You've got it absolutely right! Well said! As a theoretical
economist, I am trying to develop an alternative paradigm that
can make economics a discipline that is dedicated to human
wellbeing, rather than growth. That means trying to figure out
how we can have the first without the second -- addressing
precisely the paradoxes you describe. We don't have all the
answers, but we're making some progress. My institute's web
site (listed below my name, at the bottom of this message)
offers some of our findings and writings. I will also post to
this list a project description that may be of interest to some
readers (although, unfortunately, we can only, at this time,
offer financial support to university groups within the U.S.)
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Barry Brooks wrote:
> Please note,
>
> In public view, everyone seems to have it wrong! The left and the right
> now seem to agree that jobs are the only acceptable way to dole out
> money to the masses. Yet, when we create nearly full employment our
> powerful technology and out large supply of workers will always waste
> too far too many resources to be a sustainable mode of operation. On TV
>
> there is no confict between expanding the economy to make jobs and
> contracting the economy to conserve resources.
>
> Whether our goal is to preserve the present pecking order or to help
> improve the lives of the poor, we must have a sustainable system for
> anything to really matter to anyone. Excess growth is the cause of our
> high consumption, and high consumption is the reason our economic system
>
> is not sustainable. Growth is the common problem of all classes!
>
> True conservation cuts consumption and that cuts production and that
> cuts real paying jobs and profits. No one supports a sustainable
> economy. Without true conservation we can continue to squander scarce
> resources to exercise all our surplus labor. Without conservation we
> can have our giant SUV. That is our plan, left or right. Is is
> Zero-Vision. I doubt that pro-growth positions should be called
> radical, or different, or anything other than conventional parrot talk,
> even when it is a socialist talking.
>
> A stable population could use a general increase in durability to cut
> its consumption to sustainable levels while maintaining high living
> standards. Consumption is not use. Use is not consumption.
>
> Barry Brooks
>
>
>
>
>
Neva Goodwin, Co-director
Global Development And Environment Institute
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
web address: http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae
(Note new web address -- containing a lot of new material)
