3 ms·

You can say what you want about Augustine, but he was right about the connection between population growth and better outcomes for humanity. Population decline

You can say what you want about Augustine, but he was right about the connection between population growth and better outcomes for humanity. Population decline is going to hurt humanity and society in wild and unpredictable ways and the planet doesn't care either way, it's a giant rock.

lm28469 3y ago
Infinite growth always ends up the same way one day or another though
- speak_plainly 3y ago
  Yeah, humans leaving the planet and flourishing.
  - lm28469 3y ago
    In computer games I used to play as a kid yes, that's called sci-fi, until we actually do it I'll rely on the holy spirit and santa claus
defrost 3y ago
Critics of 'degrowth' economics say it's unworkable— but from an ecologist's perspective, it's inevitable https://phys.org/news/2023-08-critics-degrowth-economics-unworkablebut-ecologist.html https://phys.org/news/2023-08-critics-degrowth-economics-unw... You may not have noticed, but earlier this month we passed Earth overshoot day, when humanity's demands for ecological resources and services exceeded what our planet can regenerate annually. Many economists criticizing the developing degrowth movement fail to appreciate this critical point of Earth's biophysical limits. etc.
- speak_plainly 3y ago
  Earth overshoot day is not a serious movement. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029445-000-admit-it-we-cant-measure-our-ecological-footprint/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029445-000-admit-it...
  - defrost 3y ago
    "10 year old opinion piece says it's hard to measure resource footprint" Sure. So what's your estimate on our current resource burn rate with > 8 billion people, several tens of billion tonnes of ore extraction per annum, terrawatts of energy generation causing problems with the atmosphere, etc. We golden, or are the cracks starting to show? The key point you're missing isn't * whether or not the people that originally looked at resource burn rates Vs. renewals got their sums correct, but * whether the idea that globally we're overstripping our resources is sound. Your link agrees that this is an issue: But I for one imagined that the footprint analysis was a bit smarter, that it had some handle on how we are overusing our soils and water reserves. Sadly, it does not measure the things that most of us assumed it does – and the things we really need to know. So, ten years on, do we have a better understanding of our sustainable usage?

lm28469 3y ago

Infinite growth always ends up the same way one day or another though

speak_plainly 3y ago
Yeah, humans leaving the planet and flourishing.
- lm28469 3y ago
  In computer games I used to play as a kid yes, that's called sci-fi, until we actually do it I'll rely on the holy spirit and santa claus

defrost 3y ago

Critics of 'degrowth' economics say it's unworkable— but from an ecologist's perspective, it's inevitable https://phys.org/news/2023-08-critics-degrowth-economics-unworkablebut-ecologist.html https://phys.org/news/2023-08-critics-degrowth-economics-unw... You may not have noticed, but earlier this month we passed Earth overshoot day, when humanity's demands for ecological resources and services exceeded what our planet can regenerate annually. Many economists criticizing the developing degrowth movement fail to appreciate this critical point of Earth's biophysical limits. etc.

speak_plainly 3y ago
Earth overshoot day is not a serious movement. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029445-000-admit-it-we-cant-measure-our-ecological-footprint/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029445-000-admit-it...
- defrost 3y ago
  "10 year old opinion piece says it's hard to measure resource footprint" Sure. So what's your estimate on our current resource burn rate with > 8 billion people, several tens of billion tonnes of ore extraction per annum, terrawatts of energy generation causing problems with the atmosphere, etc. We golden, or are the cracks starting to show? The key point you're missing isn't * whether or not the people that originally looked at resource burn rates Vs. renewals got their sums correct, but * whether the idea that globally we're overstripping our resources is sound. Your link agrees that this is an issue: But I for one imagined that the footprint analysis was a bit smarter, that it had some handle on how we are overusing our soils and water reserves. Sadly, it does not measure the things that most of us assumed it does – and the things we really need to know. So, ten years on, do we have a better understanding of our sustainable usage?