4 ms·

Yes, some change in pesticide use would fit better with the time scale. But supposing that's the source of the problem, I don't understand your focus on capita

Yes, some change in pesticide use would fit better with the time scale. But supposing that's the source of the problem, I don't understand your focus on capitalism. In any economic system, some people are going to be trying to increase the efficiency of food production (if not, they'll all eventually starve to death). In doing so, they are going to be responding to incentives of making money, or of getting a promotion after fulfilling the goals of the five-year plan, or simply of having the inner feeling of having done a good job. I don't see why only the "making money" incentive is problematic. And indeed, the former Soviet block was notorious for terrible environmental problems.

toss1 6y ago
Good question, thx. It is the balance that I'm focusing on. Completely agree that over-regulation, e.g., soviet-style, is a recipe for many of the WORST environmental disasters. Corporate regulatory capture or elimination of regulation is just crashing the scale in the other direction. Since the current problem in most of the world is lack of constraints on production of, for example, things that serve some purpose but also break the food web, that's my focus. Basically, it seems that, whenever people get enough good information, and have good democratic (small-d) control of the system, they find a balance to encourage and regulate development. No one wants to live in a wasteland. But if too few control things, such as an authoritarian state, or corporatists doing regulatory capture, they have the illusion that they can destroy all they want, externalize the damage, and enjoy life in their palaces. For centurys, it was true. Now, we seem to be approaching the point where the whole food web may break.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]