The end of growth?

[schrodingers cat]

resource based economy ...

Rather than go googling can you point me at any good links to bone up on such a thing

Cheers

[mashman]

Rather than go googling can you point me at any good links to bone up on such a thing

Cheers

You could try following the link in post 17 for one.

[scumdog]

Oh goody! We can all eat grass.
The world doesn't want our meat. 40-odd years of Britain 'turning it's back on us in the colonies', little headway in finding other markets that will take all/more than we produce, with the subsequent drop in sheep numbers from some 70M to around 40M, is proof enough of that.

Yeah, don't worry about any dairy industry...

Troll.

[schrodingers cat]

You could try following the link in post 17 for one.

Thanks awfully.

It a bit too utopian don't you think?

Pity, be nice to see some genuine alternatives that would work with actual human nature

[mashman]

Thanks awfully.

It a bit too utopian don't you think?

Pity, be nice to see some genuine alternatives that would work with actual human nature

Sorry i didn't link to it... got called to the bathroom whre my youngest has had a follow through incident .

The human nature and Utopia of it all were semi discussed in the Rodney Hide thread lots of posts and unfortunately my opinion amongst it, well, my vision of how I see the Resource Based Economy... and Mental Trousers went Mental Trousers and started asking questions... I thought it was a pretty good "debate", so probably worth a laugh if nothing else and potentially some other views/input .

[Winston001]

No wage rises anywhere.

The technology that you have, will have depreciated and there is always a premium price tag on new technology... so you'll probably end up paying more for the new stuff than you paid for the old stuff

Why would you need a wage rise if most of the stuff you want remains steady or drops in price? That is what has been happening with a huge amount of consumer goods and services since 1980. Tvs computers entertainment.

One of our problems is we actually have too much. So stuff is thrown out because it is a year old, not because it is worn, used up, or broken. A sustainable economy would have to change that.

Thanks awfully.

It a bit too utopian don't you think?

Pity, be nice to see some genuine alternatives that would work with actual human nature

Cloud cuckoo-land if the Venus Project is anything to go by.

However there will be other ideas for sustainable zero-growth economies, just haven't checked them out. It can't be impossible.

[mashman]

Why would you need a wage rise if most of the stuff you want remains steady or drops in price? That is what has been happening with a huge amount of consumer goods and services since 1980. Tvs computers entertainment.

One of our problems is we actually have too much. So stuff is thrown out because it is a year old, not because it is worn, used up, or broken. A sustainable economy would have to change that.

Oh and you'll probably have to stop having too many children, you'll also have to ask the banks to stop charging interest.

A Resource Based Economy would build things to last, and be expandable for the future. You may put a bigger board than you need into an appliance, but it could then be able to be upgraded on a component basis, and not need a full replacement. Sounds pretty sustainable to me.

Cloud cuckoo-land if the Venus Project is anything to go by.

I'm surprised that the Resource Based Economy took you that way, or was it the Venus Project that put you off? May I ask why?

[schrodingers cat]

Oh and you'll probably have to stop having too many children, you'll also have to ask the banks to stop charging interest.

The trouble in many ways is the sheer number of people.
A few people have pointed out that population growth isn't expodential but linear. Nevertheless, growing.

In the past there were a good many control mechanisms:
Infant mortality
Limited food supplies/poor nutrition (irrigation, fertilization, distribution, storage, processing et al)
War
Pestiance
Disease

Population and increasingly organised society leads to further advances and the irradication of many of the traditional controls. Hence greater demands on resources.

A good dose of swine flu or something would fix a few things.

(Bombing just doesn't kill enough, quickly enough...)

[mashman]

The trouble in many ways is the sheer number of people.
A few people have pointed out that population growth isn't expodential but linear. Nevertheless, growing.

In the past there were a good many control mechanisms:
Infant mortality
Limited food supplies/poor nutrition (irrigation, fertilization, distribution, storage, processing et al)
War
Pestiance
Disease

Population and increasingly organised society leads to further advances and the irradication of many of the traditional controls. Hence greater demands on resources.

A good dose of swine flu or something would fix a few things.

(Bombing just doesn't kill enough, quickly enough...)

Depends on how many bombs you drop really .

Very true. Population expansion is a problem... dunno what would happen to the population under a Resource Based Economy. It'd kinda depend on how attitudes change I suppose, or if they change, agreeing that there could be the potential for a population boom... Either way, it's a problem we face today, so using that as an excuse wouldn't be good enough reason for pulling the plug on the idea imho

[rainman]

New Zealand is 5th in the world measured in mineral wealth per head of population....but 25th in the world measured minerals mined per head of population.

But there are hardly any people here... so who gives a shit?

Is zero growth impossible - or a problem?

Nah, check out Herman Daly's work, and maybe feasta.org - they had a big steady state thing a few years ago but seem to have had a redesign since... Their thinking looks about the same though based on a superficial squizz.

Oh and you'll probably have to stop having too many children, you'll also have to ask the banks to stop charging interest.

Ah, you have spotted the problem. Listened to a good podcast from the RSA recently, Sir David Attenborough discussing population. Sad that it's only the old who are brave enough to approach that particular taboo with any vigour.

He didn't take on the bankers though...

[mashman]

Ah, you have spotted the problem. Listened to a good podcast from the RSA recently, Sir David Attenborough discussing population. Sad that it's only the old who are brave enough to approach that particular taboo with any vigour.

He didn't take on the bankers though...

Have you got a link for that podcast? sounds like an interesting listen .

[rainman]

Have you got a link for that podcast? sounds like an interesting listen .

'Twould be here. RSA do those cool RSAnimate presentations... dunno if you have seen one, well worth a look if not.Their 21st Century Enlightenment one is a good place to start.

This is also a good lecture with a similar component to the theme. Don't be put off by the maths at the beginning... dude's a physics lecturer, and the maths isn't as important as the message..

And don't be put off by the naff Youtube title either.

[mashman]

Contrary to what seems to be popular belief, I'm not constantly trawling the net to confirm what's already blatantly obvious... Just watched part 1 there. The maths is important alright and not really that hard to follow, but I do get a message ot two from what the guy is talkin about. I'll tackle the other parts and the RSA lecture during Corrie tomorrow... cheers for the linky's.

[Winston001]

I'm surprised that the Resource Based Economy took you that way, or was it the Venus Project that put you off? May I ask why?

The Venus Project site appeared to project humans forward to becoming a bee colony. Or ants. They behave like that and very successfully too, but humans are far more individualistic.

If the Resource Based Economy means a sustainable economy then that's fine.

[mashman]

The Venus Project site appeared to project humans forward to becoming a bee colony. Or ants. They behave like that and very successfully too, but humans are far more individualistic.

If the Resource Based Economy means a sustainable economy then that's fine.

Fair enough, I didn't get that out of it, but can see why it would seem that way with talk of no government, no police force, designated tasks etc... Not that I agree with the idea that no "govt" or police force will be required (not for the first hundred years anyway)... But we are individuals, and we read things differently .

I believe that that's the idea. You monitor your resources and use them as wisely as possible.