Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby nobodypanic » Sat 25 Oct 2008, 13:55:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '.')..
really? how does that work?
Free market :roll:

that's really pretty worthless in this context, if you ask me. show me an example of a single free market that didn't operate on the principle of growth.
User avatar
nobodypanic
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1103
Joined: Mon 02 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby cube » Sat 25 Oct 2008, 15:10:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '.')..
that's really pretty worthless in this context, if you ask me. show me an example of a single free market that didn't operate on the principle of growth.
Congratulations you are now on my ignore list for being a Troll.

go away, leave me alone, do not talk to me

*hits ignore button*
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby Quinny » Sat 25 Oct 2008, 16:00:21

How could you say something so rude, nasty, trollish & challenging.

You deserve to be banned, never mind ignored.

Only joking - Welcome to the ignore list. Cube's bat'n'balls been taken home again! :)


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '.')..
really? how does that work?
Free market :roll:

that's really pretty worthless in this context, if you ask me. show me an example of a single free market that didn't operate on the principle of growth.
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby TonyPrep » Sat 25 Oct 2008, 16:23:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Repent', 'I')f growth in profits is not allowed then the demand for labour= 0. When I wrap my mind around this it means that if you're not self employed or a farmer your dead. Conversly when you get 20-40% mass unemployment you get social revolution- communism, extremisim, crime waves and other problems en mass.

I think zero growth requires a complete rethink of how society operates and what people do with their daily lives. I don't think that simply outlawing profits (after all costs) is a good way to consider it. The way our society operates, growth is required but with zero growth, we clearly have to come up with an alternative arrangement.

People will have to develop alternative aspirations to the new car, big house, luxury holidays and early retirement.

If near universal realisation of earth's (and our) limits occurs, it's just possible that we could figure out how to live sustainably, without a mass die-back. I don't hold out much hope for that, but I don't think wholesale pessimism is appropriate.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby TonyPrep » Sat 25 Oct 2008, 16:23:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('venky', 'C')an we have a free market system, if growth ends?
It depends what you mean by free market. The markets we know about are all about getting as much money as possible for some product, service or financial instrument. That's about growth. Free markets also extend globally, exchanging goods and services across thousands of miles, often involving journeys.

I don't think regulation is needed, if people have a sustainable mind-set. But I don't think sustainable free markets would look much like today's.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby TonyPrep » Sat 25 Oct 2008, 16:28:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'T')he gov. does not want you to sit still and keep your consumption level constant. They want you to consume more.
Indeed. However, even no growth economies can be unsustainable. Sustainable economies would not consume resources beyond the renewal rates of those resources and would not damage our environment. So no-growth is not sufficient for sustainability, though it is essential (eventually).
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby yesplease » Sat 25 Oct 2008, 21:37:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'A')lthough I've actually argued with people who think resources are infinite (through infinite substitution)
Like who?

A guy on a Yahoo group. Pretty smart guy but with complete faith in his dreams. A couple of others come close to that, as does JD here.
Why did you raise the sustainability of the solar system; are you the infinite resources guy?
No clue about the yahoo guy but a link would be informative if ya don't mind. Where does JD do it here? Wrt the solar system, sustainability w/o a timeframe isn't really that sustainable, if ya catch my drift. ;) In terms of the article, incorrect generalizations combined with the obvious tend to make for something that's less than useful.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby TonyPrep » Sun 26 Oct 2008, 02:50:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'A')lthough I've actually argued with people who think resources are infinite (through infinite substitution)
Like who?

