Re: [Pen-l] Talking about growth -- or not

[Jim Devine <jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx>]

what role does capitalism's insatiable drive to accumulate play in this?

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Eugene Coyle<eugenecoyle@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I've been reading books that are anti- and pro- growth in connection with
> writing a review of one of them.  Discussing environmental problems in terms
> of growth seems to me to be close to futile.
>
> I believe that economic growth (however you want to measure or define it) in
> the North must come to a halt.  But discussing growth as a policy target is
> a mistake.
>
> The problem:  Economic growth promises jobs.  Economic growth promises
> higher income so as to meet our current aspirations and lets us dream of
> aspirations yet to be.  Economic growth promises lifting low income people
> to a higher income level.  Growth is very appealing.  Never mind that with
> relentless growth we are perenially short of jobs, always short of the
> income level to cover our material aspirations, and poverty is not
> eliminated.  Growth remains very appealing in spite of not delivering what
> we think it will.
>
> The books advocating slowing/stopping growth list reducing working time as
> one step to take on the journey to slow/stop growth.  Almost all also list
> many other policy options to use.  There are many people advocating
> slowing/stopping growth in GDP.  Some are economists, others come from
> environmental and/or spiritual perspectives.  Some are utopian, i.e. those
> that say that corporations should decide to stop growing and/or consumers
> should stop aspiring to more stuff (e.g. voluntary simplicity.)  Others,
> e.g. Herman Daly, work out rules and regulations on throughput into the
> economy, resource extraction, ending fractional reserve banking, etc., all
> of which seem difficult/impossible politically, evadable, or unworkable.
>  These rule-based proposals are hard to explain to the public and/or have
> their own built-in opposition.
>
> I've concluded that cutting working time is the sine qua non to
> slowing/stopping growth.  All the rest is tinkering.  Some may be useful
> tinkering but not essential.  Cutting working time is it.
>
> People like the idea of cutting working time.  It seems like a good idea in
> multiple dimensions.  But frequently heard is the objection "We can't do
> that."  But in the USA we have done it -- repeatedly.  It always turns out
> well.  Hours go down, incomes go up.  What's not to like?  And of course
> other countries have and are cutting working time.
>
> I've concluded some things.  Growth must stop, and the only way to slow/stop
> growth is to cut working time, sharply and repeatedly.  And I've concluded
> that I should not talk about growth but only about cutting working time.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>



-- 
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l