I would think that public land ownership is something the country can continue to experiment to uphold. Private ownership of lands will easily lead to concentration of all land into the hands of only a few under the name of free market.

China should work more diligent on how to protect the interests of related parties on the land making sure no one can take advantage of public ownership for private gains. it is more a political issue than an economic one. Specifically, we need to learn how to put power into a cage.

A bit worried about Wired’s ‘techno-market utopianism’ though:
“In an age of open source, custom-fabricated, DIY product design, all you need to conquer the world is a brilliant idea.”

Don’t forget the ability to bankroll hype-ing your idea via for-profit media, and actually get it to customers via a distribution network. A brilliant piece about realistic challenges of “little guy” competing with giants like Apple is at http://blog.makezine.com/2012/04/30/makes-exclusive-interview-with-andrew-bunnie-huang-the-end-of-chumby-new-adventures/

But don’t want to sound defeatist :- indeed, bring on the open source, locally-made, 3D printed eco-democratic revolution

Also visit my web site … ?may loc nuoc

Or, it recognises the temporary futility of the struggle. In today’s triumph of global capitalism, the argument goes, true resistance is not possible, so all we can do till the revolutionary spirit of the global working class is renewed is defend what remains of the welfare state, confronting those in power with demands we know they cannot fulfil, and otherwise withdraw into cultural studies, where one can quietly pursue the work of criticism.

Put another way, some kind of shit has to hit some kind of fan. Crisis => Opportunity. Of course, if it took something as traumatic as the Great Depression to make a package of demands as ambitious (or as humble) as the New Deal, then the calculus of crisis and opportunity is indeed daunting.

The key is being ready. The situation in America is depressing because the people who make a point of being prepared for shit are almost always reactionaries, nationalists and ideological capitalists.

I realise re-posting their stuff doesn’t mean endorsing their views – but still, the ambiguous conservative double-speak in the final few paragraphs is both revealing and jarring.

I.E., are they actually concerned about the loss of jobs for low-medium skilled workforce? No, they’re worried that what little environmental protection the US has will turn away a profit-making opportunity for large corporations!

In their view, we don’t need a radical shift in political-economy as a result of this new tech & productive forces – no, we need to ‘remove barriers to nascent industries’ (read: remove tax & enviro laws) and ‘encourage innovators’ (read: remove more taxes on the rich).

Suggestion for the editors: how about a few stories about countries like Finland & Sweden, which for all their social-democratic prevaricating and export reliance to developing nations, at least try to frame rapid technological change in terms of broad-based, open access, high quality education systems and re-skilling as part of the social safety net. It may not ‘solve’ the problem long term, but is at least a humanistic response within the constraints of a capitalist system.

The effects of higher daytime lows are mostly good. Therefore,
these lights are the best option for saving energy and the global environment from global warming.

Our internet site
<,http://www.caramoantourpackage.com