Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 114 posts

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#61

Post by rebuilder »

lazyjones wrote: post #49
rebuilder wrote: post #13

You can ridicule the specifics, but the high-level idea here is spot on. Either you have to decouple economic growth from increased consumption of natural resources, or you have to find a way to have a stable society without economic growth. I see no reason to think the former is possible, so that leaves the latter. The alternative is some kind of calamity.

> the high-level idea here is spot on. Either you have to decouple economic growth from increased consumption of natural resources, or you have to find a way to have a stable society without economic growth That's just a narrow-minded false dilemma. There's a (for all practical purposes) infinite universe out there, we have plenty of resources to grow even if we stop recycling.

Aside from the practicality of expanding fast enough (Dyson sphere around the sun in about 1400 years, needing to leave the galaxy in 2400 years), how far can you feasibly bring resources back to earth from to fuel that growth here? If you can't do that at some point, you have to stop growing locally even if the species is expanding. And besides, without FTL travel we're not going to be colonizing anything, just spreading seeds of new societies and, eventually, species that happen to be our offspring.

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#62

Post by drorco »

01100011 wrote: post #37
rebuilder wrote: post #13

You can ridicule the specifics, but the high-level idea here is spot on. Either you have to decouple economic growth from increased consumption of natural resources, or you have to find a way to have a stable society without economic growth. I see no reason to think the former is possible, so that leaves the latter. The alternative is some kind of calamity.

> you have to decouple economic growth from increased consumption of natural resources Hasn't technology generally been heading in this direction? It seems we are constantly doing more with less. If it keeps up, and we slowdown procreation, I see no reason why it won't drive resource usage down long term. I mean, I completely disagree with the premise that we must consume non-renewable resources to generate wealth, b…

One way technology can really decrease consumption is by turning humans to machines. If you are essentially a CPU, your energy consumption would likely be very low yet your computational power and lifespan could be much higher. This way earth could support a much higher quantity of "humans", being mostly electric, it could even leave the confinements of earth, this way freeing earth.

The only challenge left is to maintain cognitive growth drives when you're based on electricity, rather than hormones among other chemicals.

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#63

Post by rebuilder »

christkv wrote: post #50
rebuilder wrote: post #13

You can ridicule the specifics, but the high-level idea here is spot on. Either you have to decouple economic growth from increased consumption of natural resources, or you have to find a way to have a stable society without economic growth. I see no reason to think the former is possible, so that leaves the latter. The alternative is some kind of calamity.

Attempted mass colonization of the moon and mars might cause massive economic growth with less consumer consumption ?

That could kick the can down the road a bit, yes.

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#64

Post by antisemiotic »

maxxxxx wrote: post #34
antisemiotic wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what Ted Kaczynski tried before he got driven out of his cabin in the woods.

He also sent a few bombs. Without those I think he could have lived his life in peace.

Supposedly he started sending bombs after his neighborhood was paved over.

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#66

Post by tonyedgecombe »

hyko wrote: post #7

What size ‘should’ the global economy be?

Jeffrey Sachs[1] put forward $10,000 USD per person as a sustainable sized economy. For most in the world this would be a massive improvement. It was a few years ago now, thanks to our inaction it’s probably lower now.

[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Sachs

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#67

Post by tonyedgecombe »

BrandonM wrote: post #33
smadge wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The size that ensures every person a comfortable lifestyle while maintaining a healthy and sustainable biosphere.

Is the human species every really comfortable?

“All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone.”

Blaine Pascal

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#68

Post by tonyedgecombe »

TheOperator wrote: post #40
zwkrt wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even though this is the most misanthropic comment I've ever seen on HN and I'm appalled you would consider writing it, I'll play along! Killing the only people advocating for their movement would make the movement very unlikely to succeed.

See the whole "while it would make the movement unlikely to succeed" is what I hear from politicians explaining why they don't refuse corporate donations like pledging to fight corporate greed. These people are PART of growth... >Even though this is the most misanthropic comment I've ever seen on HN and I'm appalled you would consider writing it, I'll play along! This modest proposal being pushed to shrink the econom…

This is probably correct however there are also millions of deaths on the way if we continue with business as usual.

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#69

Post by fulafel »

jryan49 wrote: post #17
rebuilder wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like I said, the specifics are certainly open to ridicule. But I don't think you can dismiss the idea that we need to find a way to live without economic growth. I think we still have room for some growth, but not for long. If we keep to the status quo, waste heat from energy production alone will grow to disastrous levels within a few centuries.

The world's population is still growing, economy must grow or there is less of everything for everyone.

Population growth is not a constant in the equation.

Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy

#70

Post by makapuf »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #27
rblatz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The shakers died out because they were celibate.

Yep. What do you think degrowth will lead to if it’s done in the context of growth? Nature doesn’t reward restraint, either in that kind of productivity or the other kind of productivity.

Wait a few decades and see if it exuberant growth ... What I think is that we might price natural resources much more expensively. Higher Price and thus growth is not always synonymous with more resources. It is an approximation but better means higher price not more resources.
Post reply on HN