A guy on a Yahoo group. Pretty smart guy but with complete faith in his dreams. A couple of others come close to that, as does JD here.
Why did you raise the sustainability of the solar system; are you the infinite resources guy?
No clue about the yahoo guy but a link would be informative if ya don't mind. Where does JD do it here? Wrt the solar system, sustainability w/o a timeframe isn't really that sustainable, if ya catch my drift. ;) In terms of the article, incorrect generalizations combined with the obvious tend to make for something that's less than useful.
The guy's on a sustainable communities group, you need to be a member to see the posts but here are a bunch of quotes from emails we've exchanged:$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')es, eventually in millennia from now, there might be limits to further growth unless we expand off earth or into the oceans$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')nfinite economic growth is indeed possible as it does not necessarily entail increasing use of resources but in fact reducing them, replacing them with others, or using them more efficiently.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') have faith in technology evolving to solve today's perceived shortages.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') do not worry about generations from now. On that basis the energy reaching earth from today's vantage point is infinite. It is convertible to usable applications$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') thought the mental block was yours, thinking the planet is indeed finite in any conceivable and relevant time frame, given all the possible substitutions and alternatives.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') fraction of a % maximum utilization of anything is as good as assuming that for those applications the supply is infinite.

I'm sure you'll find much to agree with there, yesplease.

JD disregards limits and attempts to prove that fossil fuels can be substituted by other resources, in a timely fashion and to any scale required. This is the mindset of infinite resources or of no problems in our lifetimes.

Sustainability doesn't have a time scale. Sure, one could target sustainable economic growth over a period of years but that is not particularly helpful long term, as those articles were trying to explain.

What generalisations were made in the NS articles that were incorrect? The articles were definitely useful because they provide a reference, from a serious science magazine, that may gain some traction with those who have acted as though infinite economic growth is possible (perhaps by simply not considering it).
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby mos6507 » Sun 26 Oct 2008, 12:35:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '.')..
really? how does that work?
Free market :roll:

that's really pretty worthless in this context, if you ask me. show me an example of a single free market that didn't operate on the principle of growth.



A nonprofit organization?
mos6507
 
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby DomusAlbion » Sun 26 Oct 2008, 14:14:18

When I read such thoughts and think of the peak; oil, fish, resources, everything, the poem "The Second Coming" by the Irishman Yeats comes to mind. It was written in the 1920s and foreshadowed the turmoil to come to his world. The world is on the cusp of change and a new world will emerge but not until the monster is loosed and has wreaked its destruction.

The Second Coming

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the center cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
"Modern Agriculture is the use of land to convert petroleum into food."
-- Albert Bartlett

"It will be a dark time. But for those who survive, I suspect it will be rather exciting."
-- James Lovelock
User avatar
DomusAlbion
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1979
Joined: Wed 08 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Beyond the Pale

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby galacticsurfer » Sun 26 Oct 2008, 14:30:15

With calls from UN for a Green New Deal globally and such articles in leading magazines plus the conference in summer in Saudi Arabia and the coming UN onference on a new world financial orde I would think the time is ripe for a wholesale switch of ideologies towards sustainability in terms of ecological economics. This can help little, like putting the brakes on as you run over the cliff but it is something nevertheless.
"The horror, the horror"
User avatar
galacticsurfer
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 449
Joined: Wed 09 Nov 2005, 04:00:00

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby venky » Sun 26 Oct 2008, 14:50:50

A free market system by itself might not lead inevitably to perpetual growth, however, I think that it will always have an inherent pressure to growth, as millions of individual players will always be trying to better themselves, expand their businesses. With no regulation, and ready access to resources it will result in a steady growth in the right circumstances.

Most would agree that too much government regulation is a bad thing and its very harmful for the economy. How about the government only regulates the usuage of scarce and non renewable resources?

But I hate the idea of some bureaucrat liscensing out energy or raw material permits to the industry; that is almost a guarantee of corruption and cronyism.

Another option is trusts that act for the local community. They would not fall under the federal government, but would be responsible to the local community that elects them to safeguard the environment and resources that fall in that area. Any businesses operating in this area would have to pay the necessary fees to operate in that area, corresponding to the resources they use of pollutants they emit. The draw back is that this might not work on the global scale, many communities might choose short term greed over long term care of the environment, and might not really change the status quo.

We could also leave it to the free market. But the consequences of that are pretty clear right now; I dont really need to go into it.

Will individuals themselves be sustainable minded? Not until our culture and value system dramitically changes.

