Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hasn't technology generally been heading in this direction? It seems we are constantly doing more with less Actually no, we haven't and we don't. Carbon emissions are still growing. Classic mistake: You're confusing relative and absolute reductions. We have reduced relative ecological impact a lot, but overall impact has been growing along the way.
Carbon emissions are decreasing in Europe despite economic growth. Nature is getting in better shape as well.
The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
91–100 of 114 posts
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#92What's stopping them? There's tons of empty land in the world. Go find a stream in the forest and live a sustenance-level life. Oh, they want everyone else to be miserable too.
That's what Ted Kaczynski tried before he got driven out of his cabin in the woods.
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#93I think people in the West assume that because we are freer than most that we are not drowning in propaganda. Money really does run the show this planet over. Money and power really do seem to bring the worst out of people.
Economic growth is only needed for Ponzi economics, whether that be retirement funds, Social Security or stock market returns. Human beings are not some living aberration that requires growth or we die. Growth is only "needed" by the financial industry and holders of equities. As growing social unrest increases, and it will, people will slowly realize that consumption of cheap Chinese electronics do not make them happy. This idea that once we get over the hurdle of 100% automation we will all be able to live work and stress free in our post automation utopia where people can focus on the things that give them "meaning" and make them "happy" is absurd. Basic Income as a panacea for the lower class is another ridiculous idea that can only be imagined being successful if you first image human beings as blank slates whose programing is purely cultural and devoid of millions of years of instinctual hardwiring. The only thing I see Basic Income providing is as cultural grease (as in bribe) to keep people from rioting. The "need" for immigration is another epic lie needed only to keep the Ponzi scheme going. It blows my mind that the left let this made-in-marketing-heaven line of propaganda slide: "immigration is needed to supply the jobs that Americans don't want to do". It even sounds like a corporate slogan. Holy shit the gas-lighting. This is wage suppression. Americans don't want to do those jobs for what you want to pay them when you can instead take advantage of someone from a poor and broken country. This was big business stealing from Americans and it has contributed to the decline of the middle class. People seem to forget, or maybe they don't know, that the middle class was created through policy, just as it is now being dismantled through policy. Instead of this issue being talked about honestly we are told to ridicule those "xenophobes" who dare suggest that Americans could/should be doing those jobs for a non artificially lowered wage. Off-shoring and immigration are the same thing and no one is honest about this. They are supported by the same forces, for the same Ponzi effect, for the same concentration of wealth causing the growing income disparity we see. The "need" for immigration is also about the higher abstraction of the population Ponzi scheme. We as human being do not need to grow to thrive. There is no need to see just how many billions of us this planet and technology can sustain before biblical levels of suffering ensue. Europe importing millions of "refugees" (migrants)/immigrants to "fill the void" is purely the greed and entitlement of the Elites. They feel entitled to Ponzi economic comforts even though they did have to children themselves to support it. Less people means less load on the environment and less fighting over resources. This is a great thing especially for the environment as well as for everyone else on the planet not just those in Europe. Jared Diamond in his book Upheaval very slyly points out that immigration from the third world into the first world increases environmental problems by increasing gross carbon emissions and overconsumption. Yet as much as Diamond is loved by the left this is ignored, as if he didn't say it. Again the propaganda pumped out is multiculturalism and "diversity is our strength". Japan and the Norwegian countries beg to differ and are looked up to as models. Immigration is pushed to keep the Ponzi scheme going and to increase the Democrat voting base and not to give you more choices in local cuisine. The bullshit is miles high.
Can you really not envision a thriving human race without growth? International finance and corporate banking really do need growth. Either way economic growth is not sustainable indefinitely. Technology will not enable us to colonize the Universe anytime soon. Self driving cars are not happening in the next decade and the singularity is not happening in the next 5 decades, at least.
Looking through the comments I see multiple posts suggesting that non growth equals lowered standard of living. Standard of living has all ready started falling in America, most likely due to income disparity. Japan has not had much economic growth for the last 20 years yet they are living in the future. I have visited Japan, it's incredible. Japan feels like a future I'm not sure a multicultural country like American can ever achieve. Regardless, Ponzi economics is not necessary for anything other than easy money, especially for the Elites. Someone down at the bottom mentions Ted Kaczynski as a "far-right [thinker]". I think not. If you remove his savage deconstruction of leftism and academia from his writings he would be considered far left-wing. His philosophy is left-wing environmentalism and anti capitalism/tehcnology.
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can only increase efficiency so far. I do agree that a reduction in population would result in lower resource usage, but that's an economic slowdown, i.e. the opposite of growth.
Isn't economic retraction the opposite of economic growth?
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#95For a while, I was pretty sold on anarcho-primitivism as a concept (Derrick Jensen is a prominent figure in that sphere), but it is pretty deluded to think that quality of life would increase and life would be cushy and comfortable.
What improvements in quality of life do we really _need_ though? In first world countries we're so comfy and everything is so convenient that the leading causes of death are due to eating too much and not moving enough. That's pretty ironic if you ask me. We don't have to go back to living in caves and eating raw animals of course. But I don't see how slowing down would decrease our quality of life. There is no limit…
We spend our best time of the day stuck in an office or someone else's property doing work for them. Losing all the time we have with sunlight.
If we all worked 20 hours a week and maintained our SoL we would even be mentally more stable.
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question is: if we do nothing and just keep destroying the planet, would it be worse? Or better?
> keep destroying the planet, We couldn't even scratch the planet with an all-out nuclear war, why do people always resort to such ridiculous hyperbole? The planet will be fine, we just might destroy our species (very unlikely with pollution etc.).
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#97I'm pretty far on the left and used to be active in communist politics (little bit less exceptional here in Europe than across the pond), but I've always been very irritated by these degrowth movements, although a lot of this stuff came out of 'my' political tent. It's to me reminiscent of the 'deep ecology' folks, who don't pursue environmentalism with the goal of furthering human well-being, but have a quasi religi…
Degrowth has never been in the same "political tent" as "communism" (by which I assume you mean Marx/Engels-based socialism?) The idea that human well-being is central, while nature is just a resource used to achieve abundance is completely opposite to the philosophy of the degrowth movement.
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Carbon emissions are decreasing in Europe despite economic growth. Nature is getting in better shape as well.
Can you explain how nature is getting in better shape? Everything I have read contradicts your statement.
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#99An author once came and spoke to my environmental studies class. Of the Club of Rome, he said "Fascinating ideas. They might be right. But try getting elected by promising a shrinking economy." Yeah, not gonna happen. Best to treat growth as a given and work around it, imho.
It could work if the promise was to give people time instead of a 9 to 5 shitty job, and assuring equality through a Universal Basic Income. That income could be financed with taxes on externalities. Taxing externalities would also benefit the local and more sustainable economy with more decent jobs.
Re: The degrowth movement wants to intentionally shrink the economy
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
What improvements in quality of life do we really _need_ though? In first world countries we're so comfy and everything is so convenient that the leading causes of death are due to eating too much and not moving enough. That's pretty ironic if you ask me. We don't have to go back to living in caves and eating raw animals of course. But I don't see how slowing down would decrease our quality of life. There is no limit…
Maybe not working 40 hours a week and enjoying the world in our prime age? We spend our best time of the day stuck in an office or someone else's property doing work for them. Losing all the time we have with sunlight. If we all worked 20 hours a week and maintained our SoL we would even be mentally more stable.