Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Reduction in the use of resources whilst maintaining economic growth: A Myth; The belief that economic growth can be detached from destruction appears to be based on a simple accounting mistake.
Topic Started: Nov 29 2015, 02:00 PM (82 Views)
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
http://www.monbiot.com/2015/11/24/false-promise/

Quote:
 
[..]
There are two kinds of decoupling: relative and absolute. Relative decoupling means using less stuff with every unit of economic growth. Absolute decoupling means a total reduction in the use of resources, even though the economy continues to grow. Almost all economists believe that decoupling – relative or absolute – is an inexorable feature of economic growth.

On this notion rests the concept of sustainable development. [..] But it appears to be unfounded.

A paper published earlier this year in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences proposes that even the relative decoupling we claim to have achieved is an artefact of false accounting. It points out that governments and economists have measured our impacts in a way that seems irrational.

Here’s how the false accounting works. It takes the raw materials we extract in our own countries, adds them to our imports of stuff from other countries, then subtracts our exports, to end up with something called “domestic material consumption”. But by measuring only the products shifted from one nation to another, rather than the raw materials needed to create those products, it greatly underestimates the total use of resources by the rich nations.

For example, if ores are mined and processed at home, these raw materials, as well as the machinery and infrastructure used to make finished metal, are included in the domestic material consumption accounts. But if we buy a finished product from abroad, only the weight of the metal is counted.


I pointed out the lie that we have reduced carbon emissions before by pointing to import/export related stuff.

This really does take the biscuit though. Why do these people call themselves 'economists'?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I think the whole of the Carbon capture idea and all this "green" propaganda is a load of shite and is making £billions for a select few, if we really wanted to make a difference we would have done so, it is all for show and bucks,ffs, lets start by allowing the Amazon rain forest to regrow itself after decades of deforestationing.

I despair at do gooders who apparently know what is best for us.....and their bank accounts.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
If you want to capture carbon then go plant a few hundred million trees. Re-forest the planet, turn the deserts green and spawn carbon consuming algae in the oceans. Whilst you are at it go cull ~7b humans. We moan about climate change, but who is it they claim are causing such changes? Humans. So reduce the size of the human foot-print. Why do we need 9b or 12b consuming, shitting and farting across the Planet? What for? I am sure a world of <2b will be more easy to manage.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
A biblical solution .... don't you pause to consider that this is what is happening now, today?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Nov 29 2015, 03:03 PM
A biblical solution .... don't you pause to consider that this is what is happening now, today?

Papa warned many moons ago that if we did not control populations in a manageable way then nature would do it for us, I believed him then and I still believe him now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cymru
Alt-Right
[ *  *  *  * ]
We have to get over this obsession with maintaining economic growth.

Having an economy based on constant economic growth in a world of finite resources is not only unsustainable it lessens the time we have to adapt before the resources are used up. It isn't rocket science, the maintaining of economic growth in a consumerist economy requires a constant expansion in the number of consumers which in turn has the effect of increasing the consumption of resources.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Cymru
Nov 29 2015, 04:27 PM
We have to get over this obsession with maintaining economic growth.

Having an economy based on constant economic growth in a world of finite resources is not only unsustainable it lessens the time we have to adapt before the resources are used up. It isn't rocket science, the maintaining of economic growth in a consumerist economy requires a constant expansion in the number of consumers which in turn has the effect of increasing the consumption of resources.
Yes mate, it is simple arithmetics.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Cymru
Nov 29 2015, 04:27 PM
We have to get over this obsession with maintaining economic growth.

Having an economy based on constant economic growth in a world of finite resources is not only unsustainable it lessens the time we have to adapt before the resources are used up. It isn't rocket science, the maintaining of economic growth in a consumerist economy requires a constant expansion in the number of consumers which in turn has the effect of increasing the consumption of resources.
Yes but who will vote for a lowering in materialism?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
None of our parties are for sensible policies wrt to OP.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Nov 29 2015, 06:13 PM
Cymru
Nov 29 2015, 04:27 PM
We have to get over this obsession with maintaining economic growth.

Having an economy based on constant economic growth in a world of finite resources is not only unsustainable it lessens the time we have to adapt before the resources are used up. It isn't rocket science, the maintaining of economic growth in a consumerist economy requires a constant expansion in the number of consumers which in turn has the effect of increasing the consumption of resources.
Yes but who will vote for a lowering in materialism?
Certainly not those in receipt of benefits.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
^ Not true. Plenty of those on tax credits voted for this govt.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 29 2015, 07:02 PM
^ Not true. Plenty of those on tax credits voted for this govt.
And have they suffered in any way as a result of voting that way?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
-
Edited by skwirked, Nov 29 2015, 07:10 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
They will by 2020 according to current policy, just next month they will suffer a small cut to real income.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply