I'd like to discuss where other Mingle users see us, the human race, in terms of progress.

Are we moving forward, meaning we are advancing technology that increases our quality of life and increasing our life span?

Do we define "advancing" as technology that increases quality of life and increases our life span, or can technology still be considered an advance if it promotes some other objective?

If we are not moving forward, are we just spinning like hamsters on a wheel?

My opinion is that in the broad view, we are making advances, period. The advances may not be in the majority, but by definition, if we are not standing still or moving backward, then we are advancing.

I do not believe we are advancing in the proper direction, or at the speed, with which we are capable of making. In that sense, I think we're being kept busy, like the hamster wheel example.

I look back on how long, as an American, I've known about solar energy. We created simple experiments in grade school that proved the concept. Yet, here I am in my forties, and solar energy still seems to be some kind of exotic concept, not a very real and obtainable science. Solar panels are cheaper to produce now than ever before (I have links, if anyone cares to follow up) and their output is even three times greater than what was traditionally accepted. The average American homeowner has enough space on their roof to not only generate enough electricity to power a fully electric home, but actually produces excess (such a house has been built) that would be sold back to the utility companies.

Think of the freedom you'd have if your electricity was abundant and free.

The average American homeowner also possesses enough yard space to grow all of their own food. The vegetarian diet is often ridiculed, with vegetarians being ostracized as extremist, irritating and unrealistic...yet, 23 years of incredibly accurate scientific data confirms that a plant based diet can not only prevent most major chronic illnesses and disease (such as heart disease and CANCER) but it can actually STOP the progression of those diseases. Yeah, I know, you read it, I read it, still hard to believe, but the proof is there (it's called The China Study, by Colin Campbell, PhD). Cancer actually stopped, 100% of the time, by a plant based diet.

Insurance. The practice of betting your money against an established firm who hires the best mathematicians in the country to calculate odds in their favor to protect you from negative consequences. Think on that...if you could only buy what you could pay cash for, and only owned possessions that you could afford to replace...and your health was good (see above), then what would you need insurance for? What if everyone held a savings account, tax deferred, that acted as self-insurance? When you sued someone, you'd literally be suing them, not some big insurance company.

Now...if your energy was free, your food was grown by you, your health was very good and you didn't need to pay insurance premiums...how long would you have to work? How much free time would you have, if you only had to work one day a week to meet your income needs?

What would happen if you had all that spare time? Would you pay more attention to what politicians were doing? Would you be more involved in politics?

Are we being kept busy, or are our daily lives what they are by true necessity?

Technology is going to be the downfall of this world. Look at Atlantis. We should go back to the way it was in the 1840s before the industrial revolution.

Really? You want us to use Atlantis as a real example of how technology causes a downfall. Might as well use Cinderella as an example that glass slippers give you magic powers.

In the same way that a fire extinguisher is not the downfall of fire, technology will not be the downfall of humanity.

Only humans can push the button, its not the nukes fault. Yes, we may very well wipe ourselves out, but its not the tech that will do it.

With greater power comes greater responsibility, so while I may agree we may end up doing ourselves in, it will be squarely the fault of the human in not being sophisticated enough to responsibly use the tech, not the techs fault itself, nor a necessary end.

Then why the hell do they need things like a mood sensing app for phones or glasses that will tell you everything about whatever you're looking at?

You know, now I understand and agree.

Justin Beiber and mood sensing apps will be the downfall of civilization!

Personally I love the idea of glasses that would tell me everything. I have to wear glasses anyway so it would be nice if they could do that for me too. Okay, I suppose it would get annoying after a while. But this reminds me of the show Earth 2, which I loved.

Atlantis kind of made me spew my milk, too. Not to mention going back to the 1840s, are you serious, ilott? Do you know what the roads were like then? Do you have a particular desire for death by communicable disease? Never had a headache or toothache? Don't need refrigeration?

MD, I respect where you're coming from, but have you ever tried to grow any sizable amount of your own food? It is a lot of work, and it ties you down. I'm not convinced that the "average American homeowner" does have adequate space to grow ALL their own food. Plus you have to consider the quality of the soil and the amount/direction of the sun. I lived in a place that had plenty of room for a full garden but got practically no sun at all, and there wasn't a thing I could do about it. And of course, where does all that leave nonhomeowners? Not to mention having to start all over when you move. Not to mention inhospitable climates. I like lots of things that won't grow in my area.

I do think people could do a lot more for themselves, and the food of course tastes much better when you grow it yourself. But gardening really is an art that not everyone is good at.

I'm a big fan of solar energy. My understanding is that the reason it hasn't become more widespread is that the initial investment is pretty big. I built a passive solar house for myself, but not active solar because I couldn't afford the panels; plus I don't believe they would have collected all the energy I needed. I think wind may be a better solution, or a combination of the two.

I don't know who you're talking to that ridicules vegetarians. It seems like every third person I know looks down on me for eating meat and, God forbid, LIKING it. Humans evolved to be omnivores, not vegetarians. But I agree that most people eat way too little greenery.

Insurance . . . you go right from that to basically dismissing the credit society. I tend to agree, but they're not the same thing. I do LOATHE insurance companies but think they are necessary to a certain extent (just not in healthcare!). It's not realistic for people in our society to only own what they can pay cash for. Hardly anyone would have a car, and certainly not a house, if that were so. Of course, if you're talking 48-inch screen TVs, especially three of them per household, that's a different story.

If I could remove one thing from our current society, it would be advertising. I'd like to erase the entire concept from the human brain. That's the one thing that I think has led us over the cliff.

So Bushi, you don't believe Atlantis ever existed?

I think technology is advancing faster than people. There are a few very smart people and then there is the general population. (Like me) who don't even like trying to learn how to operate a cell phone and don't want to learn to program a VCR.

I just want a regular desk phone please. And flush toilets with handles. Geeeze.

The humble toilet has come quite a ways, too, and not just those sensing valves that are supposed to flush for you but malfunction all too easily. Today you can buy a toilet that never clogs, uses little to no water, and does not require a connection to a sewer system. It's called a composting toilet. My grandfather called it an outhouse. Same concept, only now they'll manufacture it for you and charge you an exorbitant price because it's "green".

Which is sort of my point...what we used to do out of necessity, we now have science confirming that it was a more sustainable way of living. Technology is starting to come full circle, acknowledging that the cave is the most efficient living model, that your body is not designed to consume processed foods, that our sleep cycles should not follow electric lighting and that there is abundant energy in wind and sun.

My biggest bias is that I do not like to work. I know, I know, that's why they pay me, and honestly, I do love what I do for a living, but I'm constantly aware of how much of my day is consumed by processes that are completely unrelated to the product produced. Very little of my day is spent on activity related to my survival. I don't grow food, perform maintenance on my shelter or produce clothing. My Maslow's needs are met mostly on my own time; my work life produces numbers on a piece of paper that I then exchange for the items that eventually meet my needs. I'm arguing that the majority of my time is not spent in direct relationship to my needs, and that we've developed far too many processes that technology was supposed to eliminate.

The ads in the 50s and 60s were always touting how this new appliance was going to free up time and make life easier; you see that now in terms of productivity at work, less about having more free time at home, but the truth is, technology today only makes it possible for us to work more often, for longer hours, instead of truly simplifying our lives.

Computers were supposed to replace entire floors of typing pools, leading to greater productivity...so what happened to that productivity? Why am I working more hours today than the typists of decades ago that were replaced?

You know me JB, I need much better evidence.

Its not clear it existed at all.
Its not clear they had any tech greater than what would be expected at that time.
Its not clear that the tech is what caused there destruction.
To use Atlantis as an example one would need some extraordinary evidence and have to shown all of the above decisively.

So we dont know they even existed . . . yea, I am skeptical to say the least.

I would like to work on living a more simple life. One day I might wake up and no longer have electricity and a computer. What then?

People and society are so dependent on technology it is frighting. If the power goes out in my town, after 15 minutes, you can not even buy a loaf of bread. Forget about getting your money out of the bank. It won't do you any good at the grocery store anyway.

