Letters  

You decide how much it's worth to you:

Dear Republic:

It was fascinating to read "How about the Vancouver ducat" (issue 148). I was a member of the Work Exchange in the 1980s. Just now I read for a couple of hours about community currencies, etc at wikipedia.org Different types of local money are many and amazing. What if I want to work to earn extra? Expert analysis is needed. You could run a contest to name the new monetary unit. If the city won't create it, a group of us could, backed by several alternative media and activists.

—Korky Day, Vancouver

Dear Republic:

Concerning the comments in issue #149 regarding emissions: Canada plans to replace Kyoto's greenhouse gases emissions controls with their own less stringent standards, and the United States plans to ignore Kyoto completely. Interesting news, but it misses the real point entirely. The real crisis looming on the horizon is when the world runs out of oil. According to the film "A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash," this will happen by 2050. As well, we've reached peak oil delivery already. (This can be attested to by the sudden necessity of processing the tar sands, hitherto economically unfeasible.) Another estimate—from the film, "The Oil Factor"—has the world running out of oil by 2018. That's 12 years away. In "A Crude Awakening," there's a clip of former US President Richard Nixon fatuously declaring that oil resources will last for centuries to come. This clip follows the assertion that politicians will say whatever the people want to hear, in order to be re-elected. Obviously, the people don't want to hear that the world economy is about to crash, more disastrously than the Great Depression. But that day is coming much faster than people think. The time for politicians to act in anticipating the post-oil economy is now, if not 10 or 20 years ago. If not, the crisis of increasing greenhouse gas emissions will pale in comparison to the crisis of a crash of the fast-depleting-oil-based world economy.

—Rolf Auer, Vancouver

Dear Republic:

Your letter writer Jim Hudson (letters, issue 149) seems puzzled that Jon Scop was upset to hear about the "go away" signs left on cars with US plates (letters, issue 147). Though I cannot know, I suspect Mr Hudson is of European descent, and I would like to ask him this: if he were to find a "go away" sign on his door, with information about the colonialism in the Americas, how would he respond? Is the United States exploiting the weaknesses of others nations, and do its citizens (even former ones, including Jon Scop) benefit as a result, even if they dislike it? Yes. Does every Canadian with ancestors from elsewhere (including myself) benefit as a result of land expropriated from the First Peoples, even if they dislike it? Yes. Our houses and schools and businesses and farms are built on stolen land. Messages like this only make those who are convinced they are entitled to any luxury they want only more convinced that those opposed to them are rabid, unkind freaks, while frustrating those who are aware of the world around them and have taken steps to distance themselves from an empire they disagree with. We're all in this together. The founders of both the United States and Canada have blood on their hands. Instead of fighting because of where we're from, let's work together because of where we're at, and end this argument.

—Devon 8, Vancouver

Dear Republic:

The massive Gateway project, including the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge, was predicted 26 years ago, when the then Social Credit government forced the GVRD to build with the proprietary SkyTrain metro system. Instead of getting planned for Light Rail Transit from Downtown Vancouver to Whalley, Lougheed Mall and Richmond Centre, for the same price the region got SkyTrain to New Westminster. So expensive was the metro system, the SkyTrain lobby created the “density myth” to counter demands for transit expansion up the valley. SkyTrain, unlike LRT, is much too expensive to build up the valley, so regional planners coined the myth that "there wasn't the density for rapid transit in Surrey, Langley and beyond." This myth conveniently ignored the fact that most European and North American LRT systems operate quite happily in areas with less density than the lower mainland. This mantra spewed, ad nauseum, that "we do not have the density," by the roads lobby, has skewed all transit planning in the GVRD. All transportation planning is based on new highways and bridges and rail transit expansion is just a vote getting mega-project. "Vote for us because we are building rapid transit!" is the clarion call of every politician. Despite over $5 billion spent on SkyTrain (don't forget those pesky annual debt serving charges!) by the taxpayer, TransLink has failed to show a modal shift from car to SkyTrain, as transit ridership in the region has stagnated at about 10% for the past two decades! RAV and the Evergreen line are just more of the same rapid transit flim-flam. The result: Lots of new highways and bridges coming to a city near you!

—Malcolm Johnston, Delta, Light Rail Committee

You decide how much it's worth to you: