Religion and Capitalism

Comments

7 responses to “Religion and Capitalism”

1. 

   Canada Guy

   November 25, 2009

   Hmm, however, we are nearing the end of economic growth. We are depleting our renewable and non-renewable resources faster than ever, while at the same time destroying our environment, and our economic base. In other words, we’re burning through our principal, not living off the interest.
   http://www.watchinghistory.com/2009/11/end-of-economic-growth.html

   Loading…

   Reply
2. 

   Michael W. Kruse

   November 25, 2009

   Thanks Canada Guy but I strongly differ. This neomalthusianism. That we are exhausting resources beyond carrying capcity wasn’t true 200 years ago nor is it true today.
   Take energy. We are not running out of energy resources … though if we project current behavior and technologies into the future we would certainly run out. But fossil fuels are only one miniscule part of the boundless energy existing on the earth, and behaviors and technologies do not stay constant. The Bronze Age did not end because we ran out of bronze and the Horse and Buggy age did not end because we ran out of Horses and Buggies. Neither will the Fossil Fuel Age end because we run out of fossil fuels. Almost everything we make can eventually be made from renewable resources. Economic growth is what will propel socities to be able to innovate and adapt in that direction. Furthermore, economic growth is what is needed especially the nearly 2 billion people living on less that 2 or 3 dollars a day.
   For more on neomalthusianism see my post on Linear Projection Fallacy.

   Loading…

   Reply
3. 

   Canada Guy

   November 25, 2009

   Hi Michael. I wasn’t specifically talking about food, though I do address carrying capacity in a separate article here (and I do discuss the green revolution in it):
   http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/11/carrying-capacity.html
   As for economic growth, I never argued we were running out of energy resources, only that we are near peak production (i.e. throughput) for many of these, especially oil. Oil (and other fossil fuels) are by far the richest and most dense sources of energy we have, they have largely driven the economic (and population) boom of the past 100 years.
   Wind and solar, and other renewables are great, but they will never be able to replace oil. Yes, they can probably provide enough energy for us to get by, but with far less energy than we have today, they cannot drive further economic expansion. Note that Bronze and Stone are material resources, not energy resources, so this common comparison really doesn’t apply.
   Where is the “boundless energy” you refer to? I wish we had this, we could avoid all the problems with pollution and carbon emissions from fossil fuels. 🙂

   Loading…

   Reply
4. 

   Michael W. Kruse

   November 25, 2009

   For one, there is atomic energy. But the earth has any number of processes that we do not yet know how to harness and there are likely power sources we have yet to appreciate much as people living in the 19th Century could not forsee the rise of oil. As energy and various resources become more scarce their price rises driving more innovation and adaptation. There has also been a decades long improvement in the energy efficiency of use of production and goods. Every few decades someone comes along and says this has come to end because they can’t see what innovation is ahead … and of course it wouldn’t be innovation if we could forsee it. Saying renewable resources can’t produce future expansive needs is once again projecting present technologies into the future without consdieration of innovation.
   Bronze is a finite quanity and oil is a finite quantity, so I think the comparison does hold. We found substitutes for bronze. Oil is one form of energy we have perfected today. We will find replacements for it as well.
   I’d also add the value is created by transforming matter, energy, and data from less useful forms into more useful forms. Depending on how culture evolves we can have considerable economic growth coming from relatively minmal use of non-renewable resources. To say economic growth should stop means that people will stop producing goods and services more valued than if they had done nothing. That is not a world I want to live in. That is destruction of the planet and humanity.

   Loading…

   Reply
5. 

   Canada Guy

   November 25, 2009

   Okay, fair enough, you’re saying we will find something else to generate as much energy or more than oil. There’s no scientific evidence of this today, but you’re right no one can know the future. Still, it seems very unlikely that we are going to find a new unknown energy source, given how much more advanced our knowledge is today compared to the 19th century.
   I was simply predicting that the circumstances I describe will lead to the end of economic growth. I think within a couple decades we’ll know who was right. 🙂

   Loading…

   Reply
6. 

   James Otteson

   November 27, 2009

   Thank you for the discussion, Mr. Kruse and Canada Guy. I posted a short notice to your discussion on my original post, along with a book recommendation here: http://www.jamesotteson.com/2009/11/religion-and-capitalism.html.

   Loading…

   Reply
7. 

   Michael W. Kruse

   November 27, 2009

   Canada Guy
   As a thought experiment, I like try to picture myself in 1900 looking forward to the next century. Could anyone of have predicted what would unfold. Who anticipated what we are seeing with the internet 20 years ago.
   I agree that only time will tell. That is why I make sure to make all my predictions for just after I should be dead. That way no one gets to say I told you so. 🙂
   James Otteson
   Thanks for the link and the subsequent post!

   Loading…

   Reply