Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gorjusborg 44 days ago
This is an important distinction: what is good for ecology is not necessarily good for economy.

If we need unbounded growth to jeep our economic system to function, its the economic system that is wrong, not nature.

2 comments

Capitalist economy.

Economies can exist in many different ways. At its core it is just a way to describe how we move resources between ourselves and that can be done in many, many ways.

What are the other ways that are proven to work over the long term at scale?
How do you mean that capitalist economies are proven to work?

Like what does "work" constitute?

Wrong question if you actually like capitalism or value keeping it going. The question should be how to make the necessary reforms to capitalism to not have people try to attempt "the other ways" you're going to try to debate. The problem, it seems, is that Capitalists can't fathom a world where they might be prevented from doing maximum extraction.

I know what I'd be using those billions for!! To virtue signal like hell that I was the most nature conservationist billionaire in existence. Not "how can I say this is conservation and monetize it", real conservation with true stewardship of the land. But also that thinking is probably why I'm not a billionaire.

What
Non-capitalist economies don't really have a better record on environmental protection. It's almost like the problem is human nature, not the specific economic system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#Environment...

It seems it may be 'animal nature'. We maximize our benefit until the environment limits us, and humans have become 'too good' at it, increasing stakes to a global scale.
Hence why the die hard capitalist shills are so set on going to space.
We should help by shooting them into space.
you can save even more co2 and costs by leaving the "into space" part out