I've seen motion sensor ice and water dispensers that shut off before you have what you want and I find myself having to move my cup this way and that way to get ice or water to come out. What was wrong with the old way when they used a simple lever??

Why must everything be electronic?

Does a young couple starting out their lives even know how to bake bread? Or cook anything from scratch?

Why on earth does every mother think that she has to have a cell phone for each of her children?

People today all have cell phones. They are walking around talking into their ear pieces. They are driving and texting and talking.

Their cars are telling them that they want oil, and to shut the door and buckle up.

Well my car does not talk to me and I'm glad of it. I don't have a cell phone. I want my phone tied to the wall so I will know where it is when I need it.

Well, Jeanniebean, while I like the idea that we have much better methods of communicating today, it seems like ease of communication has created a drop in quality of communication and created unreasonable expectations, like you've touched on.

To a mother that railed at a school board because her child's phone was taken away, worried that "what if there was an emergency?" I asked, what if that emergency had occurred five years ago? What did your parents do when there was an emergency? If there is an emergency, should your child be focused on talking to you, or listening to those responsible provide directions?

I still consider the mobile phone a luxury, not a right.

I very much enjoy that luxury when my kids call to just say hello, and to share some tiny tidbit from their day. It makes the phone worth the price, but it doesn't mean I can't live without it.

Those sensors are for hands-free use, once thought to promote less transmitting of bacteria, but have recently been shown to actually harbor bacteria because the valve aperture is much smaller than on a manually operated mechanism, creating pockets where bacteria are allowed to thrive.

There is a simple joy in creating with your hands that has been forgotten. Making something from scratch is wonderful stress relief, and I find my kids enjoy it so much more than anything I could buy them. Concocting your own recipes can also be very rewarding, and I wish for everyone to have that experience, as often as possible.

I'm looking forward to living off of the grid, growing my own food, not receiving monthly bills for so many services I can provide myself.

I've wanted that also, but not sure if it is even possible. Of course if the grid crashes, then we have little choice.

I would love to be able to afford a completely green house powered by its own wind electricity, grow my own food etc. I would love to have an indoor garden I could grow all year round. I would love to live in a cave that did not require heat and cooling systems.

I don't know if I have the energy for that, or the money. It seems impractical at this point.

We could learn a lot from the Amish.

I have to agree. If Atlantis existed, and it may well have, there is no telling what destroyed it.

There is plenty of evidence for age old civilizations that may have had technology of some kind, but it could have been a different kind of technology that we don't even have in use today. I think the pyramids was some kind of power generating station. I think ancient civilizations had some kind of technology that could defy gravity.

I grew up on a small farm in the Midwest, so I was raised on the idea that gardens are not just simple, but essential. My family and neighbors would have thought someone without a garden was unusual. Granted, our neighbors had a superior sweet corn field, so we bartered tomatoes with them. My point is, if we, as a society, valued home grown food, wouldn't we see value in teaching that skill and making it readily available? I'm willing to join with the other individual raindrops in trying to create a new pond.



The initial investment is three times less than it used to be: http://www.gizmag.com/cuess-solar-panel-photovoltaic/14507/ That site is the source of a lot of my information: http://www.gizmag.com/ecogizmo/ but I have many more. I read these articles, and wonder why I don't see the information transformed into merchandise readily available at my favorite home improvement store. I can buy everything else I need to build a house with there; why not solar panels?



I see a lot of backlash towards vegetarians, primarily because the most vocal espouse that holier than thou attitude you mention. Pop culture (Family Guy, Simpsons, How I Met Your Mother) have portrayed vegetarians as pretentious and "high maintenance", and the popular cooking shows often incorporate a vegan as a "challenge" to the menu. Commercials for "manly" foods often emphasis meat. I know that when my friends notice I'm eating primarily vegetables and not ordering steak, they're going to speak up, and I'm going to take some good-natured ribbing about it. Folks in my area are hunters and raise cattle; people who don't eat meat are typically their political opponents.



