dagblog - Comments for "Meet the New Limits, Same as the Old Limits "

The editorialist lifts a

Watt Childress — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 15:13:38 +0000

In reply to Good column, but I could only

The editorialist lifts a sentence from the column that was highlighted by the publisher: "We're so obsessed with corporate profits that we've failed to care for the things people need to survive." He basically counters that a large number of people depend on corporate profits to survive because of pensions and retirement investments.

"Isn't an adequate retirement one the basic things 'people need to survive'?" he asks.

Prompts me to ponder how we have yoked our security to speculation. I'm thinking there's fertile ground to reflect on the history of how people save money. Also makes me wonder how the management of public pensions and such have changed over time.

Good column, but I could only

Donal — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 10:26:03 +0000

In reply to Most of us are plagued by the

Good column, but I could only see the first paragraph of the letter.

Most of us are plagued by the

Watt Childress — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 05:41:45 +0000

In reply to I think we're in a similar,

Most of us are plagued by the same difficulty. The challenge is illustrated in a column I wrote that was published last Tuesday (first link), and the response that ran in the same newspaper today (second link). I think these links will be open for a couple of weeks before they are shut down for non-subscribers.

http://www.dailyastorian.com/opinion/columns/across-the-bow-the-road-to-...

http://www.dailyastorian.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/letter-full-of-po...

I think we're in a similar,

Donal — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:13:51 +0000

In reply to I haven't read Limits to

I think we're in a similar, if not the same, camp. It's difficult because my profession, as currently practiced, is driven by growth.

I haven't read Limits to

Watt Childress — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:02:35 +0000

In reply to Meet the New Limits, Same as the Old Limits

I haven't read Limits to Growth or Limits to Growth Revisited. But it makes sense to me that the natural and fiscal resources that fuel our growth economy are limited. Peak oil. Peak debt. You authored my favorite title of any post on the debt limit debate.

I am in the camp of those who believe society cannot progress under the same set of assumptions that we've used for who-knows-how-long with respect to growth in consumption. Are you in that camp, or more of an academic researcher who finds that camp interesting?

It's not that I think everyone should be a camper. Goodness knows we need people who are mostly interested in chronicling what they see.

It's just that I often feel like I'm in a camp of one person. Then I see a compelling title, and I think -- hot dang, another person who shares my concerns.

I'm not personally involved.

Donal — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:54:41 +0000

In reply to This is not meant as a

I'm not personally involved. I find it frustrating to see a logical post attacked as being part of a conspiracy because there is no answer. Competent conspiracy is like religion - there's no solid evidence, so you either believe or you don't. I both have enough imagination to believe conspiracies - alignments of powerful actors - exist but enough skepticism to doubt them at the same time, so I'd rather see logical arguments.

This is not meant as a

Verified Atheist — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:17:28 +0000

In reply to Meet the New Limits, Same as the Old Limits

This is not meant as a criticism, but as an observation and/or implicit question: the ending of this posting gives me the impression that you are somehow personally involved with this book (beyond just your obvious emotional investment in protecting the environment). What gives me this impression is that you seem uncharacteristically bothered by what some fringe commenter has said.

Hmmm, indeed.

(P.S. Feel free to delete this if it bothers you.)