The "growth economy" is not sustainable.

jacee · August 9, 2011

This is a direct challenge to the economists, financiers, industrialists and business community to explain why it all depends on continued "growthgrowthgrowth" forever and ever. As an economic theory that has driven policy and practice in the past, maybe ... but it makes absolutely no. sense to me NOW as we know it is a impossibility.

The earth is getting tired, overworked, worn out, depleted of what we've narcissistically called 'resources', that are in fact the earth's survival systems. Example - gravel: We dig it out relentlessly, paying no attention to the fact that it is necessary to filter and clean and purify the groundwater, rivers lakes and streams of fresh water that the earth provides for our survival. In Southern Ontario, a predatory company purchased several thousand acres over the years, ostensibly for a huge soybean farm. However now they have revealed that their real intent is to build a huge open pit gravel mine. The property is gravel moraine, critical to all of the water systems of S Ont.

That's just one example of the unsustainable 'growth economy' that ultimately cannot sustain human life. WE CANNOT EAT OR DRINK MONEY.

What happens to the growth economy when the people are gone? Do the economists have any ideas for an economy that sustains human life here on earth? Do they comprehend the collision course we are on? Do they have any different ideas?

We cannot continue to blindly believe the moneybags like our parents were brainwashed to, when we know it isn't our interests but their own they pursue and they are driving us to a precipice from which there is no return.

What else does the financial/economist mentality have to offer us that is viable theory and practice for the future?

OR ... should we just ignore them? Stop them? Somehow create our own economy that is not dependent on depletion of the earth?

??

eyeball · August 9, 2011

What happens to the growth economy when the people are gone?

Whatever animals and plants have survived it cheer.

Michael Hardner · August 9, 2011

Growth doesn't just mean that more resources are consumed. There is economic growth in doing more with less as well - reducing costs.

M.Dancer · August 9, 2011

WE CANNOT EAT OR DRINK MONEY.

Of course you can.

Drink money

eat money

bush_cheney2004 · August 10, 2011

...The earth is getting tired, overworked, worn out, depleted of what we've narcissistically called 'resources', that are in fact the earth's survival systems

A bit of perspective is in order here...the earth does not give a damn whether human beings "survive" or not. It has been here long before and will be here long after our blip in time has expired. So go ahead, party like it's 1999.

jacee · August 10, 2011

:lol:

Whatever animals and plants have survived it cheer.

!

Edited August 10, 2011 by jacee

jacee · August 10, 2011

Of course you can.

Drink money

eat money

mmm ... pork bellies and red wine ... have you stocked up then?

jacee · August 10, 2011

Growth doesn't just mean that more resources are consumed. There is economic growth in doing more with less as well - reducing costs.

Ah yes ... that'll save the world. Ya we should cut costs by firing all the economists except the ones who have no better ideas than "grow it".

jacee · August 10, 2011

A bit of perspective is in order here...the earth does not give a damn whether human beings "survive" or not. It has been here long before and will be here long after our blip in time has expired. So go ahead, party like it's 1999.

yes I am not worried about the survival of the earth but of us. The blip that we are has given mother earth a bad case of indigestion and she may purge us to cleanse herself.

But assuming that isn't imminent ... is there an alternative to the 'growth economy' model so we can live here sustainably? Is human life on earth self limiting because we are dependent on growth?

OR ... is that just a bad economic model?

bjre · August 10, 2011

Do the economists have any ideas for an economy that sustains human life here on earth? Do they comprehend the collision course we are on? Do they have any different ideas?

Lots of economists are just like some of scientists. They work for making living. They work for bosses. Their work results must helpful for bosses to make more money, or he will not have the job.

jacee · August 10, 2011

Lots of economists are just like some of scientists. They work for making living. They work for bosses. Their work results must helpful for bosses to make more money, or he will not have the job.

Ah Yes ... make money for the bosses ... in the growth economy built for them. But it doesn't work for us.

What kind of economy works for all of us?

M.Dancer · August 10, 2011

But assuming that isn't imminent ... is there an alternative to the 'growth economy' model so we can live here sustainably? Is human life on earth self limiting because we are dependent on growth?

OR ... is that just a bad economic model?

Absolutely. Just reduce the world's population to around 5 million, trash all our technology beyond flint knapping and let the forces of nature work.

Michael Hardner · August 10, 2011

Ah yes ... that'll save the world. Ya we should cut costs by firing all the economists except the ones who have no better ideas than "grow it".

Nobody has submitted anything better - at least not on this board.

bush_cheney2004 · August 10, 2011

Ah Yes ... make money for the bosses ... in the growth economy built for them. But it doesn't work for us.

Working is just fine for many of "us". Changes to suit those who cannot/will not get with the program will be met with skepticism at best. I sure don't want them to be the "boss".

What kind of economy works for all of us?

Economies don't work for us.

Edited August 10, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

Oleg Bach · August 10, 2011

Growth doesn't just mean that more resources are consumed. There is economic growth in doing more with less as well - reducing costs.

In a consumer society and as you know I am not expert..growth means to consume more - and you can not consume nothing - you must consume resourses - directly or indirectly. Maybe you are wrong on this one Michael. As for the reduction of costs - show me the proof of that. It seems that costs are going up as we "grow" - why is that Michael? Oh - you are going to metion inflation - why do we have that? From a childs point of view it does not make sense - so explain it to this baby.

Oleg Bach · August 10, 2011

A bit of perspective is in order here...the earth does not give a damn whether human beings "survive" or not. It has been here long before and will be here long after our blip in time has expired. So go ahead, party like it's 1999.

You are quoting a Canadian pop guy....okay - but how much booze and dope can a human being consume - eventually when you have gotten sick of partying like it is 1999...you will wake up stone cold sober - just in time to witness dooms day - stone cold sober...No one gets out with out paying..

wyly · August 10, 2011

Nobody has submitted anything better - at least not on this board.

no one on this board has that level of expertise but enough of us understand infinite growth in the free market world is an impossibility something the free market will never acknowledge...the free market system lives in the short term, the future unless it concerns money/profit is of no concern...

bush_cheney2004 · August 10, 2011

You are quoting a Canadian pop guy....

I didn't know that Prince was Canadian..amazing!

CPCFTW · August 10, 2011

no one on this board has that level of expertise but enough of us understand infinite growth in the free market world is an impossibility something the free market will never acknowledge...the free market system lives in the short term, the future unless it concerns money/profit is of no concern...

Actually the free market is responding to the possibility of stagnant growth already. For example, defined pension benefit plans are a relic that can barely be found in the private sector, the public sector hands them out like candy. Mortgage lending rules have also been tightened after the credit crunch. Analysts consider off-balance sheet liabilities and hidden pension costs when valuing companies nowadays. Ratings agencies are downgrading the debt of countries which will curb excessive borrowing in the future.

Meanwhile public sectors around the world continue to accumulate deficits and debt rather than make the necessary cost cuts for sustainable compensation. Union leaders continue to demand that their union members get paid a salary that is not commensurate with the work they perform all in the name of "a strong middle class". We are lucky to have a conservative government to tackle these issues, but they still move at a snail's pace compared to the private sector.

It is the public sector that dug us this hole, and it is the public sector that continues to live in an infinite growth world. The private sector has already adjusted and private companies are generating profits, jobs, and wealth for society.

A few companies might cause some pollution, but that is a small price to pay to live a comfortable and free life, rather than being controlled by the state and working a meaningless bureaucratic job until the bureaucracy collapses under it's own weight.

We have already found who has the best expertise to organize production and wealth distribution: the market.

Edited August 10, 2011 by CPCFTW

Sir Bandelot · August 10, 2011

Ha! Peoples pensions are getting cleaned out, in the mad scramble to get ones dirty fingers on what's left to steal.

At least in the past they tried to pretend there was fairness in the system. Now there's no time to put on such airs.

Funny thing is, the more the greedy ones eviscerate what's left, the faster she sinks. What a fools game.

Another funny thing too, poor peope don't hardly give a care. you can't take from those who don't have. The meek.

wyly · August 10, 2011

Actually the free market is responding to the possibility of stagnant growth already. For example, defined pension benefit plans are a relic that can barely be found in the private sector, the public sector hands them out like candy. Mortgage lending rules have also been tightened after the credit crunch. Analysts consider off-balance sheet liabilities and hidden pension costs when valuing companies nowadays. Ratings agencies are downgrading the debt of countries which will curb excessive borrowing in the future.

Meanwhile public sectors around the world continue to accumulate deficits and debt rather than make the necessary cost cuts for sustainable compensation. Union leaders continue to demand that their union members get paid a salary that is not commensurate with the work they perform all in the name of "a strong middle class". We are lucky to have a conservative government to tackle these issues, but they still move at a snail's pace compared to the private sector.

It is the public sector that dug us this hole, and it is the public sector that continues to live in an infinite growth world. The private sector has already adjusted and private companies are generating profits, jobs, and wealth for society.

A few companies might cause some pollution, but that is a small price to pay to live a comfortable and free life, rather than being controlled by the state and working a meaningless bureaucratic job until the bureaucracy collapses under it's own weight.

We have already found who has the best expertise to organize production and wealth distribution: the market.

all of which verifies you don't understand it at all...

CPCFTW · August 10, 2011

all of which verifies you don't understand it at all...

Great answer. Sounds like you know everything! :lol:

Of course the only people who understand are the people with the same opinion as you.. The typical lefty mentality. :lol:

Edited August 10, 2011 by CPCFTW

wyly · August 11, 2011

Great answer. Sounds like you know everything!

Of course the only people who understand are the people with the same opinion as you.. The typical lefty mentality.

why so brief? why don't yammer on endlessly as you did before, pretending to understand a something that is well above your head...your senseless babbling makes my point, the free market boosters are as shallow as dinner plates and haven't a clue as to the bigger picture...

CPCFTW · August 11, 2011

why so brief? why don't yammer on endlessly as you did before, pretending to understand a something that is well above your head...your senseless babbling makes my point, the free market boosters are as shallow as dinner plates and haven't a clue as to the bigger picture...

Do you honestly believe posts like this deserve a more detailed response? :lol:

Of course this is well above my head considering I have a degree and work in a related field. Only someone like you in the 1st year of a sociology or philosophy program and having read a few websites and watched a few youtube videos could understand this complex issue.

Let me guess what the "bigger picture" is: Mother nature will be angered and purge us all. Yup I learned all about negative externalities over 5yrs ago in the first year of my undergrad. But don't let that bother you or your sense of intellectual superiority. :lol:

Edited August 11, 2011 by CPCFTW

Bonam · August 11, 2011

People really underestimate the available resources, both on Earth and elsewhere. The reality is there are many types of resources we have not yet even begun to exploit (we have not tapped even a tiny fraction of the energy available for example: solar, wind, nuclear, tidal, geothermal, fusion). We have plenty of room for centuries of continued growth.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Bonam