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