Sometimes when I find the time, I go chasing hypertext links. The other day I found an online seminar on Richard Douthwaites book, The Growth IIlusion which took place this February. Despite my frustrations of having missed it, it was archived and I am able to read the postings. Lot's of good comments, I wish there was a way to make our politicians and bureaucrats sit down and respond to some of the fine ideas outside of conventional wisdom that comes out in these kinds of seminars. I have cut and pasted a few paragraphs that seem especially relevant to me and hopefully will be commented on by you. The more we talk, the more potential there is for change. The first few quotes were taken from a larger body of quotes based on these two books. I invite you to follow the hyperlinks and read it all, consider this a teaser. The Ecology of Commerce by Paul Hawken ISBN 0-88730-655-1 For the Common Good By Herman E. Daly and John B. Cobb ISBN 0-8070-4703-1 http://www.cyberus.ca/choose.sustain/MMW.html In the market process, millions of people collect information about materials, techniques of production, labour costs, what people want and how much they are willing to pay. Working with the common goal of personal enrichment, the activities so informed provide a vast array of goods and services. Paul Hawken notes, however: "If the market is so efficient, why, as it affects the environment, is the overall economy so inefficient? The answer is simple: Markets are superb at setting prices, but incapable of recognizing costs." Thomas: It seems I constantly hear on TV and read in the newspaper, everytime there is a merger with the attendant 500 to 5000 lay-off of personnel the statement that "it will lower prices and be good for the consumer". It seems to me that this paragraph eloquently states the reverse side of the coin in that these mergers do not recognize the costs. The costs in unemployment, divorce, credit default, reduced market demand, and a host of others. It would seem to me, as I think about this that an effective accounting of a merger would also make a projection about the hidden costs of mergers, not just the chances for increased profit. (end of comment) Prices are what we must pay to receive a good or service from a supplier. To the extent that prices reflect the money cost of other goods and services used in supplying the product, the price is accurate, but as soon as the activity draws from the natural world or impacts upon it, there are no mechanisms for accounting. No account is made of the depletion caused by drawing 55 million barrels of petroleum from the ground each day nor do we account for the costs incurred by burning it. Thomas: We have all heard of "externalities" and in the area of resource use, the externalities are never mentioned. The reclamation projects, the flood damage in succeeding years, the wildlife and habitat damage, the roads built and then allowed to disintegrate or the cost of maintenance. In the cost of electricity, the loss of land, the nuclear fuel disposal, the weather pattern changes, the communities dislocated, etc.. So when the current business leaders talk about their drive to lower our prices, they are often hiding behind a big - big lie, the lie of omission. One wonders why there is not a continuos challenge to this lie being published? (end of comment) It is governments' role to oblige full cost accounting. Without full compliance, firms accepting the responsibility on their own would often find their products uncompetitive. The changes have to take place across the board, to avoid favouring those who do not care. By gradually requiring that externalities be factored into economic equations, markets can be tuned so that money is saved by treating the environment well and a high price extracted for doing it damage. Thomas: It is like the minimum wage, as it applies to all businesses, it cannot be considered a rise in costs that make an endeavor uncompetitive as the competition has to incur the same cost. Prices go up to be sure, but the amount of money in consumers pockets - or a large portion of them anyway also go up as they earn more. Lower prices and lower wages do not give you any choice. What is the use of a low price when you have no disposable income? With disposable income, the consumer, ie wage earner now has choice. This is the government's role and the question is in North America is why we have allowed them to abdicate their responsibility? (end of comment) GDP treats the depletion of natural capital as income. The GDP violates basic accounting principles and common sense by treating the depletion of natural capital as income, rather than as the depreciation of an asset. The Bush Administration made this point in the 1992 report of the Council on Environmental Quality. "Accounting systems used to estimate GDP" the report said, "do not reflect depletion or degradation of the natural resources used to produce goods and services." As a result, the more the nation depletes its natural resources, the more the GDP goes up. Thomas: This is from another web page. The GDP concept is maintained by mainline economists who receive their training at great cost in our best Universities. They all know the fiction and yet they all and I do mean all perpetuate this illusion. How can we hope to have a sane economy when the high priests of the economy are providing our government advice based on an illusion? Inside our governments are many high priests trained in the same Universities. They also know about this illusion and yet they advise those citizens who run for office through their study papers on courses of action based on this illusion. Politicians are people from communities who chose to stand for election and who have to rely on those who advise them and on the party discipline of the organization that they use to identify their political philosophy. Where is the fault, is it with the parties or the bureaucracy or the in the training of the experts?(end of comment) http://www.cyberus.ca/choose.sustain/Tour/Heresy.shtml This is a good read, take 10 minutes and try it
