Interesting analogy.

That observation didn’t go over well when I worked in a corporate office.

I think about this every day…sigh….

People understand this totally fine when you say “our current economic systems” but replace it with “capitalism” and suddenly they’re really into nuance and actually things are, like, really complicated, you guys. And like…iPhones, or whatever. Don’t you like your iPhone?

I can recommend a book called The Hidden cost of Money that explains this very well. If an economic system can print money at will with nothing to back it up then it is doomed to collapse.

Look, I’m anti consumption, but capitalism does not *require* infinite growth.

There’s nothing stopping these companies from producing a certain amount or fixing their prices. They won’t do it, but infinite growth is not a “requirement” for the system to function. The strongest claim that can be made is that those who own and control the means of production want and are trying to achieve increasing growth.

Alright, I’m ready now for the downvotes from people who don’t like what I said rather than contest my claim or defend the false one in the meme.

Well, yes, but actually no.

The concept of economic growth is often a bit misunderstood. It does tend to go hand in hand with resource consumption, environmental destruction, and so on, but it doesn’t necessarily need to. It’s absolutely possible to have economic growth while becoming more sustainable, and there are three reasons:

Firstly, economic growth is an increase in the ***value*** of goods and services. Value, not amount. When refrigerators become more efficient and need less energy, or when they become easier to repair, they become more valuable. That’s sustainable economic growth.

Secondly, it’s about goods ***and services***, and services can be sustainable. When schools hire more teachers for the same number of students, that’s economic growth. When more people go to therapy, that’s economic growth. And so on.

And lastly, it doesn’t make sense to look at absolute values like GDP. More important are relative values, like GDP ***per capita***. When people have fewer kids, but our living standard increases, that’s sustainable economic growth.

I know no one here wants to hear it, but a market economy has its benefits. We should create political conditions in which we get to keep these benefits while incentivizing companies to aim for the “good” kinds of growth, and penalize companies who, like today, only aim for higher numbers, more products, shorter lifespans, cheaper prices, and so on.

If only we could go back to being paralyzed by polio at age 7. Friggin capitolism…

It’s eating its tail right now. Yay?

What is finite about a universe so incomprehensibly large that our super computers cannot simulate even tiny sections of it

You can make that analogy with any living thing. The only logical conclusion that can be drawn from that is that you should heavily restrict some people’s ability to reproduce or.. kill people?

It’s just an economics fact that things need to grow because populations grow, it’s not that deep. Go look at how much people are spazzing on the front page and tell me you think overpopulation and heat death of the universe are relevant problems right now

The size of the economy directly correlates to energy consumption – and we don’t even exploit a fraction of the available energy to us. Not to mention that we don’t even live in a circular economy i.e. there are still many improvements to be made before we even begin to see the ceiling of our potential growth

We humans are the cancer of the planet. Even in 1950 there were new places and people to explore. Now absolutely nothing and we’re sucking through resources at a rate that’s gotta be a million times slower for the earth to produce. If global warming actually gets real bad I’m glad I live by Lake Michigan. Water wars will be a real thing if what they predict comes to pass

What makes you think we are forever going to be limited to this very finite system known as Earth? Pretty sure the Universe is constantly expanding and is therefore infinite as well. This is Amish propaganda if I’ve ever seen it.

Bad take. There are only two basic things required, and both are unlimited: sunlight (energy) and human ingenuity (efficiency).

I don’t understand why people are convinced infinite growth is a requirement of capitalism.

Infinite growth is a bandaid. A facade. The truth is, healthy capitalism, the kind that actually *worked* and made people’s lives much better, required periods of economic contraction to remain stable.

They weren’t comfortable. They aren’t fun. But society, families, and the economy recover and have always been healthier for it on the other side.

Staving off those contractions is what has put us in this situation. Politicians kicking the can down the road because they don’t want it to happen in their watch. CEO’s being complicit because they use the political policy of can kicking as an infinite money glitch.

I hate to say it because a lot of people will be affected negatively, more than likely myself included, but let the economy crash. Prices will stabilize. Wages will match cost of living, and our kids and grandkids can actually be better off than ourselves.

While it is an interesting analogy, it is not a perfect one and It is also one I am getting tired of hearing about