The Great Debate: Is There a Limit? “Yes” Physiocrats Classical economists Ecological economists...
-
date post
20-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
2
Transcript of The Great Debate: Is There a Limit? “Yes” Physiocrats Classical economists Ecological economists...
The Great Debate: Is There a Limit?
“Yes”
• Physiocrats
• Classical economists
• Ecological economists
• Ecologists
“No”
• Neoclassical economists
• Corporations
• Politicians
=$
$
$$
The “Information Economy”
• What is the information used for?
• How does one come to afford the information?
And yet we hear:
“Some people just don’t get it.
There is no conflict between
economic growth and
environmental protection!”
Why do they persist?
Goals• Replace national goal of “economic
growth” with national goal of steady state economy.
• Replace bloating economy with steady state economy.
Revolutions
• Magnitude of change
• Pace of change
• “When evolution won’t cut it”
• Evolution combined with revolt
Steady State Revolution
• Academic, social
• Peaceable, not pacifistic
• Models–abolition of child labor
–reduction of smoking
Academic Phase
• Replacement of neoclassical
economic growth theory
• Refocusing of curricula
• More public outreach
Social Phase• “Economic growth” reconstructed
as economic bloating
• Dollar spent is dollar burned
• Castigation of the liquidating class
Class Structure of the Steady State Revolution
• Liquidating class
• Steady state class
• Amorphic class
Percentile: 80 99 100
Expenditures
Consumption Classes
Percentile: 80 99 100
Expenditures
Consumption Classes
Percentile: 80 99 100
Expenditures
Consumption Classes
Percentile: 80 99 100
Expenditures
Consumption Classes
Liquidators
Steady Staters
Amorphs
Amorphic Class
Steady State Class
Liquidating Class
Amorphic Class
Liquidating Class
Steady State Class
Economic Rationale
• “Trickle-down consumption”
• Redistribution of wealth compensates for reduced per capita consumption
• Reduction of waste
• Leads toward steady state economy
Liquidators
Amorphs
Ecological Capacity
PovertyLineSome Steady Staters
Most Steady Staters
Liquidators
Amorphs Liquidators
Amorphs
Steady Staters
Ecological Capacity
PovertyLineSome Steady Staters
Most Steady Staters
Political Rationale
• No “everyone revolt against everybody”
• Taps into predisposition
• Readily identifiable classes
Psychological Rationale
• Darwin, Veblen, Maslow
• Cure for “liquidator syndrome”
• Ratcheting effect toward
sustainable ideology
Maslow’s Hierarchy 1) Food
2) Security
3) Love, affection, reproduction
4) Self-esteem
5) Self-actualization
Sociopolitical Rationale
• Ideological horse before the public
policy cart
• Supplementary to policy
prescriptions
• Replaces politicians, not system
Ethics I • Equity (current, intergenerational)
• Consistent with religions: Buddhist,
Christian, Hindu, Islamic, Judaic
• “Devil in the details” of castigation
• Tolerance overrated
Ethics II• “Why do they hate Americans?”
– It’s the economy, stupid!
– Conspicuous consumption not everything, but
major thing
• SSR beats violent alternatives
• “Speaking truth to power”
K
GD
P
Time