shmmeee
Well-Known Member
We've discussed this before. Growth is, by its very nature, unsustainable and a fools errand.. All the time needing ever higher populations, land and resources that are finite being used faster and faster. Just a recipe for war over territory and resources until it implodes spectacularly.
It's not that there isn't enough money, it's that those with it all refuse to let anyone else have any. If we have growth it still all just goes to those that have loads and the poor are still in need. Look at big cities that have massive growth in populations and economy. A handful live in fabulous luxury due to it but far more suffer abject poverty and social problems. So what's the suggestion - more growth - which just entrenches the problems! What's that adage about doing the same thing and expecting different results?
Where economic policy needs to focus is distribution, not growth. I'm not naive enough to think that it'd appeal to voters - I know it wouldn't - but is more likely to get results.
Good luck telling people their living standards are going to fall. Growth is not at all unsustainable by its nature. That’s a completely ahistorical take. You also don’t need more people for growth, because it’s per capita that matters.
Overall though, I don’t really want to live in a country preserved in aspic for older generations because we refuse to build anything. I like innovation. I like new stuff. It leads to better lives than the old stuff.