you thinking. And I'd love to hear the discussion.
It is just one side of the story. And probably a slightly biased and perhaps misrepresented one too. Even so, what if it's enough to make you stop and think for a moment or two? Would that be enough?
Tomorrow is World Diabetes Day and the first time this day has been acknowledged by the United Nations. This year, the campaign focuses on Diabetes in Children and Adolescents. With symptoms going undiagnosed and a lack of medication (economy, geography, or supply), many children around the world die of this disease. Diabetes is more than just sugar: it has significant impacts socially and on health status as a whole, impacting the eyes, heart, kidneys and nervous system.
Today begins my community's food bank challenge -- The Great Food Fight 2007. Beginning at 5pm, and continuing for 24 hours, we hope to defend our current Guinness World Record title of collecting the most food in one day. Our challengers? Winnipeg. Last year we collected 100.257 tonnes of food. The food bank is pretty important when you consider the cost of healthy eating in the province.
Did you know? In Saskatchewan, it costs an average of $172 per week to feed a family a healthy diet. That amounts to $747 each month for a family with two adults and two children.
Food costing was conducted in 99 stores throughout the province in June of 2006. The costs were calculated based on a "nutritious food basket." This basket contains 66 commonly purchased, healthy food items.
Food costs vary depending on where you live. Weekly costs for a family of four are the highest in the northern part of the province ranging from $171 to $255. This is followed by rural areas at $166. Weekly costs in other centres, including large cities such as Saskatoon and Regina, range from $141 to $159.
Data on food costs help us identify the barriers that people face. Some do not have enough money to buy nutritious food. Some individuals and families that receive income assistance or minimum wage, have little money left after paying for food and shelter. People with a lack of money may view food as the most flexible part of a budget. They may choose low cost food items that fill them up but do not meet their daily nutrient needs.
Some Saskatchewan communities benefit from school nutrition programs that aim to help children learn. The costs of nutritious snacks used in these programs vary. They depend on where the school is located in the province. Some schools pay up to 86 cents per student-over 50% more money than the same foods in other schools. Nutrition programs that only have access to higher priced foods may be left with budget shortfalls.
by the Public Health Nutritionists of Saskatchewan
In establishing the International Day of Peace, the United Nations General Assembly decided that it would be appropriate: "to devote a specific time to concentrate the efforts of the United Nations and its Member States, as well as of the whole of mankind, to promoting the ideals of peace and to giving positive evidence of their commitment to peace in all viable ways… (The International Day of Peace) should be devoted to commemorating and strengthening the ideals of peace both within and among all nations and peoples."
I have a sneaking suspicion that violence, no matter how distant, has a profound effect on any given individual. Violence is extreme dischord; a place where harmony is not heard. The great thing is that is doesn't take too much to resolve the chord - shift a mere halfstep and add another note here and there. Then the community will resonate freely.
Last night, I watched the third part of a documentary on CNN: "God's Warriors." Perhaps you have caught a glimpse of my social-minded conscience breaking forth in recent months. The documentary seemed to highlight some of my own internal arguements. What resonated with me during the interviews were a few points that were made by Greg Boyd, pastor at Woodland Hills Church and Richard Cizik, vice president for governmental affairs of the National Association of Evangelicals. (Please don't start a discussion on "Open Theism or Cizik's specific environmental policies. While it would be interesting, I'm trying to focus on a larger picture.)
Boyd interview: 'I never quite understand what sin gradation scale some people go by when there decide some sins are worse than other sins and those are the ones we need to go against... To be pro-life is not just to be concerned about the womb. It is to be concerned about life. For example, what is the relationship between poverty and abortion? And studies show there is a direct correlation there. So, maybe the best way to lessen abortion in society is to go for the candidate that you can can do the best poverty. So we need to take great care not to naively think that we can translate a particular value into a particular vote. Don't label your way of voting "Christian.'
Cizik interview: "'It's Biblical environmentalism. It's Biblical. It's being a steward of the earth. It's caring about issues that impact millions of people like climate change... Historically evangelicals have reasoned like this: "Scientists believe in evolution. Scientists are telling us climate change is real. Therefore, I won't believe what scientists are saying." It's illogical. It's an erroneous kind of syllogism. But is that what's been occurring? Absolutely...' [Several] prominant evangelical leaders have called for Cizik's resignation. They accuse him of using global warming to "shift the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time; notably, the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children." Cizik calls protecting the environment a great moral issue today. 'They say, 'Oh, Rich Cizik is singularly responsible, they say, for redefining evangelicalism away from being a social and political conservative movement.' And I'm saying, 'Now wait just a minute. Since when has evangelical been defined by a political term or an economic term? It is primarily a theological term.''
The Gospel is not just about a “personal relationship with Jesus.” The Gospel is not the true Gospel unless it has revolutionary social implications. - Greg Boyd
Catch the full God's Warriors series on YouTube:
God's Warriors - Christian (Boyd and Cizik's interviews in parts 8-9)
God's Warriors - Jewish
God's Warriors - Muslim
The MDGs were adopted by the UN in 2000 with target achievement date of 2015. We are midpoint in our journey.
Today in a hop-skip-and-jump, I came across the 2007status update (chart or report). The report suggests that progress has been made in the areas of extreme poverty and childhood mortality. There is still much to be achieved in the areas of pregnancy and childbirth, the HIV/AIDS epidemic and global warming.
In 2002, world leaders pledged they would commit 0.7% of their national income to foreign aid. Only five countries to date have done so. Canada, the US and the UK are among those who have not yet done so. (A few more quick facts on international aid here)
The MDGs 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger :: Reduce by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day
:: Reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger 2. Achieve universal primary education :: Ensure that all boys and girls complete a full course of primary schooling 3. Promote gender equality and empower women :: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and at all levels by 2015 4. Reduce childhood mortality :: Reduce by two thirds the mortality rate among children under five 5. Improve maternal health :: Reduce by three quarters the maternal mortality ratio 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases :: Halt and begin to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS
:: Halt and begin to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases 7. Ensure environmental sustainability :: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources
:: Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water
:: Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, by 2020 8. Develop a global partnership for development :: Develop further an open trading and financial system that is rule-based, predictable and non-discriminatory, includes a commitment to good governance, development and poverty reduction— nationally and internationally
:: Address the least developed countries' special needs. This includes tariff- and quota-free access for their exports; enhanced debt relief for heavily indebted poor countries; cancellation of official bilateral debt; and more generous official development assistance for countries committed to poverty reduction
:: Address the special needs of landlocked and small island developing States
:: Deal comprehensively with developing countries' debt problems through national and international measures to make debt sustainable in the long term
:: In cooperation with the developing countries, develop decent and productive work for youth
:: In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies, provide access to affordable essential drugs in developing countries
:: In cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies— especially information and communications technologies
If you decided to keep reading, I assume the topic is of some interest to you. Seeing as there is some interest, why not turn interest into action? Too difficult? Maybe not. Perhaps you could tell someone else about the MDGs and the progress that has been made. You could sponsor a child. Volunteer at a homeless shelter or soup kitchen. At KIVA, you can partner with others to provide micro-loans for entrepreneurs. Write a letter to your politician (MP, MLA, Senator, Representative). Join a cause like UNICEF, MCC, Amnesty International or GCAP. Park your car, take public transit, walk, don't drink bottled water, reduce then recycle, downsize, live below your means, meet your neighbours, smile.
Now that the imminent threat has passed, I feel somewhat more comfortable commenting on the strike that never really was (HSAS vs. SAHO). One of the comments that arose in a discussion about essential/emergency services was that you can't touch the things that are sacred: oncology patients must get their chemo and the pediatric and neonatal wards must have near-normal coverage. So there it was, cancer and kids. These are things of awe, things of fear, things revered, things we battle to protect.
Fast forward a day and I asked myself if we as society were not protecting but quiet bystanders in the apparent exploitation. I had the opportunity to watch "How the Kids Took Over"; a documentary which (re?)aired on CBC last evening but had been broadcast in the US last year. The gist is: marketers have essentially tapped out the adult market. The normal gimmicks no longer works. So they turn to kids, who, at an indirect level, influence about $600 billion in sales annually. Now that's a nice market. And all business has to spend is a measly $15 million.
The stats: kids decide about 75% of snack food choices; 50% of fast food visits are due to kids nagging (and the marketers teach kids how and what to nag for); 70% of parents give in to nagging; kids direct about 62% of household spending (trips, toys, clothes, food...)
Then there are the Golden Marble Awards for "excellence in children's advertising" (sponsored by KidScreen, produced by Brunico Inc.). After protests by SCEC which began at the 3rd annual GMA in 2000, the awards were canceled in 2003.
A chance to see the year's best creative advertising targeted at children. See the marketers and agencies that are taking creative to new levels and making connections with kids. The Golden Marble Awards is the only awards show recognizing creative excellence in kids advertising. GMA Brochure 2000
"Promotional marketing plays a crucial role in reaching the increasingly influential kids market. Kudos to KidScreen for recognizing that these kid marketers deserve to be recognized." Julie Colbrese, Executive Vice President, Creative Services. Communicator Marketing Worldwide
How did this all come to be? The documentary goes back only a century. Early 1900's brings forth a new precedent of gift giving to please the child, especially at Christmas. 1947: Howdy Doody - the first Saturday morning children's television program. This allow for focused, effective advertising all year round--not just at Christmas. The society 60's and 70's began to see a more inclusive family unit; one in which children were both seen and heard (and grew in their ability to influence family spending). While 1977 brought forth the unforgettable Star Wars film, the toys, games and accoutrements brought in twice the revenue of the film itself. Riding the same idea, the 80's had "program length commercials", He-Man and Strawberry Shortcake; television programs designed to sell products. Of course, infants are the next (current?) market. Just look to products such as Baby Einstein.
On Thursday, the story broke that a report commissioned by the federal Environment Ministry found that a substantial carbon tax would have minimal impact on economic growth. The report, dated Jan. 16, 2007, was obtained and released by the Green party through an access to information request.
She's right. A hefty carbon tax is, without a doubt, the most effective way to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, and no government serious about climate change would dismiss it. But the Harper government has dismissed it. John Baird even called a carbon tax "the mother of all taxes." And he did that while claiming that his government is committed to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions. Even by political standards, that is dazzling cynicism. It's hard to know which economists to disbelieve (Dan Gardner, The Ottawa Citizen, June 23, 2007) cache from Google
American Perspective
Earlier this year, the world's top climate scientists released a definitive report on global warming. It is now "unequivocal," they concluded, that the planet is heating up. Humans are directly responsible for the planetary heat wave, and only by taking immediate action can the world avert a climate catastrophe. Megadroughts, raging wildfires, decimated forests, dengue fever, legions of Katrinas - unless humans act now to curb our climate-warming pollution, warned the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "we are in deep trouble." ...
"We're going to see a big debate on it going forward," Cheney told ABC News, about "the extent to which it is part of a normal cycle versus the extent to which it's caused by man." What we know today, he added, is "not enough to just sort of run out and try to slap together some policy that's going to 'solve' the problem." ...
An examination of thousands of pages of internal documents that the White House has been forced to relinquish under the Freedom of Information Act - as well as interviews with more than a dozen current and former administration scientists and climate-policy officials - confirms that the White House has implemented an industry-formulated disinformation campaign designed to actively mislead the American public on global warming and to forestall limits on climate polluters. ... more at Rolling Stone
Here is an argument about climate change. Not on whether or not climate change is 'true' but on whether or not we should do anything about it. His counterpoints are included at the end (click on continue).
In an effort to induce conversation, I'd offer a penny for your thoughts ... probably one of those magic pennies from a recent post. Pick your answer or suggest a different one.
Many people in North America have relatively high levels of wealth in comparison to many other people groups in the world.
1) All people should aim to live within their means, regardless of relative wealth or poverty. Those with relative wealth should assist those in relative poverty.
2) Those with relative wealth should aim to live below or well-below their means. The relative wealth excess should be used to assist those living in relative poverty.
3) Relative wealth and relative poverty are just that: relative. There is no basis for a society to feel morally inclined to assist others based on perceived/actual/relative wealth/poverty indices.
