Form or Function

Throughout the millennia man has moved to and fro between form and function. One area that has not moved between the two throughout our history is the ornamental garden. Gardens are a symbol of wealth and power. It lets others know that the owner has the means to acquire the plants, the land to grow them without impinging on their own food production and consumption, and the time to create this frivolity. There is no real function in the garden in front of your home, it is just seen as a thing of beauty, purely form. Ornamental gardens around the world can be as simple as just a couple of shrubs, or as opulent and splendorous as Keukenhof in Holland. There is however a recent environmental push to create ornamental gardens that have a functional purpose. You may be starting to see them appear along roadsides, in storm water catch basins and on the roof tops of many buildings. Now I am not speaking of the community gardens, or ones created by building owners that want to try something different, but the ones imposed quietly throughout this fair land by environmental nut jobs! If you want a garden, plant it your selves, unless you don't care to make a difference by your own un-selfish actions.
I have been studying the gardens that are in our area, and at a discounted rate, and what governmental agency gets a discount, it looks as if the cost for these gardens should start at about $20,000 each, and the cost of carpeting a building roof probably would start at over $100,000 and most of this paid by your tax dollars, and don't forget the yearly cost of maintanince.
We are now stuck with this trend due to legal renderings, and if we truly want to follow the function rule we are planting all the wrong material. We are currently planting things that do us no good other that to look pretty and where is the function in that? Let us take the garden and replace in future design the Locust, Service Berry, and other trees with Apple, Pear, Walnut, Cherry and other fruit or nut bearing plants, remember that these trees use more CO2 to grow their fruit than do other non fruit bearing trees. Now we can replace the woody shrubs like the Taxis, Boxwoods, and Cedar Yews with Blueberries, and in wet areas Cranberries. Finally replace the Lillies, Iris's, and ornamental grasses with Corn, Tomatoes, Cucumbers, Pumpkins, Squash, Green Beans, Potatoes, Garlic as well as many herbs as the list of food bearing plants is too long to name.
By planting gardens that are purely functional we will produce a bounty of food throughout the year that can be utilized by the homeless and the hungry, harvested by volunteers who will collect them and bring bushels of produce to those in need through the free food banks, and still sait the desires of those who would rather see people starve so that their political enviro-wants can be fulfilled. Is it not better to see a true bounty for all for the dollars that are spent?

Their Job...

It is the job of government to govern, but when there is nothing to do they will still work, as it is their job. Over time they will continue forward on a path of what is not needed. This will continue, and when they reach the point of crisis they do not realize what is truly in need of governing.

The tale of the lion and the mouse...

Let me preface this tirade, I am an environmentalist, I dont piss in my Wheaties, I do remember what we have done in the past, and we could do a little better. I do not however march with the enviro-wackos as I was taught that Science was imperical, and was repeatable, so without proof of humans causing the supposed global warming, it should be said that there is a "theory" that humans might be effecting our climate, IT IS NOT SCIENCE!!!
A great deal of wind has lately been expelled that might power a wind turbine and energize a few homes. I speak of the $30 mil dollar mouse. As it seems that the cash is not directed to the mouse, but to wetlands reclimation projects that stand to creat some 100 jobs. Mouse? 100 jobs? who has the gaul to defend spending such as this? It does not matter wether the money is going to a mouse or to wetland reclimation, the point is that there are PEOPLE who are in need. If we leave the project to lay fallow nature will reclaim the land, perhaps not as fast as man could create the results, but it can wait.
Last night I was watching 60 Minutes and there was a story about a scizophrenic musition who was also homeless. Let us think long and hard over this dicodamy, hell for get it, my 8 year old wants to answer this question. Oh really, you think it would be better to use funds to create housing, and give help, (he means psyciatric services) to thoes in need. You think we should also help families who are homeless and hungry too? Well he is only 8, and there is not enough salt water marsh yet, so lets make some more. As I watched The Amazeing Race last night, the contestants were in India, several were crying as they watched people eating from the trash, but the most disturbing comment was from one of the racers who proclaimed how sad it was to see a ferral cow eating from the trash. She did not see the humans who were doing the same, just the poor cow.
Back in America there are people, acording to 60 Minutes aproximately 60,000 homeless in LA alone, who do the same, eat where ever they can find food, and the trash is a buffet. You cry over the impoverashed in India, lament over the cows eating trash, but at home our electorate funds creating a swamp over feeding and housing people in need. I think the differance between now and the Great Depression is that I have yet to see bread lines and tent cities. Wow, we will create 100 new jobs with $30 mil, we are so careing...

responce to a friend

Bit by bit? It has been on a freefall since the election of Jackson. Other than his inaguration and the wheel of cheese both parties have been heading away from jeffersonian pollitics at a mad dash. It should be noted that our fore fathers had planned for much of our founding documents to be living, and adaptable from time to time, so long as congress made the requisate changes in the law. There is only one right that is "inallenable" (can not be taken, or given away) Our government has not waited to change the law, they have just acted in their own interest and moved along to the next self bennifitial action. Congress for example is quite limited in its power to tax and spend, but without care for the law or the populas they just do as they please. This reminds me of our not so mis-spent youth at the Highland Coffee House, but to relive this we would need to go to Kentucky to avoid funding a governmental entity that disallows smoking... And on that topic the first sin tax has been levied to pay for unfunded programs, 158% increase in federal taxes on cigarettes, guess I need to go to Kentucky and buy smokes that are not federally taxed. Obama, you have failed!!!

Time to start my rant...

Logic prevailes!!! I have done the math, if we estemate the cost of this body of government, 3.5 trillion? Now devide it by the populas. We arrive at a cost of aprox. $11,438 per citizen. If the powers that be sent this ammount to each person we could spend our way out of this resession. This is absurd, but it would be much more fun to pay back as everyone would directly benefit, vs. only thoes who have funded the polititions. Logic dictates that if we are going to have to pay back the $11,438 we the people should be the borrower. i could continue on how the use of the money would cover the problems we have toady, but just you think where you would use the cash, had how it might fix the economy.