We're killing off the only life we know of anywhere in the universe • Hacker News Board

Re: We're killing off the only life we know of anywhere in the universe

#11

Post by Gys » Mon, May 06, 2019, 3:44 AM UTC

ciconia wrote: post #7

I think the jury is still out as to who will win this terrible war of Man Against Nature. One thing is sure though: if Man does win, and Nature becomes completely subjugated, then life is simply not worth living...

For an incredible number of ppl (seems to me) the idea of spending all their time in a mall-like environment, spending money (credits?) on things they not need, eating and drinking fancy looking ‘artificial’ (overly processed, no relation to anything natural) food is the ultimate goal.

‘Its life Jim, but not as we know it’ ;-)

Re: We're killing off the only life we know of anywhere in the universe

#12

Post by marccarre » Mon, May 06, 2019, 3:50 AM UTC

dtagames wrote: post #8

I totally get the ecological argument but how would changing to a socialist system (which is what we're talking about here without saying the word) fix it? The planet's woes are caused by bad human behavior. There's no rule that says one must be inherently bad in order to have a capitalist business, just like there's no rule that would make a socialist economy naturally non-polluting. Governments and militaries are t…

I don't understand this article as being about changing to a socialist system. AFAIU, it is about better taking Life & Nature into account in our current economic system & models. We do to some extent, but they are massively undervalued, and economy & ecology aren't current aligned (otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion in first place), hence our current economy is unsustainable.

I think of it as finding the "fair price" for having X many trees, X many wild animals, pure air, pure water, etc. on our planet and consuming some to produce goods, food, etc. ; i.e. a fairer price between the immediate gain, and the longer term consequences. A metaphor: what's the "fair price" for the "goose that laid the golden eggs" and the profit/loss for killing it?

Re: We're killing off the only life we know of anywhere in the universe

#13

Post by polotics » Mon, May 06, 2019, 4:44 AM UTC

dtagames wrote: post #10

dpflan wrote: post #4

The crux of the matter: “Life itself dying off because we are trying to use 18th century economics — built for the industrial age — to solve 21st century problems.” Evolution of economic systems: what comes after capitalism?

There is nothing "after" capitalism which hasn't already been tried with disastrous consequences (read: death, starvation, and violence). Either you own your body, your land, your labor, and your money -- or the state owns them for you. What makes the state a good determiner of what's best for humanity? It doesn't have that great a track record.

Capitalism with accounting of externalities, priced by the market. It's not that hard to conceive.

Re: We're killing off the only life we know of anywhere in the universe

#14

Post by dtagames » Mon, May 06, 2019, 6:45 PM UTC

marccarre wrote: post #12

dtagames wrote: post #8

I totally get the ecological argument but how would changing to a socialist system (which is what we're talking about here without saying the word) fix it? The planet's woes are caused by bad human behavior. There's no rule that says one must be inherently bad in order to have a capitalist business, just like there's no rule that would make a socialist economy naturally non-polluting. Governments and militaries are t…

I don't understand this article as being about changing to a socialist system. AFAIU, it is about better taking Life & Nature into account in our current economic system & models. We do to some extent, but they are massively undervalued, and economy & ecology aren't current aligned (otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion in first place), hence our current economy is unsustainable. I think of it as finding th…

If the price is determined by anything other than the market, that's socialism/collectivism/statism.

The idea that someone could do a better job of pricing than the market (with whatever definition of "better" appeals to you) has been disproved again and again. A person doesn't become an expert in what's "better" just because they work for the government. Thinking that it would amounts to worship of the state as an entity.