🚀 go-pugleaf

tcw@2xtreme.net (Tim Worstall) wrote in message news:<825e2890.0401041032.4bcefbab@posting.google.com>...
> Once done, let's work out which " resources " we are going to run out
> of in that long run. If you define long run as 100 years, current
> capitalist society is eminently sustainable. Define it as 10,000 ?
> maybe, maybe not. But you had better be a pretty good predictor of
> technology : you want to go back in the time machine and tell the
> first farmer he can't plant wheat because in 10,000 years some idiot
> screws up the Everglades with sugar cane ?
> 
> Tim Worstall

From a Review to 'Natural Capitalism"...

"Whether all that the authors have organized and presented so
earnestly here can be assimilated and acted on by the people who run
the world is open to question."

It's so funny: The people who run the world haven't noticed the
environmental crisis! I wonder what do they worry about, the next
elections perhaps?

'Capitalism as an economic system is criticized as a financially
profitable, nonsustainable aberration in human development.'' Also
attracting debate is the free market, vilified as one of the forces
causing waste and pollution. This seems *unfair*, since the same
system is an underlying aspect of the solutions cited throughout the
book. Rather than abandon capitalism altogether, the authors argue for
modification, yielding what they call ``natural capitalism.'''
 
Does it seem "unfair" when the very capitalist solutions being
proposed are ignored by capitalism? Does it tell something about the
nature of capitalism? It reminds me of the stupid hungry dinosaurs...
:(
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0316353000/reviews/102-4408045-7984902#03163530007299