Banks; bigger than countries.

Click on the chart to see countries and banks (in yellow), in order of financial size.

If banks were countries ...

Among the world's largest, based on GDP and revenue, many financial companies are bigger than most of the world's countries. Beginning with the 57th largest country in the world, it's Fannie Mae with revenues greater than the 60 countries at the bottom of the list, combined. Bank of America is next followed by other familiar names.

Too big to fail or jail? Of course they are. They wield more influence than most of the world's governments and they are NOT there to serve any citizenry or national interest. They have no granted constitutional role in the countries where they play. They provide no goods or services.

Their business model is competitive, bottom line driven; take wealth and use it to make more wealth. They are willing to take money from anyone in any country regardless of the damage done. There are no policies of benefiting others. They recognize no higher good or greater purpose than their own financial success. And so far, no one is holding them reasonably accountable for their adverse impact on the world.

Mega-banks provide no significant social benefit; there is no correlation between size and performance. Mega-banks do, however, create significant systemic risk and, being profit driven, exert their influence in favor of increased autonomy and against regulatory oversight that might reign them in. When the inevitable crash came in '07, government had no choice but to bail them out for fear of a complete financial system collapse.

In the larger context of a world economy:

“Globalization is the result of powerful governments, especially that of the United States, pushing trade deals and other accords down the throats of the world’s people to make it easier for corporations and the wealthy to dominate the economies of nations around the world without having obligations to the peoples of those nations.” — Noam Chomsky

"The financial debacle has many causes and implications, but it would be wrong to underestimate systemic corruption."  ~Daniel Kaufmann, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, formerly World Bank director of governance.

Feel free to inquire, to have an opinion, to fire the bank you've been using and join the credit union, write your congressman, ... and the white house, or join the movement to occupy wall street.   This sort of volatility is a precursor to change; we should consider investing ourselves in the process.  Perhaps we'll be the impetus that provokes change for better.

This is wrong.

(NC-17 Subject)   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .

There are no excuses. There are no adequate circumstances to justify such suffering. There cannot be any 'turning away' from this until such things no longer happen.

Realistically, there are too many occasions of suffering where it didn't have to happen.  There are too many who die because of greed and selfishness.  There is no excusing those at fault.  There cannot be any pretense that they didn't know.

There is no food shortage.  There is plenty for everyone, at least for now.  The rich never go hungry.  They do, however, manipulate the world's marketplaces to serve themselves, and the poor die because of such behavior.  There is no excuse.

Don't turn away.  Do something.  Say something.  Join in, and insist on change now.

There are way too many things that should not be irreverently or callously photographed.  I've posted this picture reverently, and with a broken heart.  This precious mother buries her little baby in the Dadaab refugee area of northern Kenya.  Hundreds of thousands have fled for their lives to such areas, hoping for a chance to just survive, but thousands die. 

"World Population"

We all know that living things need resources in order to survive. We often, however, don't make the connection that the amount of available resources dictates the size of a population – 

that a population will grow when resources are in surplus, decline when resources are scarce, and stabilize when the population is at the maximum level that can be sustained.  It smoothes out generally like the S-curve here (right).

There are a number of complex variables, but the results are understandable.  Continuous growth depends on unlimited resources.  Equilibrium comes with a balance of population and resources.  Overshoot and oscillation  occurs with fluctuating resource events like drought and flood and marketplace upheavals.  Collapse comes when resources are used and not renewed.

Human population is on a steep J-curve rise based on our aggressive exploitation of resources. We're bringing water, food, power, raw materials in at an accelerating pace, and population responds accordingly, particularly urban population.

It's not a smooth path across the globe. Oscillations occur regionally with drought and flood, earthquake and marketplace upheavals, things that interrupt the flow of resources.  The world's rich don't feel the inherent distress others do.  The poor are affected the most.

Do we know what resources will be available to support human population? Do we know which ones are not being replaced at an adequate rate to support our current consumption?  Of course we do.

Change is certain.  

• Caught in the Crosshairs: Wildlife Faces the Population Challenge
• Demographic Facts of Life
• Fishing for a Solution to the Population Problem
• Population: 7 Billion
• Population and Climate Change: A Clear Link
• Seeing the Forest for the Trees: Population and Deforestation
• Ten Population and Environment Connections
• The Perfect Disaster: Man vs. Nature
• The Thirsty Billion: Population and Water
• Unsustainable Suburban Sprawl
• Wildlife Feeling the Population Squeeze

• Diffusing the Population "Bomb": Demography and Security 
• Population: 7 Billion
• Population Growth and Food Insecurity
• The Fifth Largest Country: International Migrants
• Teen Childbearing in the United States

• What Will $1 Billion Buy?

Billions of babies

In 1810, one billion; in 1930, two billion; in 1960, three billion, in 1980, four billion; in 1990, five billion.

