Is economic growth the greatest thing since oxygen?

[Seeds]

I mean seriously how awesome is it. For the majority of the worlds population famine, plague and death from violence is no longer a likely threat to our livelihoods. The first time in human history this has been achieved. Yes there are still pockets in the world where these threats are very real but for most of them they are not. And that has only been achievable due to economic growth. The process of not spending all our working time for immediate consumption but instead spending some of that time to invest in capital, new technologies and new ideas. This has created the medicines to fight off plagues, the agricultural productivity to fight off famine and the concept of non zero sum gains from trade that make violence beneficial to neither side (albeit there are also other non economic reasons for why violence rates have dramatically fallen in recent centuries).

Yet despite all this there are still people who hate economic growth and wish governments stopped encouraging it. Surely these people have to be atleast 2 standard deviations to the evil side of a normal distribution ranking humans on their level of goodness? Am I right?

Yes economic growth has created some issues such as climate change, environmental damage, extinction of certain species with relatively limited forms of consciousness and emotional experiences, threat of nuclear destruction, depression from boredom, drugs and obesity. But on the grand scheme of things eliminating the probable threat of famine, plague and death from violence far outweigh these costs by multiple fold as many of these issues don't hit the majority of the population and are solvable. Not to mention the other benefits economic growth has provided such as numerous forms of entertainment, leisure time, drugs, running toilets, transportation and potentially in the near future economic growth will deliver us much longer lives and much higher scopes for human happiness.

So my question again. If you hate economic growth are you two standard deviations to the evil side of a normal distribution ranking humans on level of goodness?

 

[Procrastinator35]

Sliced Bread.

Lord Sandwich is not amused.

 

[Number37]

Over 2.1 billion people (>35%)in the developing world lived on less than US $3.10 a day in 2012.

 

[M Malice]

oxygen is the best thing since water.

 

[VineyIsLORD]

I don't see many people arguing against economic growth.

I do see most democratic people arguing that economic growth alone tells us very little about how well an economy is going, in particular how it is distributed across society is of far more value.

Many of the south east asian nations are booming and have been for well over a decade, enjoying economic growth in the double figures year on year. Yet it isn't "trickling down" the way the free market extremists said it would - this is causing a backlash all over the globe, whether Brexit, Trump 16, One Nation etc. people are turning away from free market ideology because it isn't benefiting most people.

Economic growth is just a reflection of trade. Everyone likes trade. The way we measure ecocnomic growth is just not really accurate if we're trying to figure out if it's actually benefiting our people or not.

tl;dr economic growth doesn't really tell us anything of value if you believe in democracy

 

[coerced]

Another dumb Seeds thread.

 

[wmvaux]

It's development that gives people the chance to improve their lives. Sadly there are people like those in the green movement that don't want people to develop and improve their lives. Our lives have improved greatly because of development, the average life expectancy has increased and also the quality of life due to technology. Imagine if people in undeveloped places in Africa were able to develop their natural resources and generate wealth? Why should we deny them the opportunity to have what we have?

 

[BirdPerson]

It's going to be pretty interesting to see how these benefits are outweighing the costs when the planet descends into an uninhabitable state over the next few centuries. Infinite growth in a world of finite resources is not sustainable, as we are all now starting to find out.

The need for the exploitation of those at the bottom of the food chain (talking humans here) for the advancement of those at the top aside, the thirst for growth has certainly facilitated some remarkable achievements as you've mentioned. But at the end of the day, we're looking at the next mass extinction on our planet and it's entirely our fault.

Even from a perspective that glorifies growth and the more civilised way of life that accompanies it, is it not time now to acknowledge that we can't continue in this fashion? It's literally leading to our own destruction.

 

[smokingjacket]

The strawman to rule them all

 

[BirdPerson]

Imagine if people in undeveloped places in Africa were able to develop their natural resources and generate wealth? Why should we deny them the opportunity to have what we have?

We have what we have because of these guys. We wouldn't enjoy the excess we do now if we weren't literally digging the wealth out of these countries.

 

[wmvaux]

It's going to be pretty interesting to see how these benefits are outweighing the costs when the planet descends into an uninhabitable state over the next few centuries. Infinite growth in a world of finite resources is not sustainable, as we are all now starting to find out.

The need for the exploitation of those at the bottom of the food chain (talking humans here) for the advancement of those at the top aside, the thirst for growth has certainly facilitated some remarkable achievements as you've mentioned. But at the end of the day, we're looking at the next mass extinction on our planet and it's entirely our fault.

Even from a perspective that glorifies growth and the more civilised way of life that accompanies it, is it not time now to acknowledge that we can't continue in this fashion? It's literally leading to our own destruction.

Population growth is slowing and we have technology to provide plenty of energy, food and water. Humans are smart enough to adapt and do all the time.
There won't be doom and gloom, we'll keep improving as we always have and we'll adapt to any changes.

 

[Seeds]

Over 2.1 billion people (>35%)in the developing world lived on less than US $3.10 a day in 2012.

And that is the lowest proportion the world has ever seen.

 

[Seeds]

I don't see many people arguing against economic growth.

I do see most democratic people arguing that economic growth alone tells us very little about how well an economy is going, in particular how it is distributed across society is of far more value.

Many of the south east asian nations are booming and have been for well over a decade, enjoying economic growth in the double figures year on year. Yet it isn't "trickling down" the way the free market extremists said it would - this is causing a backlash all over the globe, whether Brexit, Trump 16, One Nation etc. people are turning away from free market ideology because it isn't benefiting most people.

Economic growth is just a reflection of trade. Everyone likes trade. The way we measure ecocnomic growth is just not really accurate if we're trying to figure out if it's actually benefiting our people or not.

tl;dr economic growth doesn't really tell us anything of value if you believe in democracy

over the long run economic growth can only occur with a reasonable level of income equality. Economies with very high inequality become politically unstable which destroys economic growth. Not to mention that workers aren't incentivised to work in highly unequal socities. Economic growth also makes it much easier to provide welfare. There is a reason why all the richest societies have the largest welfare programs and lowest rates of poverty.

The bigger issue that you mention in the last paragraph is the link between human well being and economic growth. Economic growth has greatly reduced human misery through improving health and reducing fear from violence. But there are still a lot of question marks about if it improves happiness. It's become obvious that rampant consumerism does not. I think we are about to hit a turning point here on the link between economic growth and happiness as soon we will be able to engineer ourselves to be much happier.

 

[Seeds]

It's going to be pretty interesting to see how these benefits are outweighing the costs when the planet descends into an uninhabitable state over the next few centuries. Infinite growth in a world of finite resources is not sustainable, as we are all now starting to find out.

The need for the exploitation of those at the bottom of the food chain (talking humans here) for the advancement of those at the top aside, the thirst for growth has certainly facilitated some remarkable achievements as you've mentioned. But at the end of the day, we're looking at the next mass extinction on our planet and it's entirely our fault.

Even from a perspective that glorifies growth and the more civilised way of life that accompanies it, is it not time now to acknowledge that we can't continue in this fashion? It's literally leading to our own destruction.

Except we now have more food resources per person then we ever have had. Lack of food supply was a far greater problem when the world only had a population of 1 billion. Conventional Energy resources will gradually run out but they will be replaced by non renewable resources such as solar power well before that happens. There are only a couple of minor resources that can't be replaced but they aren't necessary in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Seeds]

Another dumb Seeds thread.

there are plenty of boring gay marriage, left vs right and Islam threads for you to read.

 

[Seeds]

We have what we have because of these guys. We wouldn't enjoy the excess we do now if we weren't literally digging the wealth out of these countries.

Yes we would have the same excess, well almost. the us and Canada is swimming in oil and gas. It just costs a bit more to dig up.

 

[Seeds]

The strawman to rule them all

Never been to a conference full of greenies or Csiro climate scientists? Many of these people genuinely advocate that governments should actively try to stop economies growing.

 

[BirdPerson]

Except we now have more food resources per person then we ever have had. Lack of food supply was a far greater problem when the world only had a population of 1 billion. Conventional Energy resources will gradually run out but they will be replaced by non renewable resources such as solar power well before that happens. There are only a couple of minor resources that can't be replaced but they aren't necessary in the grand scheme of things.

You are correct, we would have enough food if we waved a magic wand and all the food across the globe was evenly distributed. But that's not how the world works, and instead we have 800 million people who don't have access to sufficient food to live healthily. If growth was the answer this problem could have been fixed by now, we have the production capabilities, instead we grow at their expense.

By the time we've flogged the death out of fossil fuels the world is going to have tipped over the edge in terms of what it is capable of withstanding. Climate change, ocean acidification, nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, and global freshwater stocks. In all these areas we are reaching a tipping point. Flooded coastal cities, eradication of ecosystems/extinction of species (the full impact of this we won't understand until too late due to the complexity of ecosystems), freshwater scarcity (and the resulting impact on food production), the list goes on.

We can't rely on the miracle of technology to be our saviour. If anything, cleaner or more efficient fuels just encourage more production. It is incompatible with a system based on growth to take a step back because you're becoming more efficient. Instead, now that the horse has more to give you flog it harder.

 

[little graham]

Never been to a conference full of greenies or Csiro climate scientists? Many of these people genuinely advocate that governments should actively try to stop economies growing.

 

[Seeds]

By all reports death from violence was extremely high in hunter gatherer societies. Extremely high. And it wasnt even necessarily out of hate given the old and injured often couldn't live a hunter gatherer lifestyle and were murdered out of kindness. Death from malnutrition however was surprisingly low. Not as low as it is today but much lower than you would think and much lower then agricultural socities for thousands of years. This being due to low fertility rates and highly varied diets. There was no rape because rape wasn't considered a thing in many such societies.

Everyone would take today's lifestyle over a hunter gather lifestyle. You are free to go pack up your family and live on a deserted island or in the middle of the bush and start your own hunter gatherer tribe if you want. Virtually no one does for good reason. It's boring and you will likely die of an accident and if your tribe eventually becomes big enough you will likely die from murder.

 

[little graham]

By all reports death from violence was extremely high in hunter gatherer societies. Extremely high. And it wasnt even necessarily out of hate given the old and injured often couldn't live a hunter gatherer lifestyle and were murdered out of kindness. Death from malnutrition however was surprisingly low. Not as low as it is today but much lower than you would think and much lower then agricultural socities for thousands of years. This being due to low fertility rates and highly varied diets. There was no rape because rape wasn't considered a thing in many such societies.

Everyone would take today's lifestyle over a hunter gather lifestyle. You are free to go pack up your family and live on a deserted island or in the middle of the bush and start your own hunter gatherer tribe if you want. Virtually no one does for good reason. It's boring and you will likely die of an accident and if your tribe eventually becomes big enough you will likely die from murder.

Cool story bro but you're an arrogant little fellow, arn't you? When are you going to think for yourself? What you posted is scripted bullshit, propaganda. If your economic system is so good, you would not need violence to protect it, you wouldn't need post rubbish to validate it.

Many have woken up that the European banking system is inherently evil and those civilizations you called hunter gatherer, are actually way more intelligent than the one you blindly share allegiance to.

 

[Lebbo73]

Cool story bro but you're an arrogant little fellow, arn't you? When are you going to think for yourself? What you posted is scripted bullshit, propaganda. If your economic system is so good, you would not need violence to protect it, you wouldn't need post rubbish to validate it.

Many have woken up that the European banking system is inherently evil and those civilizations you called hunter gatherer, are actually way more intelligent than the one you blindly share allegiance to.

You just got smacked down, LG!

 

[Seeds]

Cool story bro but you're an arrogant little fellow, arn't you? When are you going to think for yourself? What you posted is scripted bullshit, propaganda. If your economic system is so good, you would not need violence to protect it, you wouldn't need post rubbish to validate it.

Many have woken up that the European banking system is inherently evil and those civilizations you called hunter gatherer, are actually way more intelligent than the one you blindly share allegiance to.

Gees turn down the hate a fraction. Did you actually disagree with any points I made or is it the truth that hurts?

What has the European banking system got to do with anything this thread is about? I think western banking systems have major flaws and are a major source of economic instability and need serious rectifying that sadly I don't see ever happening unless a very serious banking crash happens. Don't know why we are discussing banking systems in this thread though.

The humans in the 10,000 years before agriculture societies were formed are suspected to of basically been the same as we are today in terms of genetics and therefore would of had the same intelligence. Its suspected that hunter gatherers also had vast amounts of knowledge that were lost after humans had moved into agriculture. But again, what has this got to do with the benefits of the lifestyles they had?

 

[smokingjacket]

Never been to a conference full of greenies or Csiro climate scientists? Many of these people genuinely advocate that governments should actively try to stop economies growing.

That's a misunderstanding of the logic of sustainability economics.

Their argument is that yes we should support developing countries attempts to lift themselves out of poverty but that it must be accompanied by cuts to consumption of resources in the West to offset the rise of these people as our biosystem has already reached its limits of stability.

This is in the absence of any major breakthroughs in mass power generation but not only limited to emissions but also things as diverse as steel, beef, and water. All of these resources will come under pressure from rising living standards in the developing world over the next 50 years while we're supposedly trying to curb runaway climate change.

Like how in China they built a city the size of Chicago every year, all of the built form that exists in the world today as urban habitat will need to be built again to house the rest of developing world over the next 50 years.

It's a remarkable challenge and will make great demands on resources even if you don't believe in climate change. When you throw in the challenge of trying to keep emissions stable at the same time it becomes quite scary.

Your first post makes a number of highly ideological statements and passes them off as fact, so in that vein I put it to you: if all of the economic growth that has gone on to date - largely as a result of the industrialisation of the West - causes climate change that causes mass loss of life and livelihood across the most vulnerable parts of the globe, does that make us evil?

Modernity isn't capitalist economic growth. We need to move beyond growth capitalism for a numbers of reasons.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

Cool story bro but you're an arrogant little fellow, arn't you? When are you going to think for yourself? What you posted is scripted bullshit, propaganda. If your economic system is so good, you would not need violence to protect it, you wouldn't need post rubbish to validate it.

Many have woken up that the European banking system is inherently evil and those civilizations you called hunter gatherer, are actually way more intelligent than the one you blindly share allegiance to.

Your post got the answer it deserved. No fights, murder, theft, jealousy or rape in tribal societies? You actually believe that? Pretty hard to take you seriously when you tell people to think for themselves but then parrot nonsense about how glorious the hunter gatherer lifestyle is.