This is G o o g l e's cache of http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/pfvs/2000/msg03889.html as retrieved on 21 Feb 2004 04:19:41 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
This cached page may reference images which are no longer available. Click here for the cached text only. To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:5HQoFJxPtOUJ:csf.colorado.edu/mail/pfvs/2000/msg03889.html++%22David+MacClement%22+site:csf.colorado.edu&hl=en
Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content. |
| These search terms have been highlighted: | david | macclement |
|
|
Re: [pf] a sustainable economic system
< < <
Date > > >
|
< < <
Thread > > >
Re: [pf] a sustainable economic system
by David MacClement
10 July 2000 19:01 UTC
At 20:33 9/7/2000 -0700, Jill Taylor Bussiere wrote:
>What we have not yet discussed explicitly in the choice between GoreorBush
>and Nader, is capitalism.
>We can not sustain existence on the planet with the capitalist system that
>we have been using - with its need for growth. Nor can we continue with
>the
>model of continued exploitation that world powers have been using for
>centuries. Our frontiers are gone. The wall is in our face, and there is
>writing on it. ... The consumerism that we all condemn is a direct result
>of
>capitalism. ...
>We need a new model. To vote for Gore or Bush is to vote for capitalism.
>To vote for Nader is to vote for a person who realizes that the earth has
>limits, and has been acting upon that realization. ... there
>sure is some relationship between ownership of land and capitalism.
>What other models of land could there be besides individual ownership? The
>ones I could think of so far were government ownership, communal ownership,
>no ownership (there would be several forms of that as well....) What
>models
>are there for a sustainable economic system?
>
>Any ideas?
>
** I have little to say; I'm mainly pointing out that Jill's started a
very worthwhile thread.
** The only point I can add is that for most of human history,
sustainability has been the assumed goal of the whole society/civilization.
Individuals and cities have wanted and achieved growth in power, but the
assumption has been that the general shape of "the world" would be nearly
the same in a hundred years, bar some ups and downs in relationships.
** A merchant or a farm owner would often want to become more prosperous,
but what would be handed on to the son/daughter would be in the same scale
(e.g. only 50-100% bigger) when one life tailed off and the next person
took over - sustainable. Not tens or hundreds of times bigger.
** There wasn't this assumption that not-increasing-profit-every-year was
shameful. You accepted ups and downs - sustainable.
** Yes, we do need examples, models of a sustainable economic system, and
I'm sure they're there, because that's been the way-of-life for most of
human experience. This 100-year "blip" (so far; it'll take a long time to
tail off) is quite out=of-the ordinary, caused by greed grabbing hold of
science-derived huge power. Capitalism is a formulising of that. (creating
& using a formula, a recipe.)
David.
(David MacClement) davd@ihug.co.nz
http://www.emucities.com.au/member/davd/
****************************************
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
< < <
Date > > >
|
< < <
Thread > > >
|
Home