Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

shanny

(6,709 posts)
43. We're there.
Tue Nov 14, 2017, 02:59 PM
Nov 2017

We already "spend" more in natural resources than can be replenished in a year (i.e. we are spending the principal instead of living on the interest). It would take the resources of more than one planet to bring everyone's standard of living up to Western (admittedly wasteful) norms. Innovation and tightening our belts can change the equation of course: if everybody is willing to eat paste we can probably support 50 billion.

And that leaves out ecosystem collapse. We are well down that road:

Earth has lost 80% of her old-growth forests, 50% of her soil, 90% of the big fish – and many water, land, and ocean ecosystems, as well as atmospheric stability, as human population has soared more than sevenfold.* The human family is living far beyond its means, devouring natural capital principal and ravaging its own ecosystem habitats, which can only end in ecological, social and economic collapse. Earth’s carrying capacity has been exceeded, and we must equitably and justly bring down human population and consumption inequity or else face global ecosystem collapse. We can start the necessary social change or an angry Earth will sort it out herself by killing billions; as we possibly pull down the biosphere with us, ending most or even all life, during a prolonged collapse.

Earth is not designed for 7 billion people (and growing), some of them destroying ecosystems globally as they live in opulence, others more locally through their grinding poverty and need to survive. Overpopulated, inequitable, unjust human industrial growth ravages ecosystems; destroying all that is natural, indigenous and good, heralding a brief era of opulence for some and abject misery for many, before collapsing the biosphere and causing the end of being for all.


http://ecointernet.org/2014/05/17/on-overpopulation-and-ecosystem-collapse/

The extractive / exploitative nature of capitalism makes all this worse. Personally I find it amusing when people wonder if we will have a country, the Constitution, or even a civilization in 100 years. If we do, it is going to be very different.

* our population has grown from 1 billion to more than 7 in 135 years

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Capitalism is better than other systems greeny2323 Nov 2017 #1
Best system known to modern societies rufus dog Nov 2017 #12
This capitalism does not mean free market anarchy Amishman Nov 2017 #31
Oh, it works fantastically. Keeping it leashed is the issue. Hortensis Nov 2017 #2
There is a difference between capitalism and free enterprise but oligarchy conflates it for egbertowillies Nov 2017 #3
Actually, free enterprise is unbridled capitalism (aka "free market"). Dr Hobbitstein Nov 2017 #5
Capitalism requires growth and more growth. Always. shanny Nov 2017 #4
Bingo. It requires infinite growth on a finite planet. Garrett78 Nov 2017 #9
Yup. shanny Nov 2017 #10
Yeap. That was Karl Marx's main critisism in "Capital". Xolodno Nov 2017 #13
Socialism is not an economic construct. OilemFirchen Nov 2017 #15
I agree. Xolodno Nov 2017 #19
Homework HoustonDave Nov 2017 #30
Only problem is, they aren't socialist nations. Xolodno Nov 2017 #41
Perhaps learning the definition of socialism would help.. EX500rider Nov 2017 #48
Odd...I'm pretty sure I implied tha Socialism means government.. Xolodno Nov 2017 #51
It is simple, if the government does not OWN the means of production then it is not Socialist. EX500rider Nov 2017 #54
I disagree. Xolodno Nov 2017 #55
No, socialism is a command economy, that's what you get when the govt owns the means of production. EX500rider Nov 2017 #56
That's incorrect. Xolodno Nov 2017 #57
Marx thesis was that eventually capitalizm would run amok, Alice11111 Nov 2017 #52
How long? HoustonDave Nov 2017 #32
We're there. shanny Nov 2017 #43
Is it capitalism that provides ad revenue on your blog? (Hint: why not post the content here.) n/t X_Digger Nov 2017 #6
... OilemFirchen Nov 2017 #16
I guess those sweet, sweet blog ad money-clicks aren't capitalist, that's different. betsuni Nov 2017 #23
I like this quote, probably from G.K. Chesterton: Ron Green Nov 2017 #7
Unfettered capitalism does not work uponit7771 Nov 2017 #8
Why did you ask two different questions? brooklynite Nov 2017 #11
Regulated capitalism is the answer Calculating Nov 2017 #14
Well-regulated capitalism works pretty well, but like a well-regulated militia ... Hekate Nov 2017 #17
n/t Fait Accompli Nov 2017 #18
+1 shanny Nov 2017 #28
No. Capitalism requires restraint marybourg Nov 2017 #20
No we can't. There nothing better when proper taxation and regulation is in place. Demsrule86 Nov 2017 #21
it's worked the best compared to anything else that has been tried as long as there were regulations JI7 Nov 2017 #22
Nothing works. alphafemale Nov 2017 #24
It tends to concentrate the wealth at the top treestar Nov 2017 #25
Capitalism Works Better with Strong Unions louis c Nov 2017 #26
capitalism requires a middle-class . . . the GOP is killing it by their middle-class death wish DrDan Nov 2017 #27
Gasp...!!??!! CanSocDem Nov 2017 #29
Capitalism is great at creating wealth. It's absolutely shit-horrible in DISTRIBUTING that wealth. HughBeaumont Nov 2017 #33
"Capitalism is great at creating wealth. It's absolutely shit-horrible in DISTRIBUTING that wealth." NCTraveler Nov 2017 #36
No, we should not. ismnotwasm Nov 2017 #34
You can admit it but you would be wrong. NCTraveler Nov 2017 #35
you didn't get any economics classes in high school I take it snooper2 Nov 2017 #37
This! WillowTree Nov 2017 #49
Socialism is superior to Capitalism as a sustainable economic system. HOWEVER.... Yavin4 Nov 2017 #38
Well-regulated capitalism is the answer. dawg Nov 2017 #39
Capitalism works just fine. What the US has is not true capitalism.... scheming daemons Nov 2017 #40
capitalism is awesome Locrian Nov 2017 #42
Unregulated capitalism kills, yes. Orsino Nov 2017 #44
Capitalism works, but only for the benefit of very few DemocraticWing Nov 2017 #45
"suffering of the working class is necessary to keep the bourgeoisie in control" FiveGoodMen Nov 2017 #53
I think most people in the real world recognize that capitalism is a brutally inhumane system. YoungDemCA Nov 2017 #46
lol, a link to your own site that runs ads. lol grantcart Nov 2017 #47
Capitalism is fine, its the Ayn Rand jerkoffs and pigs that warp it. VOX Nov 2017 #50
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Should we admit that capi...»Reply #43