Land Plan 2020 – Sustainable Development was discussed on Tuesday, October 26^th. The presentation was concise and intelligent. It maintained its appeal to an aged mind such as mine. I sometimes work in first gear when everybody else is running full-tilt for the finish line. It works for me because I can examine more of the sides of this shiny bauble dangled before my eyes. The United Nations started all of this in the ‘80s.

This plan was developed by knowledgeable people doing what they do best: crunch numbers. They also attract, for the appropriate rate of pay, the more artistically bent members of the business world and present the prettiest picture they can for “our” future. Because all of this is debated about SOCIAL development, the primary benefit should be to the SOCIETY it’ll hold sway over.

Okay. That makes sense.

As our society is composed of all socio-economic strata, ALL socio-economic strata should’ve been represented. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case. Fatigue, a sense of their representation lacking in drive to accommodate them and general laziness of some in the community led to a gross under-representation of the lower middle class and those straddling the poverty line.

There were large parcel land-owners represented (some larger than others), and there were mainly middle-class people attending. The major property owners are flexible. They look to get the most “bang for the buck”. It’s immaterial whether the land is used for commercial, industrial, manufacturing, warehousing, urban development, residential construction and subdivision or whatever else comes about – their main responsibility is to get the most money for the sale and/or development as is profitable for them.

This is good in many ways. (At least it is for those with the major holdings.) But it narrows the project’s vision. It more closely adapts the process to the needs of the possessed rather than benefiting the futures of the presently dispossessed. It “straight-arms”, and potentially stunts the realization of (presently) lesser-achievers’ dreams looking to advance in smaller steps than desirable by people having more.

I recognized nobody from Agri-business. With this drive to develop and make scads of money from the sale of the dirt holding up the foundations of endless cookie-cutter designed homes spreading across the landscape like a virus in a Petri dish or as planted by Johnny Condo-seed; what are we to do about our agricultural industry? If you stick a subdivision on the land where sugar cane once grew; where will we get our sugar from: Cuba? Central-America? Africa? Will Rogers, the great entertainer; humorist and social philosopher claimed one of the best investments to make in any economy was Real Estate. After all, he said, “They’re not making any more of it!”

How much of our economic base are we willing to erode in order to claim we “progress”?

 Progress is defined: (n) (v) movement or (moving), as toward a goal; advance.

Nowhere does this definition proclaim whether the advancement is toward the positive or negative polarity. It’s indeterminate except as moved on by the most people. It isn’t a matter of the peoples’ voice as it is the recognition the loudest, most articulate minority can sway the course of societal movement.

There’s a move afoot to direct the world toward Utopia where everything looks grand and wonderful and everybody gets a small piece of “social justice” by following the path suggested by social scientists. And like all scientific endeavors there’s a major level of uncertainty to beware of and explore for its detriments.

It’s like trying to understand Theoretical Quantum Physics/Mechanics. The theories are so far out there and beyond the scope of the average person as to be undecipherable. If you take it for granted the scientist has all the answers, you may not know for sure until the entire project goes awry and civilization is hurt. Want to better understand?

Nazi doctrine, Russian Communism, Pol Pot’s Regime in Cambodia, Cuban Revolutionary “Economics”. (No, I’m not a Right-Wing Conspiracy nut. These are facts in this context.)

These are working models that misdirected and dropped the bomb on societal growth in their regions.

Is Sustainable Development another one of them?

Thanks for Listening.