Sustainable Money

It has been two months since the last blog. The bad news is…it’s been two months and I had planned on weekly blogs. The good news is that two people complained that I haven’t blogged! OK, so they are friends of mine, but still, SOMEBODY read this aside from me. Thank you! Please come back.

Since the last blog I quit my job at a large commercial radio broadcast company to offer myself up as a consultant to companies, social enterprises and mission driven businesses. I do believe that these sustainable start ups and mid-course non-profits need business acumen to scale up and not sell out on their mission. Why me? (OK, so this is a pitch…but it will give you background on why I am blogging on these topics in the first place)

Nutshell: Always loved the outdoors and felt that relentless business growth at any price did not make sense. Two years ago I read Cradle to Cradle , (McDonough, Braungart) and Raising the Bar, the story of Clif Bar. Then I signed up for a year of graduate school at a place called Bainbridge Graduate Institute or BGI. They infuse sustainability into every course. I took a year, 9 credits…and I got religion, as they say.

Here is a link to a video, a naked plea for support from one of the founders, Gifford Pinchot. If there is any school that will make the world a better place and should be the recipient of a huge endowment (or your donation in any amount I am sure they would say) it is BGI. BGI is training the leaders of the sustainable economy. BGI is inventing the way to train the leaders of the sustainable economy. Look at it this way. When JFK announced that the US would go to the moon within 10 years many of the engineers and scientists that actually did all the work were like 18 years – 25 years old. So, that age group, now that Obama is in office and is doing the things he is doing, will be amongst the people that get the US back on track, that turn us into a net energy exporter (maybe), that redesign our filth-spewing economic engine.

http://www.bgiedu.org/content/view/90/86/

Here is the topic I was going to write about: Local and environmental effects of monetary policy. Last time I wrote about the Treasury Department and the World Bank. How does what they do affect the way money is obtained from banks and who can get it?

When I say monetary policy I am talking about interest rates. I am certain there are other facets to it, but interest rates and access to money is my topic. Interest rates would affect the housing industry and loans of all sorts. But how can monetary policy affect sustainability? Is money agnostic in that regard? If one can get it, they get it? If they can’t, they can’t? Does it just take money to make money? If true, this is the “old fashioned” way the credit and debt markets have worked…and something has to change.

How can monetary policy foster a more egalitarian society? How can monetary policy facilitate better environmental and social performance? How can it keep more money in local economies?

Let’s look at loans, specifically, the cost of loans.

So, What if the criterion for a commercial loan was sustainability? What if there were questions on the form asking about social responsibility, social justice, environmental justice, environmental stewardship, as well as economic viability?

And the MORE these things were LINKED, the more points you get, the better the terms of the loan, the better the chance of even getting the loan.

So, for example, a manufacturer who gives 1% of profits to a charity might get 5 points…a manufacturer who produces benign effluent, reduces their carbon emissions by (insert correct amount here), engages the underserved populations, provides more opportunity to the disadvantaged in the way of, say, job training or contributes to the creation and stewardship of workforce housing (if that’s a LOCAL need) then that business would get 25 points instead of just 5. Keeping more money inside the local economy would also garner more points.

I am confident that Barack Obama will lead us in this direction. But I think these ideas need to be included now in the laws that will pass in the coming weeks, months and over the coming year as a part of the economic stimulus package. Now is not the time to say “we can’t afford to be green”. In all seriousness, we cannot afford NOT to make these changes to the very foundation of all the rest of the economic decisions. I think two important disciplines that need to change are Money and Energy. Almost all else is connected to these two. Let’s do what we can now to make sustainable choices.

Am I missing something? Help me out here.

Can we elect a Treasury Secretary?

Not that I'm advocating a Constitutional amendment...but it seems important to know who might take over for Paulson. I have to admit...economics is not my thing. I do find it...wierd, at least, that Lehman can go under but AIG gets bailed out...and AIG's biggest partner was Goldman...and Paulson ran Goldman. Whatever.

