I'd argue that market economics does not 'require' destruction of the environment as the video suggests. The initial success of Tesla cars, a growing demand of

I'd argue that market economics does not 'require' destruction of the environment as the video suggests. The initial success of Tesla cars, a growing demand of organic foods and sustainable farming and fishing methods proves their is a huge market which is dependent on mitigating environmental damage WHILE maintaining the consumer culture. We may have been slow on take-up but I think it is hard to argue that change is coming. It is also not opposed by the market forces of increased efficiency, as the video suggests, but rather driven by the values of producers and consumers, which the video seems to neglect to mention as a whole. His second argument that the majority of jobs will be replaced by machine automation, is the view of a luddite. Over the past 100 years we've had many jobs be replaced by machine, and yet, we continue to add more and more people to the workforce in roles which could never have been imagined before. Traffic cops used to guide every intersection, and then the traffic light came to replace them all! Today, we don't wonder 'what happened to the traffic cop?', we don't suspect that thousands of people would be employed if only we didn't have traffic lights. People move on, learn new skills, create new things, unimaginable things. I think the video contradicts itself on it's third point. If the system needs people to make money in order to continue to have the foot on the gas pedal, then how can class inequality be a driver or even a 'mathematical enevitablity'? Though the challenges of class are very real, he completely ignores the fact that poverty has been in decline, even as the global population has grown. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2013/04/17/remarkable-declines-in-global-poverty-but-major-challenges-remain http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2013/04/17/re...