My comment is based on an excellent article
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=1

I am optimistic too. Not about Copenhagen but about the global
stream.

The CO2 thing has openned the eyes of many, mostly economists and
mostly in Eastern countries (a Western economist such as prof. Krugman
is an exception) about the cornerstone of economics: the concept of
value.

Kyoto created a hystoric market, the GHG (green house gas) emission
rights. Despite its deficits (trial and error is always necessary),
that market created a new value that grows when we create or enhance
forests and falls when we pollute. Although this market corelates
that
"green value" to a certain amount of money, for the very first time,
humankind envisioned that nature is an economic agent subject to
deficit and surplus. And Kyoto envisioned that its ruin means ruin
for
humankind too. It was the very first step toward the global value
unit
that will replace money within next decades.

Also the most lucid economists realized through the climate change
issue (combined with migration issues) that financialism, monetarism
and their sequels will not fix current long term crisis in some
economies. Probably, prof. Krugman is the perfect example of that
"conversion". Economics cannot fix current troubles unless we put
nature into our equations. Costs of raw materials (iron ore, crude
oil, wheat, beef, etc.) are no longer just costs of production,
scarcity, climate change, deterioration of quality of raw materials,
etc. with all those phenomena combined we have to add a certain
scientifically measured eco-tax to reach the real global value of
every single good that we have to pay to keep the equation
sustainable.

The future of developing economies is to become developed economies.
Once developing economies become developed, the future of developed
economies (the global economy at that point) is just one: near-zero
growth sustainable economies. It mimplies zero growth in demand too.
Therefore economies will be balanced with other economies through
migrations and population limits. There is no option, infinite growth
is not posible in a finite planet.

Renewable energies, recycling, maximal efficiency-minimal waste, etc.
are the rising technologies of the 21st century, the double echo
(economy and ecology). As computing and electronics was in the 20th
century, as chemistry and healthcare in 19th century, as mechanics
(new engines) 18th century, etc. as astronomy was thousands years
ago.

It is not an option, it is what this age of the humankind commands.
In
the past, all those technologies provided new ways to gain our life.
The double echo is not an exception nowadays.

In the past some beliefs tried to destroy progress, some ideologies
and religions destroyed engines two centuries ago, some opposed
advances in healthcare, etc. Now we have to understand that some
people try to destroy this new civilization, to share this planet
with
them is also part of our story. In any case our destiny is always the
same: move ahead.

Peace and best wishes.

Xi

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"World-thread" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/world-thread?hl=en.


Reply via email to