Enklings Studio

Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet by Jeffrey D. Sachs

Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet by Jeffrey D. Sachs

My rating: 5 of 5 stars I had been looking for a book that explained in detail all the issues of climate change, population growth, poverty and sustainability in the world. A friend recommended "Common Wealth" by the economist Jeffrey D. Sachs and it didn't disappoint.

Jeffrey Sachs has been an economic adviser all over the world to governments and organizations. His work advising the U.N. on the Millennium Development Goals will likely get him a Nobel Prize one day soon. His ability to break down complex issues into bite size chunks made this in-depth book very readable.

You may not agree with everything being said about climate change, sustainability and biodiversity, but Mr. Sachs lays out a very strong case for global cooperation to solve these issues before life on this planet becomes very difficult for all of us. He draws the connection between poverty and war in a way that is very compelling. His action plan seems measured and intelligent without being fanatical.

This is a must read for anyone interested in the future of our earth and how to protect the planet for future generations.

Simply,

Tim

View all my reviews >>

George Vaillant shares thoughts on "spiritual evolution"

A psychiatrist and professor at Harvard Medical School, George Vaillant shares thoughts on "spiritual evolution" (the title of his recent book). A compelling, and rare, argument for the intersection of science and faith.

George Vaillant at Gel 2008 from Gel Conference on Vimeo.

simply,

tim

Nobel Peace Lies

Al Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize

UK Judge rules that "An Inconvenient Truth" has significant errors

So Mr. Gore's movie wins him the Nobel Peace Prize and yet just yesterday a UK Judge made a ruling that requires UK school teachers to tell their students that there are 9 significant errors of fact in the movie if they choose to screen it in a classroom.  I'm usually not politically driven in my blogs, but this one has me scratching my head. 

I understand and actually support the effort to clean up the environment for future generations, but not by alarmist methods and convenient untruths.  For the Nobel Foundation to lower themselves to the level of the Emmys or Ocscars (whatever the heck other award this film won) is ludicrous to me and entirely politically minded.  Not that they haven't done that before, but my reaction to Nobel Peace Prize winners from now on will be a hardy yawn.

Thoughts?

Pops Blair, 2007