I feel depressed after writing that. :cry:
I play the cards I'm dealt, though I sometimes bluff.

Only Man is vile.
venky
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Sun 13 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby TonyPrep » Sun 26 Oct 2008, 16:14:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nobodypanic', '.')..
really? how does that work?
Free market :roll:

that's really pretty worthless in this context, if you ask me. show me an example of a single free market that didn't operate on the principle of growth.



A nonprofit organization?
I don't think one organisation is a market. However, are there any non-profit organisations that have not grown since their creation.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby TonyPrep » Sun 26 Oct 2008, 16:20:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('venky', 'A') free market system by itself might not lead inevitably to perpetual growth, however, I think that it will always have an inherent pressure to growth, as millions of individual players will always be trying to better themselves, expand their businesses. With no regulation, and ready access to resources it will result in a steady growth in the right circumstances.

Most would agree that too much government regulation is a bad thing and its very harmful for the economy. How about the government only regulates the usuage of scarce and non renewable resources?

But I hate the idea of some bureaucrat liscensing out energy or raw material permits to the industry; that is almost a guarantee of corruption and cronyism.

Another option is trusts that act for the local community. They would not fall under the federal government, but would be responsible to the local community that elects them to safeguard the environment and resources that fall in that area. Any businesses operating in this area would have to pay the necessary fees to operate in that area, corresponding to the resources they use of pollutants they emit. The draw back is that this might not work on the global scale, many communities might choose short term greed over long term care of the environment, and might not really change the status quo.

We could also leave it to the free market. But the consequences of that are pretty clear right now; I dont really need to go into it.

Will individuals themselves be sustainable minded? Not until our culture and value system dramitically changes.

I feel depressed after writing that. :cry:
Then this should depress you even more.

Any consumption of resources (renewable or not) beyond the renewal rate of those resources is unsustainable. Any activity that has a detrimental effect on our environment/habitat is unsustainable.

I don't think free markets would be capable of operating in a sustainable way, unless mind-sets change en mass. After massive education as to the finite nature of our world, complete regulation of the use of resources may be required.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby yesplease » Tue 28 Oct 2008, 05:44:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'I')'m sure you'll find much to agree with there, yesplease.
You shouldn't be so sure about things ya don't know about meng. ;)

Stuff like this is so trivial it takes all of a few seconds to point out the problems, regardless of whether or not I make 'em, you make 'em, someone else on the forum makes 'em, or someone else someplace else makes 'em. It's easy peasy. Most of the quotes involving an assumption of infinite anything are ripe for the picking. It doesn't matter what the assumption is, be it infinite resources, time, or energy, it's still flawed barring some proof that we have access to infinite anything. What's left seems to be trivial, for instance stating that tech can solve a percieved shortages. Hell, perception can solve a percieved shortage, for instance the perception that tech can solve a percieved shortage, will solve the shortage. Stuff like that borders on a truism.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'J')D disregards limits and attempts to prove that fossil fuels can be substituted by other resources, in a timely fashion and to any scale required. This is the mindset of infinite resources or of no problems in our lifetimes.
Do you have examples of this? Keep in mind that pointing out d00mc0pianism is bunk isn't the same as saying we can have a "solution" and/or "subsitution" in a "timely" fashion, at least not w/o the author defining those things.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'S')ustainability doesn't have a time scale. Sure, one could target sustainable economic growth over a period of years but that is not particularly helpful long term, as those articles were trying to explain.
Sure it has a timescale. The Earth as a habitable planet won't be around for more than a billion years give or take, so planning beyond that in terms of it isn't very useful and as such we do have a time scale.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'W')hat generalisations were made in the NS articles that were incorrect? The articles were definitely useful because they provide a reference, from a serious science magazine, that may gain some traction with those who have acted as though infinite economic growth is possible (perhaps by simply not considering it).
Simply not considering something is not the same as acting something is infinite. For instance, I don't consider, iono, lets say diamond production. But that doesn't mean I believe it will continue infinitely. Along the same lines, saying it will grow is not the same as saying it will grow infinitely.

