The Economy
Jun. 2nd, 2009 11:16 amInteresting and thoughtful post by Greenpa:
The Problem is: Men. Near the beginning he also refers/links to a recent post by Sharon Astyk on the economy, for those who haven't read that one yet.
Greenpa has an interesting background; well educated, naturally ornery, and has been living a pretty low-impact life for over 30 years. It isn't necessarily the best or only way to live, but for those interested in one way of living, plus his rather different views on how things are going in the world these days, he's worth a look.
This particular post discusses the origins for the terminology "informal" and "formal" economies. I think he's right that "informal economy" is a denigration of what are in fact very necessary things to our lives -- getting food, cleaning, cooking, making clothing (making textiles before that), raising kids (if you or friends or relatives of yours have them), healing people, finding/building shelter, etc. Obviously there are many parts of this that are now also part of the "formal economy" because of trade/selling/buying, but that isn't the focus of the essay.
Greenpa suggests "Primary Economy" instead of "Informal Economy", because in point of fact the above basics were first. "Informal" can imply "unnecessary". That makes the "Formal Economy" the "Secondary Economy" of course. And since it came second, and couldn't exist without the first, I think they work pretty well as terms.
Well, it's a pretty thought-provoking essay, so go check it out (and Sharon's too, if you haven't yet).
The Problem is: Men. Near the beginning he also refers/links to a recent post by Sharon Astyk on the economy, for those who haven't read that one yet.
Greenpa has an interesting background; well educated, naturally ornery, and has been living a pretty low-impact life for over 30 years. It isn't necessarily the best or only way to live, but for those interested in one way of living, plus his rather different views on how things are going in the world these days, he's worth a look.
This particular post discusses the origins for the terminology "informal" and "formal" economies. I think he's right that "informal economy" is a denigration of what are in fact very necessary things to our lives -- getting food, cleaning, cooking, making clothing (making textiles before that), raising kids (if you or friends or relatives of yours have them), healing people, finding/building shelter, etc. Obviously there are many parts of this that are now also part of the "formal economy" because of trade/selling/buying, but that isn't the focus of the essay.
Greenpa suggests "Primary Economy" instead of "Informal Economy", because in point of fact the above basics were first. "Informal" can imply "unnecessary". That makes the "Formal Economy" the "Secondary Economy" of course. And since it came second, and couldn't exist without the first, I think they work pretty well as terms.
Well, it's a pretty thought-provoking essay, so go check it out (and Sharon's too, if you haven't yet).
no subject
Date: 2009-06-02 04:40 pm (UTC)"As Christianity moved into the Middle Ages, women's power was stripped from them by the Church- and "women's magic" became a matter of warfare- "wise women"- witches - were systematically eradicated, in very ugly fashion."
paragraph?
Because frankly, even though the truth about women's participation in medicine actually furthers his argument, the idea of trying to explain it again makes my head hurt more.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-02 06:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-02 10:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-02 11:02 pm (UTC)