2 ms·

Berry has written extensively about environmental degradation. Notice the caveat above: "if we share". Human greed is the fly in the ointment. Again, he's writt

Berry has written extensively about environmental degradation. Notice the caveat above: "if we share". Human greed is the fly in the ointment. Again, he's written extensively on the impact of human greed on the environment. It's not inconsistent to think that there is enough for all and also to think that when we try to grab too much of that stuff for ourselves (more than what we need) that that mutual enough-ness (I hesitate to use the word "prosperity" here because it's accreted a lot of baggage in our hyper-capitalistic modern world) is threatened.

lisper 4y ago
> Notice the caveat above: "if we share". Human greed is the fly in the ointment. No, it isn't. Basic physics and economics is the fly in the ointment. For a given level of economic activity, a given amount of material wealth will be produced. That wealth can be distributed evenly or unevenly, equitably or inequitably [1], but there is one basic fact that cannot change, which is the that average wealth per capita will equal the total wealth divided by the number of people. So if the population increases without a concomitant increase in total wealth, everyone will necessarily be, on average, worse off, no matter how much we share. Christian theology is based on the idea that "God will provide" and intercede miraculously if we have enough faith. Unfortunately, that belief, as with most religious beliefs, collides violently with reality, and when it does, reality wins. [1] It is also worth noting that an even distribution is not necessarily the same as an equitable one.
- trasz 4y ago
  >Basic physics and economics is the fly in the ointment. Laws of physics are (believed to be) universal. Economics, on the other hand, is man-made and can be adjusted as required.
  - lisper 4y ago
    That's what the leaders of the Soviet Union thought. They learned the hard way that it isn't true.
    - trasz 4y ago
      That's what every leader thought - every country has a slightly different rules - and many of them ended up quite well.
      - lisper 4y ago
        As individuals they may have done well, but that has nothing to do with the fact that the nation failed when their attempts to alter the laws of economics collided with reality.
        trasz 4y ago
        Again - every nation altered those laws and most did just fine. There aren’t any “universal laws of economics”; it’s all entirely man-made and there are many different variations.
        lisper 4y ago
        > There aren’t any “universal laws of economics” Yes, there are. Let's go back to your original claim: > Economics, on the other hand, is man-made and can be adjusted as required. Think about it: if this were true, it would be possible to "adjust" the laws of economics to (say) eliminate poverty. So if eliminating poverty is a simple matter of "adjusting" economics, why hasn't any nation on earth ever eliminated poverty by "adjusting" its economics? It's because economics is not "man-made", it's a consequence of human psychology, which is a natural phenomenon and therefore operates according to natural laws, not man-made ones. It is not possible to eliminate poverty simply by "adjusting" economics. There are actual underlying constraints that you have to operate under: finite resources, the fact that people won't work without incentives, the fact that different people want different things. One man's "poverty" is another man's "freedom." BTW, even Jesus recognized that you cannot eliminate poverty simply by sharing: Mat26:6-11.
        trasz 4y ago
        Those that would like to eliminate poverty aren’t those making decisions. If laws of economy were fixed, how come they change over time?

lisper 4y ago

> Notice the caveat above: "if we share". Human greed is the fly in the ointment. No, it isn't. Basic physics and economics is the fly in the ointment. For a given level of economic activity, a given amount of material wealth will be produced. That wealth can be distributed evenly or unevenly, equitably or inequitably [1], but there is one basic fact that cannot change, which is the that average wealth per capita will equal the total wealth divided by the number of people. So if the population increases without a concomitant increase in total wealth, everyone will necessarily be, on average, worse off, no matter how much we share. Christian theology is based on the idea that "God will provide" and intercede miraculously if we have enough faith. Unfortunately, that belief, as with most religious beliefs, collides violently with reality, and when it does, reality wins. [1] It is also worth noting that an even distribution is not necessarily the same as an equitable one.

trasz 4y ago
>Basic physics and economics is the fly in the ointment. Laws of physics are (believed to be) universal. Economics, on the other hand, is man-made and can be adjusted as required.
- lisper 4y ago
  That's what the leaders of the Soviet Union thought. They learned the hard way that it isn't true.
  - trasz 4y ago
    That's what every leader thought - every country has a slightly different rules - and many of them ended up quite well.
    - lisper 4y ago
      As individuals they may have done well, but that has nothing to do with the fact that the nation failed when their attempts to alter the laws of economics collided with reality.
      - trasz 4y ago
        Again - every nation altered those laws and most did just fine. There aren’t any “universal laws of economics”; it’s all entirely man-made and there are many different variations.
        lisper 4y ago
        > There aren’t any “universal laws of economics” Yes, there are. Let's go back to your original claim: > Economics, on the other hand, is man-made and can be adjusted as required. Think about it: if this were true, it would be possible to "adjust" the laws of economics to (say) eliminate poverty. So if eliminating poverty is a simple matter of "adjusting" economics, why hasn't any nation on earth ever eliminated poverty by "adjusting" its economics? It's because economics is not "man-made", it's a consequence of human psychology, which is a natural phenomenon and therefore operates according to natural laws, not man-made ones. It is not possible to eliminate poverty simply by "adjusting" economics. There are actual underlying constraints that you have to operate under: finite resources, the fact that people won't work without incentives, the fact that different people want different things. One man's "poverty" is another man's "freedom." BTW, even Jesus recognized that you cannot eliminate poverty simply by sharing: Mat26:6-11.
        trasz 4y ago
        Those that would like to eliminate poverty aren’t those making decisions. If laws of economy were fixed, how come they change over time?