7 ms·

I think the market has shown that growth is the solution rather than rationing. Lots of the humanitarian improvements of the 20th century (such as number of peo

I think the market has shown that growth is the solution rather than rationing. Lots of the humanitarian improvements of the 20th century (such as number of people starving) are improved due to market forces innovating on doing more with less. The same will no doubt happen to energy. Consumption is the catalyst.

makapuf 3y ago
OK but natural resources are unlikely to grow. Unregulated market forces lead to hell (and of course also is too much regulation)
- sackfield 3y ago
  They don't need to grow, efficiency can grow though as very aptly demonstrated in the 20th century.
  - makapuf 3y ago
    Thermodynamics sometimes say that you can't. Also, if I can mine $x coins for y energy, I will generate a bit more of $money and remove natural resources. Value of coins may not keep their value in 2000 years, but co2 ppm/ecosystems/metals/whatever won't be there anymore, unless we know how to deal with them, that we may or we may not.
murrygawhround 3y ago
[dead]
birdofhermes 3y ago
Market forces? It was the Haber process and subsequent innovations around nitrogen-fixing. It was scientific progress that saved us from Malthusian collapse. On the other hand, market forces do explain why 40% of the American food supply is wasted [0] while 12% of American households suffer food insecurity [1]. [0] https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/ https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/ [1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/key-statistics-graphics/#foodsecure https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
jrflowers 3y ago
> Lots of the humanitarian improvements of the 20th century (such as number of people starving) are improved due to market forces This is a good point. The conversion of atmospheric nitrogen to ammonia is a capitalist reaction that would not occur under Regulations. Few people these days acknowledge all of the grain fields planted by Adam Smith in the early 1900s

makapuf 3y ago

OK but natural resources are unlikely to grow. Unregulated market forces lead to hell (and of course also is too much regulation)

sackfield 3y ago
They don't need to grow, efficiency can grow though as very aptly demonstrated in the 20th century.
- makapuf 3y ago
  Thermodynamics sometimes say that you can't. Also, if I can mine $x coins for y energy, I will generate a bit more of $money and remove natural resources. Value of coins may not keep their value in 2000 years, but co2 ppm/ecosystems/metals/whatever won't be there anymore, unless we know how to deal with them, that we may or we may not.

murrygawhround 3y ago

[dead]

birdofhermes 3y ago

Market forces? It was the Haber process and subsequent innovations around nitrogen-fixing. It was scientific progress that saved us from Malthusian collapse. On the other hand, market forces do explain why 40% of the American food supply is wasted [0] while 12% of American households suffer food insecurity [1]. [0] https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/ https://www.rts.com/resources/guides/food-waste-america/ [1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/key-statistics-graphics/#foodsecure https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

jrflowers 3y ago

> Lots of the humanitarian improvements of the 20th century (such as number of people starving) are improved due to market forces This is a good point. The conversion of atmospheric nitrogen to ammonia is a capitalist reaction that would not occur under Regulations. Few people these days acknowledge all of the grain fields planted by Adam Smith in the early 1900s