Dear Friends Regarding the excellent below. The route to long-lived wealth creation is interest-free money: both positive number interest (as now) and negative number interest (Silvio Gessel etc) lead to frantic (and therefore short-lived and waste-full ) 'economic' activity. It's the clock that has been attached to money by the legitimation of compound interest (Henry VIII - 1545) that drives (literally drives) consumptive 'economics' (aka capitalism). hthh - hugs john ***************** ps Larry Elliot and Dan Atkinson's final Chapter in 'The Age of Insecurity' (Verso 1999) is of help. *************** ---------- >From: Neva Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Barry Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Don't nibble at the edges! >Date: Thu, Aug 24, 2000, 3:55 PM > > > 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) > >
