Comments on: Herman Daly on the Financial Crisis

By: John Comeskey

John Comeskey — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 02:16:04 +0000

100% efficiency? Seriously? If human beings ever get that far, then we’ll probably have figured out how to use birth control by then too. So I wouldn’t worry about that just yet…

By: BobB

BobB — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:39:38 +0000

What happens at 100% efficiency? How do we grow more without becoming more efficient or consuming more resources?

By: John Comeskey

John Comeskey — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 06:16:30 +0000

And IF we accept the argument that expanded resource consumption is the only way to grow, then we are allowing ourselves to be hamstrung by the conservative vision for a feudal economy.

RESIST Theocratic Police-State Feudalism!!

By: John Comeskey

John Comeskey — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 06:12:30 +0000

@BobR
There are 2 ways to expand macro output:
1. Move along the curve by expanding resource consumption (and thus drive up the aggregate price level through market forces)
2. Shift the entire curve outward by improving productivity (and thus allowing greater output with fewer resource inputs)

By definition, improvements to productivity mean that we enjoy more output while requiring fewer resource input. (Ie: We can do the same job in less time and with less material.) This not only expands macro output, but does it without exerting pressure on the price level – because the expansion is not based upon increased resource consumption.

Perpetual growth is theoretically possible through perpetual productivity improvements. That is why Keynes accounted for shifts in the aggregate income function as a function of productivity.

By: BobR

BobR — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:19:42 +0000

@John Comeskey
The argument about perpetual growth presumes a planet with infinite resources. This is not possible. Factor in that humans are probably worse than 22% efficient at best, relative to the amount of toxic waste we output, and things look even less promising.

By: John Comeskey

John Comeskey — Mon, 11 May 2009 21:28:14 +0000

I would argue that some level of perpetual growth is possible without an increase in resource consumption through improvements to productivity. Of course, improvements to productivity require investments in productivity, either public, private, or both. And our willingness to invest at any expected return is constrained by our tolerance for risk. So public policy that is designed to increase risk and reduce productivity (ie: the theocratic police-state feudalism of the modern conservative) has a predictable negative consequence on economic growth.
Then again, some believe that feudalism is the desired result of free markets, while others believe that the demise of feudalism is the desired result of free markets. I personally believe the latter and am often wrongly accused of being a ’socialist’ as a result. Keynes is rolling in his grave about now…

By: Jacques Laroche

Jacques Laroche — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 20:27:30 +0000

It is interesting that while the more progressive forces continue to theorize and attempt to get a handle on the causes and implications of the burgeoning financial debacle, the concept of continual growth is never questioned. More interesting still as these forces are traditionally skeptical of purely capitalist constructs.

http://jacqueslaroche.blogspot.com/2009/02/critique-of-profit-and-other-economic.html