In 1999, just at the end of the millennium, our numbers hit SIX billion. 

(Update) In 2011, we reached SEVEN billion.  Curious what's happening?

For our entire existence, there's been plenty of room and resources.  We were nomads, and there were never more than a few million of us on Earth at any one time.  Until recently, anyway.

Modern humans spread across Africa and began to spill out into the Middle East around 100,000 years ago.  Populations were established in Europe and Asia by 40,000 and 30,000 years ago, respectively.  We reached the southern tip of South America and settled in around 12,000 years ago.

Folks settled down a bit for tending crops and herds.  At the dawn of agriculture, about 10,000 years ago, the world's population was perhaps five million or so.  Numbers increased oh so slowly until just a few years ago.

Today, hundreds of cities and hundreds more of urban areas have more than a million inhabitants each, and populations continue to skyrocket. Take a look at the recent changes and the forecast for 2050.  Things will change, of course.  

The fascinating question is regarding where the limits might be.  Can we produce enough food?  Can we provide education and medical care?  Can we govern justly?  All the high-intensity issues are amplified by the now densely populated world.

Provocative questions ...

Christianity, Religion, & Politics

Is Christianity relevant today?

         What are the viable remnants of that faith?

How much of today's Christianity is related to the original?

       The name is retained; what else?

Does Christianity require democracy?

Can a politician be a Christian? Or vice versa?

Does Christianity encourage capitalism?

Answers at the bottom of the page, but no fair jumping ahead.

Christianity has been formative for American culture, or so we're told by early writers of our nation's story. Interestingly, and perhaps more accurately, western Christian practices and western culture have shaped each other over the centuries.

Despite the rise of the religious right, there's a long-term estrangement between early Christian and modern American values that is visible and growing.  "The Republican and Democratic parties are not merely uncomfortable, imperfect, homes for people of faith; they are prisons that artificially divide us and prevent us from coming together as a community to advance the common good."  A Christian alternative to America's broken political duopoly - Michael Stafford

But God is on our side, right?

Joshua had the same question for the sword wielding fellow he saw outside Jericho.  He asked, "Are you on our side or theirs?"  "Neither," came the answer, "but as the captain of the Lord's army have I come."  Read that as, "I didn't come to take sides, I came to take over."

No, God is not on our side.  

     The relevant question, are we on His?  

           How do we get there?

So then, the questions:

Is Christianity relevant?  
Of course it is, but perhaps the church has some catching up to do.

What remnant of the original remains?  
All of it.  Religious practices come and go, but the central elements of Christianity remain unchanged.

How much of American Christianity is related to the original?
The real thing is a small core surrounded by a whirlwind of life issues; how do I live in this culture or context, how can I serve His purposes in this time and place.  It's a stronghold of extraordinary peace surrounded by a blinding conflagration of violence and trouble, turmoil and fury; it's your refuge, your fortress.

Does Christianity require democracy?  
No.  Nor even personal freedom.  Nor denominations, nor massive organizations, nor hierarchies, nor authoritarian rule ...

Can a politician be a Christian, or vice versa?  
Sure; in Him, all things are possible.  These days though, even He might have some reservations.  :)

Does Christianity encourage capitalism?  
No.  Nor personal property nor the pursuit thereof.  

Are those things wrong?  No, they're just not necessary parts of a life of faith.  Sometimes, they might even be an encumbrance.

So, what are we going to do with what we know?

Most Powerful Good

The most powerfully good thing you might ever do is, just for a moment, care for another and do something for their betterment.  Anything.

(Kenya photo: our Guruguru kids - January 2013)

It doesn't take much to meet an important need in another's life.  It might be your child or another's.  A word of encouragement, a meal, a helping hand.  For some, a year's tuition ($40-$80) can make the difference, or a week's food ($7) perhaps.

Click here for a suggestion ...

There are many more like this one.

Easily done; just noticing and then doing.  
World changers, help bringers  ... powerful stuff from a simple choice.

Luke 10:25-37

Don't read this part.  It's from Einstein and others, and it's difficult.

The most powerfully destructive thing you might ever do in your lifetime is to see such a simple need and turn away.  Doing so destroys your soul as you choose your own distractions and mindless pleasures over the real life so close to hand.  Doing so consigns the one you see to the fringe, to the disenfranchised, to the unheard.  You've decided that you are the center of the universe after all, and in so doing, forfeited your own humanity.


I remember a fellow I worked with years ago.  We were talking about need in the developing world, and he was trying to persuade me he was a giving sort of person, I suppose.  He bragged about chipping in $20 in the collection plate when he went to church.  He didn't go often.  Considering his income, I don't think that really qualified as caring about others.

“Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way.”

~ Martin Luther King, Jr.