It's a difficult concept to grasp because growth has raised our standard of living.
The question though is:
Does Growth make us any happier.
Top politians leading our country continue to repeat that what we need to do is :
Stimulate Growth.
It is clear that they have not thought this argument through to its very bitter end.
The big problem is that the world does not have the resources to support continuous growth.
An article in The Independent explores this issue.
5 comments:
Trouble is too many people have benefited from hand outs (even if some see them as 'hand ups') during the last few years. The country is using a 'credit card' to pay interest on other credit cards that pay for what has been spent and is still being spent. It will be hard for recipients to lose what they have got used to. Will there also be resentment from those who have always lived modestly and within their income — however small — to pay for debt they are not responsible for?
One way to help solve this problem of debt is to earn more through growth. (Simply put: If you lacked food, you might decide to grow more vegetables in your allotment, or keep chickens for eggs. The initial outlay could be got back through selling some produce, and you would be eating healthily too.)
This is not a case of wanting MORE but finding a solution to debt, whoever caused it.
I agree about the ever increasing desire to be forever wanting more of everything not necessary to health and happiness.
But I see national growth as necessary at present to pay our way out of debt. Once we are back on an even keel then we need to work even harder at wanting less. We need to build on a solid foundation or surely the country will collapse like a house of cards.
The focus on economic recovery is perhaps missing the bigger picture where the worlds resources are running out.
At a time when we are re-evaluating what is important, should not we be thinking more widely so that this too is addressed?
The answer is to take the doss of the rich 7/84
7% of the country own 84% of the wealth if it was shared it would solve the cash flow problem
STATE OWNERNERSHIP is the answer not capitalist greed it does not work
The formula is simple - if they can't exist without a public subsidy they should be brought into public ownership because at the moment the taxpayer is taking the loss and the private sector is keeping the profit. The taxpayer picks up the pieces when a train operator runs out of steam, as was the case when National Express decided they couldn't make enough money out of its east coast franchise. No government would be able to walk away (like the private companies can and do) as people need to be able to get to work and travel and that seems to have been forgotten. Prior to the election the Lib Dems seemed to understand the importance of affordable rail travel (it is obviously better for the environment too) and had pledged to change the annual fare price rise formula to RPI minus 1%, meaning prices would always be lower than inflation. A pledge that has been forgotten now as the millionaires in government push through price hikes on tickets they will all claim on expenses anyway.
JAK
I agree, Geoff. We should think more globally. Neither should we grow at the expense of people who have very little or nothing. Many fields that could grow food and keep down prices for those who are near starving have been given over to bio fuel (subsidised?). Those suffering a wheat crisis now have to pay more and the poorest of the poor are starving. Totally irresponsible, like many things 'fashionable'. Charities try to put food in the mouths of the poor while many companies rob them of fair trade. But then WE want cheap food even though a huge percentage of it gets thrown away. Years ago waste food (potato peelings etc) was given to pigs. If that still happened this nation could be living cheaply on pork chops and ham! But seriously, careful buying means less waste of both money and food. Making the most of what we have — repair rather than replace, buying what we need rather than just want, should be out first thoughts. Economy does not have to be dull or painful — just sensible. That goes for the nation too.
Globally, a nation's growth should aid the growth of emerging nations. ideally, the whole world should benefit from growth — exchanging ideas as well as goods and food. Unfortunately, the way things are at present, it seems the poorest workers in the world get poorer because work is given to those who will work for less. Food is bought from those who sell it cheaper. And before we blame the huge companies who control the markets we should ask ourselves what part we play by wanting more and more and cheaper with it!
As for everything in state ownership — wow, how wonderful it would be to be back in days of nationalisation. No thanks!
Careful planning is needed to conserve our assets and to grow by using renewables. This throw away age has much to answer for. This is made worse by the poorest people, including children, stripping valuable metals from our discarded waste, ensuring they suffer pain and shorter lives.
Yes, we should look at the global picture.
That's my view for what it's worth.
Post a Comment