Well, the large TVs are a separate issue, based on a study of the lifestyles (and learning methods) of lower, middle and upper class. The lower income classes tend to value entertainment over all else (because, in their experience, nothing good lasts very long for them) so, the TV is highly sought after while maintaining a home and eating healthy are of lower value.

I see the problem of over insuring being directly tied to our credit society, though, but I can see where I need to make that link. It wasn't until we could borrow significant sums of money that we started to attain items that were now too expensive to lose, thus necessitating insurance. The insurance industry became the mega-financial empire it is today after credit became readily available to a larger segment of the population. Prior to the 1950s, insurance was a newsworthy item: an actress who insured her legs for $1 million (Betty Grable) for instance.

Today, you cannot conceivably own a home or an automobile without carrying insurance on them. Most Americans would also advocate that living without health insurance is risky and very stressful and that politicians need to do something about making health insurance attainable for every American citizen. I'd add a fourth, life insurance, to the list for those who can afford it. That's four insurance policies that impact your budget. Why do they cost so much? Put simply, because insurance companies refuse to lose money, so when they get sued, they pass the loss onto their customers, and we all know how much we like to sue in America.

Rather than betting against the house (a losing prospect; they don't build those shiny casinos from their losses) by giving your money to a insurance company that is sure to make a profit, why don't we create a tax-deferred 401k type of account where we deposit premiums until a minimum is met, allow the pool of money to earn interest through very conservative investment, and allow people to draw on it when they have a loss (or pay tax penalties otherwise). If they never use it? They keep the money, and it becomes their retirement. Now we've created a system that rewards people for driving carefully, taking good care of their home, promotes fire safety and fosters a long-term reward system of saving money. Would you agree that keeping that money in the hands of the citizens, versus the vaults of insurance companies, is better for the economy? Would their still be frivolous lawsuits, if the rewards were much smaller, and more likely to be paid by an individual, instead of a faceless giant corporation? If everyone viewed insurance as something they were hoping to keep into their retirement years, would juries be so quick to award huge settlements? If the lawsuits became less lucrative, would the cost of materials decrease, health care, construction, etcetera? As a construction industry member, I can tell you, insurance costs are a major part of our business.




Agreed...commercials create this sense that we must have things, we must consume, we must replace, we must update, or we're left behind, we're not part of the society we thought we belonged to, because all of our friends and neighbors are buying the next great thing.

Well, I am worrying about the grid crashing, so I'm planning for that and it seems like a worthwhile investment to me, moreso than a new vehicle or nicer clothes. I have a strategy that starts with acquiring land away from higher real estate taxes, meaning I'd need to be retired so I could be that remote from established infrastructure.

I've been involved in the construction industry for 25 years now, so I have insights to building not readily available to everyone, so the prospect of building a subterranean home out of concrete with solar and wind energy being captured is not only possible, but within my budget, as I can do most work myself or enlist friends and family to help for substantial savings. A lot of the training I had to take for LEED certification has put me in contact with materials and suppliers that are not mainstream just yet, but may very well be common in ten years. I can only hope so.

The Amish have two communities near where I live, so not only is their example familiar to me, but some of the industries that serve them are common, as well. You'd be amazed at how advanced home appliances that don't require electricity can be.

Where might one find home appliances that don't require electricity?

Proof- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smj78NAme9M

The ag / hardware stores around here have them...Farm n Fleet, Big R, that kind of thing? The old carpet sweepers that you just push, food mills that process food like a blender or juicer that are hand cranked, old egg beaters that you hand crank, that sort of thing. They toast over wood burning stoves, so there are all sorts of cast iron accessories for wood stoves. Clothes irons that are literally heavy chunks of iron that you heat up on the wood stove. The neatest are the propane fired refrigerators...somehow, they heat ammonia, which combines with hydrogen then evaporates, causing the cooling effect. They were all the rage in the 1930s.

So, if you can adjust to cooking with wood (pretty big learning curve, very easy to get too hot, hard to build a sustained heat), burn calories instead of electricity (not so easy for those with arthritis) and aren't afraid of having a pilot light on your refrigerator, it's possible to live without electricity.