Skip to content

Comment on The 19th-Century Family Fortunes Funding Degrowthparent

Comments

No one says literally infinite growth. That's a stupid strawman and if you are arguing at that level you are not engaging, you are just playing tribal in-group signaling. And we don't need to think about growth 10,000 years from now, we have no idea, not the slightest clue, what the technological, cultural, and human landscape looks like in the timeline long enough to actually start having to think about the edge of growth

There is absolutely no reason, whatsoever, to think we are nearing the end of genuinely useful growth. We still die early of cancer, spend too much time working, live in too small domiciles, don't enjoy enough hobbies, eat worse food than we'd like, etc. We are nearing catastrophe because of our carbon-producing energy sources, but that's not "growth" generally, that's a specific problem.

No one says literally infinite growth.

The previous poster said "degrowth is such a stupid idea", which amounts to the same thing.

We are nearing catastrophe because of our carbon-producing energy sources, but that's not "growth" generally, that's a specific problem.

That is only one of many ecological limits we are approaching, or which we have already exceeded.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.