G'day all, Well, It doesn't look like too much growing is in the offing (see short report on Japanese consumption projections and consumer sentiment) until some capital eats itself towards new profitability and investment possibilities (look for major indigestion in both the domestic banking sector and the US equity markets, per Kenichi Ohmae's thesis - I reckon they can feed all the Fed electrodes they like into the Wall St cat now; it won't be bouncing after today).
And, I suppose, if people are holding onto what money they have, we won't see too much clean'n'green buying transforming the market, either at the capital equipment or consumption levels. Reliance on 'market forces' to get us out of despoliation/depletion crises is exposed right here, I think. If people aren't buying new cars, they're not expressing a preference for new technology, and, as the economy gets quieter, old cars and oil consumption become more entrenched. If we do face a depletion crisis, economists will argue that scarcity will raise prices and encourage alternatives, but raised energy prices cannot help but slow down consumption, production and diffusion, effectively retarding market responses to the crisis. As for the passanger pigeon example, Michael, didn't you argue that one factor keeping the price down through rising scarcity was the PP's similarity to chicken (wish I had the book here at home - sorry if I'm getting you wrong). Oil ain't similar to anything right now ... we depend on it more than ever, but its importance is disguised by its relative decline as proportion of GDP. Or not? Cheers, Rob. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newslink/nat/newsnat-1oct2001-57.htm Japanese economy plunges to two-year low Japanese business confidence has plunged to its lowest level in more than two years. The data is the first major international release to gauge the economic effects of the attacks in the United States. The closely watched Tankan survey shows business confidence in the world's second largest economy is at its lowest level since June 1999, a result worse than the market expected. The survey was conducted after the terrorist attacks in New York and reflects the growing belief that a global recession is now inevitable. The Japanese stock market fell by more than 1 per cent after the data was released. > I wasn't making up "grow or die." Really! I got it from a certain > professor of economics of mine, by the name of Blair Sandler, about 10 > years ago. Blair was a great teacher. > > That's an interesting point about whether capitalism can be sustained > with green technologies, and whether non-capitalist pressure is needed > to get capitalism to adopt such technologies. I agree with your > assessment. > > I guess I'd like to extend "grow or die" to the area of > territoriality. > I'm writing a paper that addresses this, actually. So I prefer to be > oblique. > > Andrew Hagen > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Sat, 29 Sep 2001 09:58:19 -0700, Jim Devine wrote: > > >At 11:58 AM 09/29/2001 -0500, you wrote: > >>Capitalism's ethic is "grow or die." > > > >Blair Sandler (a pen-l alumnus) had an article about this awhile back > in > >RETHINKING MARXISM. He cleverly called it "GOD." > > > >I think it's definitely true from the individual capitalist's > perspective, > >that given competition, the enterprise must grow or die. That's one > reason > >why the system as a whole grows. > > > >The question of whether or not the system as a whole must "grow or > die" a > >bit more iffy. Blair points out that capitalism doesn't _have to_ > destroy > >the environment, since new "green" technologies can be developed. > > > >My reading of this is that capitalists will resist the development of > green > >capitalism tooth and nail, so that it will happen only if there's > massive > >pressure from non-capitalist forces. So if green capitalism arises, > it will > >be like the late system of social democracy, a compromise with the > >opposition. Then, as with social democracy, individual capitalists > will > >seek profit opportunities that undermine that compromise. > > > >So maybe the system doesn't _need_ to expand (at the expense of > nature, > >etc.) but in general it is driven to do so. > > > >Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine > > > > > >
