@phillips78 Thanks. The video on "overconsumpulation" video is very nicely done, although I think it overemphasizes population. My main concern is that it offers nothing strategic. Capitalist economies REQUIRE increasing population and per-capita consumption. What happens to the system? How do we confront the powerful people who run it? What's the overall plan?
@frankr29 I see population as the most urgent issue regarding the environment as less people (through voluntary contraception/small family size, not coercion) means a lot less consumption but less consumption isn't possible for many people without starvation. Although I totally agree with you that constant growth on a finite planet is impossible and a change to our ecomonic system and thinking is required.
@phillips78 But drastically lower consumption is quite possible for the billion or so people in the rich countries. Further, this can be achieved almost immediately, whereas a global population decrease will take decades. Given that the planet is deeply into overshoot and that collapse could be imminent, why do you treat population as the most urgent issue? Since time is of the essence, why not rich-country consumption?
@frankr29 You may persuade rich countries to consume less but probably only by 25% at most. Reducing consumption per capita will mean little if the population goes up by 2 billion by 2050 whereas decreasing family size through education/voluntary means means that those in poverty can raise their standard of living but consumption overall still falls because only a lack of a person means no consumption. By targeting family size you can decrease overall consumption by half within 2 generations.
Sounds like a superb logical framework for getting us out of the pit we're digging. I can't help but worry that it's way too logical for human nature; my observations (and those of people far wiser than I) suggest that we the people don't plan for long-term well-being and justice; we buy with our desires, we rule from the gut, and we blind ourselves to others' needs.
How do you address the realities of human corruption?
@gringobarbudo Thanks for the positive comment. You're of course right that there are immense obstacles to the success of contractionary struggles, but without a strategy these obstacles can't conceivably be overcome. A strategy isn't sufficient, but it's certainly necessary. I also agree that my approach is too logical for people in general. However, it might provide guidance for an informed and inspiring leadership.
Frank, your video was good even though I disagree with some of your points. BTW, have you read the Technocracy Study Course? You're basically outlining their approach towards their thesis. You'll undoubtedly get some ideas on how to implement or apply ideas and techniques that meets your criteria.
@frankr29 You see no correlation with their statistical system and energy accounting with your questions at 5:47? You don't see a connection with "Technological Neutrality"/organic change and technocratic ideas?
You're basic approach is to eliminate waste inherent in the price system develop an objective framework for guidance. Technocrats want to replace the system entirely, you don't. In doing so you wish to keep whatever works in this new system. That is the only difference I can see.
Interesting video, you might be interested in "overconsumpulation".
phillips78 6 months ago in playlist GrowthBusters Around the World
@phillips78 Thanks. The video on "overconsumpulation" video is very nicely done, although I think it overemphasizes population. My main concern is that it offers nothing strategic. Capitalist economies REQUIRE increasing population and per-capita consumption. What happens to the system? How do we confront the powerful people who run it? What's the overall plan?
frankr29 6 months ago
@frankr29 I see population as the most urgent issue regarding the environment as less people (through voluntary contraception/small family size, not coercion) means a lot less consumption but less consumption isn't possible for many people without starvation. Although I totally agree with you that constant growth on a finite planet is impossible and a change to our ecomonic system and thinking is required.
phillips78 6 months ago
@phillips78 But drastically lower consumption is quite possible for the billion or so people in the rich countries. Further, this can be achieved almost immediately, whereas a global population decrease will take decades. Given that the planet is deeply into overshoot and that collapse could be imminent, why do you treat population as the most urgent issue? Since time is of the essence, why not rich-country consumption?
frankr29 6 months ago
@frankr29 You may persuade rich countries to consume less but probably only by 25% at most. Reducing consumption per capita will mean little if the population goes up by 2 billion by 2050 whereas decreasing family size through education/voluntary means means that those in poverty can raise their standard of living but consumption overall still falls because only a lack of a person means no consumption. By targeting family size you can decrease overall consumption by half within 2 generations.
phillips78 6 months ago
Sounds like a superb logical framework for getting us out of the pit we're digging. I can't help but worry that it's way too logical for human nature; my observations (and those of people far wiser than I) suggest that we the people don't plan for long-term well-being and justice; we buy with our desires, we rule from the gut, and we blind ourselves to others' needs.
How do you address the realities of human corruption?
gringobarbudo 9 months ago
@gringobarbudo Thanks for the positive comment. You're of course right that there are immense obstacles to the success of contractionary struggles, but without a strategy these obstacles can't conceivably be overcome. A strategy isn't sufficient, but it's certainly necessary. I also agree that my approach is too logical for people in general. However, it might provide guidance for an informed and inspiring leadership.
frankr29 9 months ago
Frank, your video was good even though I disagree with some of your points. BTW, have you read the Technocracy Study Course? You're basically outlining their approach towards their thesis. You'll undoubtedly get some ideas on how to implement or apply ideas and techniques that meets your criteria.
newb2yutube 1 year ago
@newb2yutube Thanks. Yes, I've examined Technocracy, although I see no significant similarity between their approach and mine.
frankr29 1 year ago
@frankr29 You see no correlation with their statistical system and energy accounting with your questions at 5:47? You don't see a connection with "Technological Neutrality"/organic change and technocratic ideas?
You're basic approach is to eliminate waste inherent in the price system develop an objective framework for guidance. Technocrats want to replace the system entirely, you don't. In doing so you wish to keep whatever works in this new system. That is the only difference I can see.
newb2yutube 1 year ago
entrenched Mubarack with 70 billion, are the Egyptions ready for contractionalism? China?
dael4 1 year ago