I don't know Kub, you seem intent on telling me I'm wrong.
OK, I'm wrong.
Now that we have that out of the way, how about you instruct me on what we will have after oil?
kublikhan wrote:capitalism cannot survive in a no growth scenario.... we have no choice but to bring average global growth to a halt........ and grind along in a sort of stasis ....we’ve been treated to a preview of what a no-growth stasis economy would look like under capitalism. It’s not a pretty sight: capital destruction, mass unemployment, devastated communities, foreclosures, spreading poverty and homelessness, school closures, and environmental considerations shunted aside in the all-out effort to restore growth. That is “stasis” under capitalism....there is no public support out there for a capitalist steady-state economy.... a steady-state capitalist economy....“no growth” just means no jobs.. limits to growth ... if there is no growth
kublikhan wrote:]No, his point was that capitalism cannot survive in a no growth scenario. Not that growth is a choice:
For Jackson, Simms and Johnson as for Daly, growth is seen to be entirely subjective, optional, not built into capitalist economies.
kub wrote:The author also mentions energy and states that even if we replaced all of those oil slaves with clean renewable energy, we would still have a problem:
kub wrote:You missed the flipside of the coin to all of that monkey greed. Sure, you can take tell the shareholders to piss off, the consumers they can't have anymore toys. But in the same breath, you are also advocating all of the associated ills that occur when a capitalist economy goes into stasis or reverse:
kub wrote:I think you misread what that author was saying there. He wasn't listing those things as a viable alternative to growth capitalism.
kub wrote:If all of a sudden we have legions of unemployed because the growth sector of capitalism is shrinking and laying off workers, do you expect all of them to start or work for mom & pop shops?
kub wrote: Remember the earlier quote that for every job opening there were seven applicants? These guys don't have the capital to start their own business. And even if they did, if all of a sudden there was suddenly six new competitors springing up for existing mom & pop shops, how long would they stay in business?
Plantagenet wrote:Once oil production starts to drop we will have DECREASING global oil production and most countries will have to deal with SHRINKING economies for decades to come.
You guys have a point, it is silly to argue about the fate of capitalism in steady state when fossil fuel depletion will force economies into contraction. Besides, I have gone off on a tangent here from the original topic of this thread. My badPops wrote:IOWs, what Plant said.Plantagenet wrote:Once oil production starts to drop we will have DECREASING global oil production and most countries will have to deal with SHRINKING economies for decades to come.
Pops wrote:I'm being a bit contrary, of course we've learned how to be more efficient and that makes things cheaper. On the macro level and as far as conservation and PO go it doesn't matter since we just turned around and wasted the proceeds on beanbag chairs and exurban commutes.
But on the micro level, if a person chooses not to waste the efficiency gains - Don't Buy all the stuff - then jeavons is no paradox, it's the key to living the low life (or prepping for what's next) because everything is cheaper than it otherwise would have been!
Return to Conservation & Efficiency
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests