[Emma_Goldman]

"It's quite another thing to tell people "no more inventions or creative labor, society is wealthy enough."

I am not a proponent of eliminating growth, let alone creativity and inventions. Those are great things, within limits. I simply think we ought to move away from the opposite extreme of maximalist production and consumption. I agree that how to do that is enormously difficult.

[chordalkeyboard]

> Those are great things, within limits. I simply think we ought to move away from the opposite extreme of maximalist production and consumption.

Who can be trusted to decide what those limits are for other people?

> I agree that how to do that is enormously difficult.

There is a perspective that interest rates are connected to time preference and higher interest rates incentivize a longer time preference, which would make people more inclined to plan for the future and consume less.

I agree that it is enormously difficult and not likely to be solved by merely changing the rate of return on invested capital.

[Emma_Goldman]

"Who can be trusted to decide what those limits are for other people?"

The productivist society in which we now live is not natural or the aggregate consequence of so many individuals choosing their preferred levels of production, consumption and leisure. It is a result of a system of competition that compels firms to plough productivity gains into capital reinvestment, and individuals to work beyond their happiness to succeed in the job market and afford themselves the markers of social validation. Any society has to collectively decide what it's priorities are, and how to balance production and consumption, this one included. However it is won, it should be won through democracy.

Interesting point about using interest rates to slow the economy.

[chordalkeyboard]

> The productivist society in which we now live is not natural or the aggregate consequence of so many individuals choosing their preferred levels of production, consumption and leisure.

> However it is won, it should be won through democracy.

The incentive structure that shapes these choices is one we allegedly arrived at through democracy.

> It is a result of a system of competition that compels firms to plough productivity gains into capital reinvestment, and individuals to work beyond their happiness to succeed in the job market and afford themselves the markers of social validation.

The labor multiplying effects of capital are the main reason we enjoy this high standard of living. Pathological pursuit of markers of social validation are the outcome of social behaviors that evolved in a society of small groups and small amounts of handmade goods being acted out in a high population, high wealth society.

> Any society has to collectively decide what it's priorities are, and how to balance production and consumption, this one included.

Collective decision-making is not possible in groups that exceed Dunbar's number. The myth of collective decision making in a large society is a social fiction that power elites use to cover their manipulation of the political process.

> Interesting point about using interest rates to slow the economy.

Thank you for considering my opinions. This is a great discussion and I'm touched by your insight into the problems of the modern world.