Raise the Hammer

it's getting tougher and tougher for Hamilton's uneducated, old boys club to defend their wacky ideas and 1950's style planning.
In the past they could dimiss groups like Friends of Red Hill as weird environmentalists or malcontents.
Now, with heavy hitters like the groups you mention above (there are many others too) that are the exact types that always used to support, in principle, ideas presented by Hamilton's establishment. As the times have changed and the world has changed, those financial institutions are in a line of work that demands they keep up with the times or risk losing (themselves and their clients) tons of money.
Hamilton's planners and politicians have their work cut out for them trying to convince the general public that CIBC and Simmons & Co. are simply 'weird environmentalists' or 'malcontents'.
Of course, we all know they'll still try, and they'll have plenty of help from our city's 'mainstream' media, but Hamiltonians have access to news sources online and on Cable and Satellite TV. As annoying as this overloaded media age is it will help inform Hamiltonians of world issues that they'll never hear correct info on from the Spec or CH.
Perhaps this signals the end of the long regime that has held our city back for decades.

(Permalink)

I think the problem is many folks simply don't understand Peak Oil. I myself had some difficulty getting to grips with the whole 'net energy' idea, and even appreciating the extent to which we have become oil dependent.
Another problem is that Peak Oil theorists are easily accused of being alarmist. This seems to be a common approach to dismissing an intelligent point of view. If the point of view is remotely alarming and/or difficult to understand, proponents are dismissed as 'extremists' and 'out of touch'.
This is a highly ignorant way of tacking a 'debate'. If Dilbert wants to pick apart the Peak Oil argument, he should tackle each aspect head on, and articulate his counter arguments. A wave of the hand and a dismissive 'this is all a red herring' really means that this debate does not serve his own agenda and/or he doesn't understand it.
It's also hypocritical of him and his 'Business As Usual' crew. The BAU folks in Hamilton will happily become hysterical over their own pet projects - like Aerotropolis, Red Hill or Maple Leaf Food plants - by telling people such projects are 'critical' to Hamilton's success and promising thousands of jobs, whilst having very little evidence to support such claims. Whose fishing for red herrings now?

Not once has anyone in Hamilton ever thought of asking them to provide any Yr 1-5 Return On Investment data to validate the projects that do get approved (Has the Glanbrook Bus Park made us any money? Or the Linc? How many jobs and $'s were promised? Where's the post-implementation analysis? No business would survive in these conditions)

At the end of the day it's all Bullshit and I'm fed up (so there!)

Love

Ben

(Permalink)