Complete video at: fora.tv Author and environmentalist Bill McKibben criticizes sustained economic growth, a policy goal, he argues, whose costs outweigh its benefits. —– Bill McKibben discusses his groundbreaking new book “Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future.” McKibben focuses on the point where environmental and economic issues intersect, offering revolutionary ideas for approaching these problems. This is one of the most important books to be published on issues relating to global warming. McKibben is the author of “Hundred Dollar Holiday,” “Maybe One,” and “Hope, Human and Wild” – Book Passage
Video Rating: 4 / 5
Want to Live Extra Years?
25 Responses to “Bill McKibben – Downsides to Economic Growth”
does he masterbate
It’s an uphill battle. Bill is correct and the financial crisis was actually good for the planet; 10% less carbon emissions! The system is not balanced and must fall, cracks are already there. Future generations will be awestruck on our (former) “Age of Plenty” and probably will not be able to comprehend our lifestyles. Better that way, so they won’t curse us
Politics, economics, philosophy, even religion will no longer matter when the finite space is filled and its resources depleted to the point of gone. Dialogue is important, but don’t lose sight of facts and try to keep an eye open as things change. Some things are true whether you believe them or not…
@350global Watch out for those who want no control or regulation of anything!
Keep on promoting the interests of multimillionaires, keep on being ignorant of what the term “scientific consensus” means, keep on blathering on YouTube about the conspiracy They are committing! *yawn*
Or you could just get a library card…
Downsides to economic destruction caused by foolish regulation giving credence to the AGW lie:
unemployment, starvation, 3rd world contries that will never be able to develop.
31,000 scientists and the founder of the Weather Channel know that man-made global warming is a hoax.
4500 of the 6000 temp gathering stations were shut down because they didnt agree with the global warming scam.
Watch out for those who want total control and regulation of everything!
@behaack, good priorities you have there. We don’t need “the environment” at all to live. And Jesus is coming to destroy what we don’t need anyhow.
Your views on economics must have been very hazy.
So Mr. McKibben seems more concerned with the environent then he is in the downward slope of the American “happiness” curve.
A lot has happened during the part 50 years since American happiness has peaked. It may very well be that if our prosperity has not increased that our happiness level may be even lower.
We did not evolve to be happy. We evolved to compete the pass on our genes. That’s why there’s such an instinct to grab consumables. Or spend your money on an expensive watch to compete with people. No doubt you’ll remember the watch less than a family day out that the money could be spent on.
Why he don’t want the chinese to eat?
Hey, I’m not some materialist who thinks that technology is the solution. It can certainly be harnessed to do great things, but humans, by nature, can make technology destructive. So I think that we must use technology for human good, not for profit or war.
But the measure of human happiness has nothing to do with material gains. Health maybe, but the new technology doesn’t really let us relax more, it’s still a contest. We might shorten our hours, but we’re more likely to increase the complexity of what we have to perform than reduce it. If something is easy it won’t pay you anything to do it, hence, relatively speaking, we stay in the same place, only with an increasingly complicated environment. :-p
No, but one would think that amazing new technology and prosperity would lead to happiness. One of the problems is that most of the prosperity has gone to the very rich.
@dtot
It’s enlightening, but tell me, did you think that everyone got happier and happier all the time? ;-p
This video is truly enlightening. It truly changes my views on economics.
I totally agree. I think the most challenging aspect of growth is understanding limits and determining what is essential to life in order to meet those limits. We, as an entire species, need to re-evaluate our needs and wants. Also, the “environment” needs to be put clearly in the constitution as a stakeholder in society, with rights. This is what Ecuador is trying to do and it will be a perfect way to bring the environmental justice movement to the forefront of policy making.
The harmful side of growth may not be apparent all at once, though. Perhaps growth first is widely beneficial, then later adversely affects the natural environment, still later damages the human habitat, and finally destroys the jobs and economic security it was supposed to create. At each stage those who are unaffected fail to take alarm. If growth creates unemployment for some, but better jobs for others, those who are still employed will continue to see growth as beneficial.
It already adversely affects human habitats. Chemicals that get leaked into our food system, rivers, soils, and air are the result of this unfettered economic growth. Manufacturing is one of the most destructive force to human habitats. As these jobs get outsourced more and more to the “global south”/”under-developed”/”3rd World” then the evidence of human habitat destruction will not be so clear, since these areas of the world have no voice.
Faith in the absolute goodness of economic growth ignores one crucial piece of evidence. We see with our own eyes that unrestrained economic growth can be destructive to the natural environment and the habitats of plants and animals. Logic suggests that the same process may reach a stage where it adversely affects the human habitat, and that this is manifested in the economic insecurity and social breakdown we are trying to change.
Yes. I definetley agree with him. If economic growth measures happiness of people, americans or other people in industrial countires must be happier than others. However, is it true? I dont think economy is the only factor to mesure people’s happiness. So, politicians. focus on something else, too.
The why is easy. It’s a matter of power. Power is taken because if it isn’t it is stolen. If something can be done more efficiently than before someone will do it so and benefit. Personally I’d think that the most pressing concern for humanity would be to end strife and world poverty but that doesn’t increase power, or options of actions or give an edge where profit spills in. So they’re second rate issues. Greed rules because hungry people will always eat, and people who are feed up starve.
word. it’s about time we question these axioms of modern economics and start looking at living closer to our means. why do we always seem to believe that this is equivalent to less happiness? I think that if christians actually read the bible they would agree too hahaha. richer = happier is such an indoctrined belief.
=(, I’ve made a mess of my statements under this video, because I was tired and in a bad mood when I wrote them, which is a shame to. I do agree though, if you roll a boulder of a mountain sure it rolls faster and faster, but to where exactly. The main thing that we’re accomplishing is an increase of the complexity and power of action that we have in our lives. Sounds good, but with the constant drive to master the complexities it is possible that we’re also causing increased frustration.
that is an unfair statement and you know it. he never goes into the variables, rather he draws an overall economic correlation to raise a question. the bottomline of what he’s saying is that the current economic idea of growth as the proverbial steam engine keeping us moving should be questioned. and wouldn’t you agree??
guess what i just punched my fuckn keyboard a;f6