Here are my two picks for Treasury Secretrary...don't believe me, go read about these people. Herman Daly (http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2003/04/10/bank/) I choose the grist article because it gives a good overview. But you can find any number of articles on the web and blogs as recent as yesterday by Dr. Daly on the financial crisis. http://rs.resalliance.org/2008/10/09/herman-daly-on-the-financial-crisis/
Dr. Daly was at the World Bank from 1988 - 1994 and he is perhaps the foremost authority in the world on sustainable economics. Isn't THAT what we need? Don't we NEED a philosphy that takes into account the number of people on the planet, the amount of stuff they all have and the fact that there just isn't room for all the garbage? That is simple supply and demand.

The other is recent Noble winner, author (wrote or edited 20+ books), professor and, for me, economics translator Paul Krugman. Yale, Phd from MIT and professor at Princeton...I would feel confortable with someone REALLY smart in that job.

Not another wolf in the henhouse scenario. We've had enough!

The World Bank and the new, new New economy

Two days ago I watched cspan for WAY too long. I watched Robert Zoellick, President of the World Bank espousing egalitarian markets, agriculture and food systems throughout sub-saharan Africa with references to a point of view that seemed to embrace systems thinking. Wow? A progressive thinker leading the World Bank? I was cheered up a bit after a week of getting news-smashed in the face every day with the economy.

So I did a little bit of reading about Robert Zoellick, President of the Workd Bank since July, 2007, following (fellow) neo - con Wolfowitz. OK, I admit it, I do not follow the World Bank...at all. But I was fascinated by the rhetoric. Then when I read a bit about his employment history I saw that he is a Republican through and through, down to his campaign contributions http://www.newsmeat.com/washington_political_donations/Robert_Zoellick.php
and then I read he pushed intervention in Darfur http://www.genocideintervention.net/network/pressroom/pressreleases/2006/06/19/385but then also was involved in the White House/ Enron stock selloff scandal http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1758345.stm and was one of the so-called "vulcans" (neo-cons) that signed a letter urging then President Clinton to remove Saddam Hussein. Then, years later, moved from the Treasury Department (back) to Goldman Sachs after Paulson was named Treasury Secretary. Needless to say, an extremely accomplished and well-connected individual. And commited Republican, neo-con "Bush" man. It seems.

What does this mean?

I hope...and I probably haven't done enough research yet, that what it means is that the concepts of sustainable development will cross-over from corporate executives, NGO's and many government employees who truly believe that the efficiencies and opportunities of sustainable development will yield greater margins and make the world a better place. That growth for its' own sake is not a goal, that externalities count....that maybe all this thinking, and more, has made it into the Republican "interior". Maybe, as was suggested in one article, Zoellick was "passed over" for the Treasury top job because he believes in anthropogenic climate change and in a truly egalitarian society that can be created through environmental and social justice. Maybe. And maybe now that government executives and legislators are going to have to engineer the new new New economy, that someone with that mindset may now be in a position to have a positive effect. Maybe. I could be crazy. Help me out here.

good old fashioned efficiency and our federal cabinet

Two recent articles in the NY Times focus on energy efficiency. One in the greeninc blog points to Obama'sreference in the debate of Tues 10/7 on weatherizing and conserving. The other refers to Amory Lovins' legendary "Soft Energy Paths" concept. I couldn't help thinking today that Amory Lovins would be a great addition to the cabinet as Energy secretary. And while I was thinking about the cabinet , I thought about Van Jones, founder of Solar Richmond and Green for All which is a green job corp for the green economy. It's designed to create a more egalitarian and inclusive green economy. How about Mr. Jones as Secretary of Labor? How can we make that happen? And all that leads me to the question of who will run treasury. I don't have an idea for that one yet. But can we possibly get someone in there who can simultaneously work on our current crisis while expunging Milton Friedman's concept of externalities from business lexicon?



Am I crazy? Someone help me out.



But back to energy efficiency. Go read all you can at Rocky Mountain Institute http://www.rmi.org/, read about all the hard research that's been done about how much energy conservation can yield to our economy...and not in two, three or five years, but virtually now.



This is my first post ever. I am calling it sustainagility..because sustainability is crucial but so is agility regarding the path to sustainability. We see problems now..but not problems in the future...so creating an economy and a society that accounts for that...is, well, important. Looking forward to more in this space