The article places far too much responsibility on government in the global economy, since economic systems aren't based, or reconstructed for that matter, based on governments alone. We need government, business, and individal input. Similarly, we can have economic growth w/o increased resource consumption, which we have seen via reducing the energy consuption per unit GDP. Not to say that this can continue indefinitely, just that one-sided generalizations like this aren't helpful, at least in terms of serious discussion. They're great for fear-mongering! :P
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby TonyPrep » Tue 28 Oct 2008, 05:59:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'S')ure it has a timescale. The Earth as a habitable planet won't be around for more than a billion years give or take, so planning beyond that in terms of it isn't very useful and as such we do have a time scale.
OK, a billion years, then, if that makes you happy. Let's plan on sustainability for a billion years. We're a billion light years away from that, right now.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'S')imply not considering something is not the same as acting something is infinite.
Sure it is. Where is the practical difference? It's not the same as actively believing in it but it ends up the same, in terms of behaviour.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'T')he article places far too much responsibility on government in the global economy
I didn't think it did. But where were the incorrect generalisations?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'S')imilarly, we can have economic growth w/o increased resource consumption
Only in fits and starts, with very rare examples for economies that are complete (i.e. all where all consumption is within the same economy as the production). More economic activity demands greater resources or greater efficiencies. But both resources and efficiencies have limits and efficiencies can't be turned on like a tap. Even with efficiencies, economic growth will hit limits.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'w')hich we have seen via reducing the energy consuption per unit GDP.That's only of relevance if population growth is zero. But efficiencies have limits, as I've mentioned.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'N')ot to say that this can continue indefinitely, just that one-sided generalizations like this aren't helpful, at least in terms of serious discussion.Sorry, still can't see the generalisation (even one) that was incorrect. Maybe you think it's unhelpful to state that increasing consumption can't go on indefinitely on a finite planet but that is actually the main point that needs to be driven home. I see you have grasped that, which is great, but how do you make others grasp it?
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby MrBean » Tue 28 Oct 2008, 08:34:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('galacticsurfer', '
')So when the people finally "get it" the popular culture will transmit theidea fairly simply.


There is nothing complicated here but mere simplicity. People do get it, easily, they know it in their hearts. The problem is merely the constant barrage of growth propaganda by the cancer like growth system that we are all made captives to - slaves and "trusted inmates" alike.
User avatar
MrBean
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sun 26 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby MrBean » Tue 28 Oct 2008, 08:47:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'P')roduction = turning inputs into outputs


Photosynthesis. Processes of metabolisms.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Infinite growth = production X time itself.

No system can sustain itself without new inputs. Stop growing and you die.


A system of metabolism involves dying and decaying into recycled resources. Earth's ecosystem is sustained by input of solar energy, but Earth is not growing.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')Thanks eggheads!

Now go tell the unwashed masses that its nothing but diminishing returns from here to eternity (or die-off whichever comes first).

Goofballs! ; - ))


Economics is a dogmatic religion based on fundamental belief in greed and selfishness. Wankers!
User avatar
MrBean
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sun 26 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby MrBean » Tue 28 Oct 2008, 08:57:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('venky', 'I') posed this question before: Can we have a free market system, if growth ends?


Depends on what you mean by "free market system". If the "market-fundamentalist" Anglo-American model of militaristically imposed fascist imperialistic corporativism, nope.

If eco-anarchistic society of sustainable mostly self-reliant small gardening communities, then you would find out what really free market system really means.
User avatar
MrBean
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sun 26 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Folly of Growth - New Scientist

Unread postby MrBill » Tue 28 Oct 2008, 08:57:47

MrBean you do not understand economics, but I assume from your posts that you have an intimate knowledge of wanking. Stick to what you know best.
The organized state is a wonderful invention whereby everyone can live at someone else's expense.
User avatar
MrBill
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5630
Joined: Thu 15 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Eurasia

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron