disclaimer: I haven't read the article very well. If you don't feel like reading some drivel don't read any further. My hunch is that this is the wrong questio

disclaimer: I haven't read the article very well. If you don't feel like reading some drivel don't read any further. My hunch is that this is the wrong question to ask. Tackling economical issues like this is like wanting to start working out and then spend all your time discussing the best(TM) fitness routine online. No amount of math will save us. After all those years of rapid economical and technological progress we have to acknowledge that it's the human factor we have to work on the most. Economic growth is a tool and we can not use it very wisely as we haven't figured out our society's real needs all that well. We lack collective tacit knowledge so to speak. That what we can codify (at least at the moment) isn't enough to solve our problems. But I think the author is right that a zero-growth economy should be the goal. Because only then resources of all kind could be perfectly allocated. However, this assumes that the perfect allocation of resources is a.) possible and b.) desirable.