Over on "Just In It for the Gold", there's a real interesting post from the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy.
Steady State Economy
As far as I can tell, the basics of this are that focusing on growth of an economy -- i.e. more people, more production, more economic activity -- as a benchmark of how well the economy is actually doing MIGHT possibly end up being a bad thing for Earthlings. This makes logical sense; if you could get to a point of ZPG (zero population growth), wouldn't the economy also get to a point of ZEG (zero economic growth)? With the same number of producers and consumers year after year after year after year after year after year ... (you get the idea), there shouldn't be a need to grrrrow, only to sustain. And that's what this group seems to be after.
They say:
"The Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE)
takes a different position. The CASSE position, a document that can be
signed by individuals and endorsed by organizations, recognizes the
conflict between economic growth and environmental protection. It
proposes the steady state economy, characterized by stable population
and per capita consumption, as a desirable alternative to continued
growth."
They also say:
"Many policy changes can help us establish financial systems and an
economy that are sustainable. But the chances of enacting them are
miniscule until we can demonstrate that a broad base of the electorate
recognizes that perpetual exponential economic growth is not the path
to prosperity."
The blog author from whence I acquired this, Michael Tobis, isn't sure if he's going to sign on to their petition yet. I don't see a downside. This is one of the revolutionary positions required for real world government: put a cap on the growth of the global economy by putting limits on population and consumption.
CONSERVATION over CONSUMPTION. I'm sure that will catch on. Hah!
How about this: ZEG means not having to say you're sorry to your great-grandchildren for royally screwing things up.
Primary Reform: Why Top Four / Top Five?
1 hour ago
No comments:
Post a Comment