Monday, November 2, 2009

Musings: Reheated

The moon, just hours from fullness, fell into a puffy black pile atop Makaleha and was lost, a silvery gilting the only trace of her presence, when Koko and I went out walking this morning. Orion and the Big Dipper squared off in the south and north, respectively, as golden Venus rested on a flying carpet of gray in a sky that turned first robin’s egg blue, then pale lavender and finally hot pink.

As we walked, several bicyclists passed us and it got me thinking about the Wailua-Kapaa Neighborhood Assn. poll on the proposed bike path at Wailua Beach. I got an email from the Sierra Club on Saturday, urging me to vote, with the question posed as:

CONSTRUCT A 14 FOOT WIDE TREX BIKE PATH ON A SACRED CULTURAL SITE OR RESPECTFULLY LEAVE IT IN ITS NATURAL, INTACT STATE?

Well, when you put it that way….. But it seems the poll must have closed, as I couldn’t find a link on the WKNA site.

Self-select polls are becoming more popular, especially on newspaper web sites trying to build traffic. But do they really have any meaning?

Now the county is getting into the act, with a survey planned to poll people on whether dogs should continue to be allowed on one small stretch of the very same path — although here it’s called “multi-use” — so long as their owners follow a slew of rules or face fines and a court hearing.

Who wants to screw with that or worry about an encounter with a ranger and/or path vigilante when you can walk your dog so many other more desirable places without having to worry about blatantly displaying a doo doo bag or measuring the length of your leash? Do you suppose one of the survey questions will be should we just drop this nonsense and let people exercise common sense and courtesy?

A friend who is a strong supporter of the path often makes the case to me that it’s needed to ensure lateral access to the coast. That’s all well and good, but one reason I go to the beach is to get away from humans and their incessant need to control the actions of the others and cover the earth with concrete.

And that brings me to another topic. I’d often like to respond to some of the comments left on this blog, but I rarely have the time to get into such exchanges. So every now and then I’ll pull a few into a post, such as this one left on the No Aku Birds post after I did leave a comment saying that living lavishly is morally indefensible:

Okay...so please explain how being wealthy is "morally [in]defensible" other than you think, because you are poor that no one should have more than you do. It appears that you think that if they are more productive than you, that they should give it all to those who CHOOSE to live a less productive lifestyle rather than working hard for something to better themselves. How does being productive and enjoying the fruits of one’s efforts hurt humanity? You socialist continue to make the same logical errors over and over by espousing a system where hard work is not rewarded other than the self-satisfaction of having done a good job. It worked quite well in Russia, is working quite well in North Korea and even the Chinese communists realized that people just mope along if there's no good reason to make an effort. It's you liberals moral bankruptcy that is failing in that you think you are owed something you didn't work for because you CHOSE not to work for it because you feel it's your right to goof off and be under employed rather than making an effort to actually improve people's standard of living through invention and ingenuity. The liberal concept of taking other peoples' money is a loser philosophy. Charity should be for those who actually need it; not for those who choose to be hedonistic leeches.

First, I never said that being wealthy is morally indefensible, but living lavishly, because it boils down to some people consuming far more than their fair share of the earth’s finite resources, while others have nothing. As for hedonistic leeches, I think that term could quite fairly be applied to some of the trust funders and capitalist exploiters who have, in fact, taken other peoples’ money, and sometimes their life energy, too, so they can live excessively large. And let’s not kid ourselves that everyone is on a level playing field, and that simply by working hard and being productive they’ll be assured of accumulating wealth. There are plenty of people busting ass every day with nothing to show for it.

And when you get right down to it, there seems to be a much stronger sense of entitlement among the wealthy, who so often have the attitude that money, or their pursuit of it, gives them the right to build on burials, blow the tops of mountains, use child labor, blow off laws and engage in all manner of crimes against nature and humanity.

Then there was the comment left on the ”Incremental Change” post:

Big difference in those Wainiha lots.
No burials on the Dobbins lot. The north shore ohana has had it's day as KD has been exposed of telling falsehoods to support the NSO's position. 
Naupaka grows naturally on the beaches, and in the "rain forest" of Wainiha it grows like crazy...

First, I don’t think anyone can say there are “no burials on the Dobbins lot” when just 5 percent of it was surveyed to a depth of .067- 1.30 meters. Second, Caren Diamnd has not told falsehoods to support the NSO’s position, and so she has not been “exposed” and the NSO has not “had it’s [sic] day. And yes, naupaka does grow”like crazy,” especially when it’s watered and fertilized as is so often the case along our coastlines.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Living lavishly is morally indefensible because it consumes more than one's "fair share" of earth's resources??

Wow...doesn't that sound ever so socialist.

Living within one's means, whether such means are great or small, is just fine. In my opinion, "lavish" equals "overextending" one's means through credit..."having" many things but "owning" none or few.

I can pay cash for a new car, but not a Hummer or Rolls. If someone else can pay cash for a Hummer or Rolls which makes him happy, he has my blessing. Not so for the dope who uses massive credit to be a poser.

Earning the right to live lavishly (or any other way one chooses to live, assuming many choices are available) is part of our freedoms.

I would not choose to live in a socialist country.

Anonymous said...

"That’s all well and good, but one reason I go to the beach is to get away from humans and their incessant need to control the actions of the others and cover the earth with concrete."

I really like that statement.

Anonymous said...

"you socialist continue to make the same logical errors over and over"

-- errors only in not being a bit more like the scandinavians / danes


"It's you liberals moral bankruptcy"

-- and yet its the gop having the recent gay sex scandals


"The liberal concept of taking other peoples' money is a loser philosophy."

-- worked pretty well for citigroup


"Second, Caren Diamnd has not told falsehoods to support the NSO’s position,"

-- ask the planning dept if they are tired of violation claims that, when inspected again per pestering, turn out to be totally nothing. but whatever, small matter


dwps

Anonymous said...

Not everyone, dare I say a great many people, don't want to be like the scandinavians / danes.

I don't.

La V said...

"And let’s not kid ourselves that everyone is on a level playing field, and that simply by working hard and being productive they’ll be assured of accumulating wealth. There are plenty of people busting ass every day with nothing to show for it."

Well said! It's the rich who believe they have the right to waste water, pollute the earth with their Hummers, build on sacred lands and diss everyone they feel is beneath them.

Anonymous said...

We don't really care if "the planning department is tired of violation claims..."

If there's the slightest chance that an owner is being deceptive, then the community has a right to know. We trust Caren Diamond alot more than we trust some inspector. To us, it's worth a second look.

Anonymous said...

We are on a level playing field only in that we all have a right to make as much of ourselves as we can given various other "unequal" circumstances.

"Level" does not mean governmentally mandated equality. It means that someone will not be prevented from attempting to amass a fortune. It doesn't guarantee he will succeed or even reach a minimum (or be protected from falling below) standard of living.

Everyone is "free" to try to succeed, and actually do it to some extent, or to fail with little or no safety nets.

That's America. Worked for me. Your mileage may vary.

Anonymous said...

What cultural site is on the beach side of Wailua?

In reading that Wainiha burial report for Bresia-Breschia-Brechia whatever, it seemed alot of burials were in the setback area. Maybe Dobbins didn't dig there?

Anonymous said...

Several years ago the burial council decided that testing in the construction footprint of proposed homes was the preferred way to conduct these surveys.

If the land was not going to be disturbed during construction then cultural material in those areas wouldd be deemed, preservation in place.

A common practice in archaeology.

Anonymous said...

How much $$$ and "gifts" change hands when the inspetors come??? Enough to make those little problems disappear???

Anonymous said...

Thanks 7:22AM!

"How much $$$ and "gifts" change hands when the inspectors come?"

We cannot accept this, even if it is a common practice. Thank goodness we have community watchdogs who keep the Planning Department on their toes!

Property owners beware! Be legal or get out.

watchdog said...

The rabid anti-socialist in the US always make me laugh. The US is only slightly less socialistic overall than the social democracies of western europe, and in some aspects far more.

For example, the US has the most socialized roads in the world. In many European social democracies, you have to pay tolls on all highways and expressways. The only reason we have a few toll roads back east is greed--not any ideology that roads should be private ventures. In a true capitalist country, all roads would be private and you'd pay tolls as soon as you left your driveway. And now thanks to "cash for clunkers" car ownership has been socialized--go USA.

Also, how about that socialized mail--Hawaii and all rural states would be paying through the nose for private mail service, though it probably wouldn't even be available in the unprofitable hinterlands. The US also subsidizes, in other words socializes, home ownership through tax-free interest. We also have socialized agribusiness, and many other industries benefit from a redistribution of wealth or risks or freedom from liabilities that are instead taken on by society as a whole (aka socialism).

I say "thank God" the US has as much socialism as it does. Too bad the education system isn't even more socialized so that people would have a better chance at learning about it.

Anonymous said...

"We cannot accept this, even if it is a common practice. Thank goodness we have community watchdogs who keep the Planning Department on their toes!"

-- many people are with you in spirit on that one, and thankfully and rightfully so

but let us be realistic, and precise

and, if i may, a few observations

1) i know at least one of the inspectors does his job perfectly

2) no, others do not do their job well. true. and yes, many gifts/favors flow from the development side into the hands of plan. dept. staff.

3) while i suspect other "favors" are far more common, as to cash exchanges -- well, the atmosphere there is ripe for that exchange...we know that much

4) sorry, the "community watchdogs" really dont do crap RE the above

5) the above is changed when the culture in the dept is changed and forced to be more professional. unfortunately, such is viewed as "mainland" and avoided. it is a matter of what "style / system" governs...what which is viewed as "local" or that which is viewed as from the outside


"The rabid anti-socialist in the US always make me laugh."

-- agreed. and nice comment too


dwps

Anonymous said...

DWPS said:

"5) the above is changed when the culture in the dept is changed and forced to be more professional. unfortunately, such is viewed as "mainland" and avoided. it is a matter of what "style / system" governs...what which is viewed as "local" or that which is viewed as from the outside"

Exactly - you can't have it both ways! Want reform of the inspection process, no building on burials, etc etc etc? Then eliminate the 3rd-world leaning aspects. Real simple.

But it won't change, and the bitching will continue.

Anonymous said...

"Want reform in the inspection process, no building on burials, etc, etc, etc? Then eliminate the 3rd world leaning aspects..."

Most inspectors are non haole. Yet they are the ones turning a blind eye, favoring haole landowners.

Hmmm....doesn't sound 3rd world to me...sounds haole...