I came across this last year, forgot about it until recently. I thought this forum would be a good place to put it to the test by seeing what people think.
The premise (and, please, don't rely on my summary - I'm crap at summarising stuff - read the transcript [click on the show transcript button under the audio feed] or listen to the audio, there's also a link to a video presentation from the author) is that in order to maintain growth over the next forty years we will need to more than triple global GDP. The author then looks at the constraints on growth: an ageing population and increasing health costs, increases in chronic diseases and mental health problems, the disparity in wealth and incomes. He makes the case that under the current regime the prospects of being able to expand the economy are very limited. However, a way out is through investment in infrastructure and efficiency. By closing down old, inefficient and polluting infrastructure and investing in renewable R&D we can counter the contractionary influences and stimulate new growth.
As I said, don't rely on my summary, it's bound to be too simplified and missing out on the detail the author brings to the discussion. The piece isn't very long, only 2200 words or so but, to a layman like myself with an existing bias towards the goals he outlines, it all seems very persuasive. Have a read, tell us what you think or where his arguments might have flaws.
http://ift.tt/1xKUgHp
The premise (and, please, don't rely on my summary - I'm crap at summarising stuff - read the transcript [click on the show transcript button under the audio feed] or listen to the audio, there's also a link to a video presentation from the author) is that in order to maintain growth over the next forty years we will need to more than triple global GDP. The author then looks at the constraints on growth: an ageing population and increasing health costs, increases in chronic diseases and mental health problems, the disparity in wealth and incomes. He makes the case that under the current regime the prospects of being able to expand the economy are very limited. However, a way out is through investment in infrastructure and efficiency. By closing down old, inefficient and polluting infrastructure and investing in renewable R&D we can counter the contractionary influences and stimulate new growth.
As I said, don't rely on my summary, it's bound to be too simplified and missing out on the detail the author brings to the discussion. The piece isn't very long, only 2200 words or so but, to a layman like myself with an existing bias towards the goals he outlines, it all seems very persuasive. Have a read, tell us what you think or where his arguments might have flaws.
http://ift.tt/1xKUgHp
Quote:
Most people in government and elsewhere believe that spending money in response to climate change will be expensive and slow economic growth. Professor Michael Molitor, who's with the International Energy Program of SciencesPo in Paris, disagrees and has some suggestions why this doesn't have to be the case. |
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1IXNgzl
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire