Save the Planet? In THIS Economy? Pffft 

Yes. lets put a finer point to that statement. One tech bro billionaires might understand; You *only* have up to as many customers as people, market saturation must be a goal not a liability.

This isn't about reality, it's about HOPE!

Depends how we define growth

the combination of capitalism and the growing population are the two main factor in the destruction of our planets environment.

​@@kk-xj5ozcan you define growth in any way that doesn't use more resources? Growth to this point has been 1:1 with materials consumption and energy requirements. Even 'digital growth' requires a foundation of physical resources (chips, copper, gold, plastics, etc...) and energy to power the machines. I don't think there's any economic measure of growth that can be defined without a tie to resources. The question could be "how do we define success as a nation/world?" and maybe instead of economy as the thing that defines, we use happiness/fulfillment. Ask most people their top 5 life experiences and they are rarely tied to a thing measurable in GDP, which should tell us something about it as a metric.

No,.we play by GDP. Go to Cuba

@@blazer9547Not a value-added statement.

It’s not just about GDP. It’s about the ability to do things; it’s one way of thinking about the ability of a civilization to get things done. - Dave Huntsman

"Economists need to figure out how to improve our lives"... Why would you allow anyone else to make decisions about the quality of your life, other than you? Certainly not the government ! Citizens have given away so much of our power, which is exactly what makes government get away with the damage and corruption. People aren't standing up for themselves or to the government. Sitting around waiting for them to change course in a direction you think is going to help you, is not a solution. People in numbers making the changes, forcing government into accommodating those changes - Try it.

Well stated. Modern economics is an incorrectly bounded problem. Economics does not take into consideration ecology. Ecology doesn't place humans into ecological systems. Nature over there, humans over here, but earth functions as a very complex web of interactions. Ignoring the billions of other things that inhabit the world in favor of fake value (modern currency) is to literally ignore reality. Your examples of life positive experiences which don't drive gdp or actually hurt gdp is a great example of why measuring success by gdp is misguided. Especially as gdp becomes further detached from human driven output and instead into automation.

Actually I wouldn't say that cost is "socialized". You see, the "private" looters yes as said privatised profits, but externalized or exported the cost if you think about it. When was the last time that a costly war was ever fought in the imperial core mainland USA or intentionally any oligarch thrown into poverty from generational loot wealth instead of a golden parachute on the way out? Not that a civil war is needed anyway, just look at the sad state of their public infrastructure and pot holes. The cost was never "socialized" but was always externalized or exported.

@@leponpon6935 'External' are ppl - so cost is socialized. Just not in US

@@volkerengels5298 that is why we should say externalized or exported instead of "socialized". Though the way you say it has been the common way of putting it, it's fine if you like it.

That's awesome to hear, honestly a big no no is when I follow someone and they start talking about a topic I have expertise on and... They fail miserably. Makes me question their whole views. I'm glad it's not the case with PBS.

I agree, she is a good host. She has a very good, clear voice. (I have hearing issues, so I usually turn off videos that are narrated by mumblers. Subtitles are all very well, but sometimes I miss bits and pieces because I'm trying to look at charts, pictures on the screen, not what it says underneath).

to economists everything not considered inside the (often mathematical) system is an externality. mental health is an important externality as well. All these should be internal in future economic systems.

I've been shocked by this series, because they are finally telling the truth.

PBS is still in the business of capturing viewers to prove their worth, I’m certain they use the PBS survey every year to prove towards the government and other investors that this content is demanded from the public. Intermarrying the sciences and the humanities is integral to being a good science communicator as well. So you’ll be more hard pressed to cultivate an employee base that doesn’t account both.

Not gonna lie, "milquetoast" caught me off guard. Never heard that word before and I've come to find (with the help of google) that it's technically not really a word but the name of a timid character from the comic book The Timid Soul who was named after the American food "milk toast" (toasted bred in warm milk of which I've also never heard). And as such, the word "milquetoast" has come to refer to a timid or feeble person though I'll assume that's only within a certain generation of the populace, perhaps? Either way, I've learned something new and pretty interesting so thanks for that :) and hopefully this helps anyone else who was as taken-aback by that word as I was.

@@kyokoyumi I learned the word milquetoast from the children’s Minecraft RU-vidr Stacyplays, she had a series focused on literacy, but also in her other projects she still championed reading books and rescuing dogs.

​@@kyokoyumiyeah, who tf says that? I sure as hell don't. Nor have I heard anyone else use the word.

Yes! This is something anyone with a lawn can do that is hugely beneficial. It'll save money and time wasted on gas, lawn treatments, etc. It can feed you and wildlife nutritious food. Having real plants, especially trees and shrubs will make your yard cooler in the heat and the air cleaner to breathe. My yard is planted this way and when the wildfire smoke was bad, my yard was the only place I could breathe without my throat and nose burning. Plus, it's amazing for mental health. Humans are meant to be in connection with the land and our food. Being able to walk out your door and be surrounded by abundance and beauty as you harvest delicious food while listening to bird song and being surrounded by life is true wealth.

Native grasses in particular are better at sequestering CO2 and water runoff than trees are, with their deep root systems, and host lots of specialist lepidoptera! Native grasses are so underappreciated. I install bioretentions as a profession and they are wonderful little things.

I don’t know that one; but depends on what one thinks The System is. For example, most of the energy and resources of the solar system are NOT on Earth. When you look at it that way, which ‘cycles’ are you talking about, for example ? - Dave Huntsman

@@michaelenquist3728 definitely both are significant strategies, and not mutually exclusive. In most industries, any externalization of costs which is legal is industry-wide standard practice.

trying to mitigate problems inherent to late stage capitalism within capitalist political frameworks is doomed to fail

@@Jonas-Seiler People have been predicting the imminent failure of capitalism for how long? And it has been those who were predicting it who's alternatives to capitalism failed. Capitalism is imperfect, and requires regulation, because people are imperfect, and require regulation. There are no pure economic systems, those which work do so because they combine elements of different economic philosophies. Externalities are the primary weakness of capitalism, but it is not impossible to regulate. Obviously capitalists don't wish to be regulated, which is why we need strong democracies to force it on them in the public interest. If you wish to exit capitalism, you are free to do so. Communes are not illegal. Probably you will need money to buy the land, and will need to sell or barter some of your products to purchase those things you can't produce yourself.

@@crawkn tired argument, good luck with your "strong democracies" in capitalism

@@Jonas-Seiler Show me a strong democracy in a communist country. Or a strong economy. China is not a communist country, kids don't even go to grade school for free. Some "tired arguments" are still kicking because they are still true.

that assumes governments actually can even actually act in the interest of their people. most laws are written by companies and passed as is (if the pay is right of course). this is how capitalism works.

The more I read history the more I realize that most humans, when given the choice, do live nicely with the environment. To the extent that we are keystone species in areas we have inhabited for a long time, the environment adapting to us, and us to it, to mutual benefit. Unfortunately I also have learned that people have been culturally forced to transition away from this by the edge of a sword/barrel of a gun by the current dominant military regime. It both gives me faith in most humans and lost some faith since the problem sems difficult to solve :/

@@ac4941 I agree with you, that people are inclined to nurture rather than destroy the environment. As you say, it's to our mutual benefit. That reminds me, Kropotkin's book is called Mutual Aid. I see that the dominant economic system is mainly at fault. It's profits over a healthy environment. As you probably know, Exxon knew 40 years ago, the damage being done. It's the ultimate in cynicism. We do have intelligent folks among us but they don't hold the reins of power.

he's one of the few anarchists to have said some right things, but still an anarchist

Yes, in my country (UK), the current government keeps trying to encourage women to have more babies to 'stimulate the economy.' Given that an increasing number of older and disabled people are now finding themselves homeless together with many younger people who never had a hope of getting affordable housing, it makes me wonder 'how' our government can keep bleating out this message. I only had one child, 28 years ago. He was all we could afford. Several of my friends never had children, and my son and others I know of his generation all say - no kids. The reasons are the same - can't even afford to leave our parent's home, so how can we afford to marry and have a family? And, what future do we have to look forward to? Nothing is being done to reverse or even slow down climate change. My own part of the UK has already proved itself the first climatic Pontius Pilate, and washed its hands of it's Net Zero Targets - before it even reached the date it set for that target! To have a child in this environment is, in my opinion, paramount to child abuse. Better for us humans to voluntarily phase ourselves out in the hope that some simpler forms of life survive, thrive and make this planet inhabitable for more complex forms later on. Humans are Nature's failed experiment, marvellous in so many diverse ways, but fundamentally still too stupid to act upon the obvious and basic facts.

Photovoltaics and windmills are made of cement and steel which are made of coal and transported with oil. We're in a predicament, not a problem, so there is no solution. Unlucky of us.

Even if we use materials more efficiently, at any given level of efficiency, more economic growth means more. ecological destruction than does less growth, no growth, or shrinking the economy. To bring our ecological footprint back within the limits of Earth's sustainable carrying capacity, we would need to shrink the global economy by ~50%, and people in wealthy nations would need to shrink their individual impacts by 60-99+% (with the 99+% meaning superrich people).

No. Civilization will collapse soon. Billions will die.

Im from germany, in france they already use a lot of green nuclear energy as kid around 13-14 I got asked what I think the future energy will come from. When I said nuclear I seriously got asked if I was also a trump supporter. Was never more insulted for my opinion

​@@GreenPoint_onenuclear is unfortunately tied up with nuclear weapons for many people. The few incidents have also had a disproportionate impact on people's perspectives... I agree though, nuclear is currently the best solution for our current energy system. At least until we manage fusion, but I'm still not holding my breath on that...

Maintain them under ALL circumstances -> e.g. Civilization is broken. Kiss

"It's wealth accumulation that's the problem." That IS a problem on the society side of the coin, but the larger problem is that we are overshooting Earth's sustainable carrying capacity by about 75% per year, but growing the private sector economy larger just destroys the ecosystems that we depend on even faster.

Photovoltaics and windmills are made of cement and steel which are made of coal and transported with oil. Unlucky of us.

"Totally depends on how we grow the economy." Virtually all economic activity causes more destruction to ecosystems and other species than does less private sector economic activity. That's because almost all private sector economic activity uses energy and materials, both of which harm the Earth.

The Democratic Party Politburo, who else? It's a joke, "central planning" cannot transition mankind away from industrial society. Unlucky of us.

Not if it comes from clean energy companies.

That catastrophe you speak of is already well on its way and unavoidable, since humans, on average are a destructive combination of overflowing ignorance and overflowing greed and glutony.

You get a Thumbs Down; all you’re thinking about is how to divvy up what currently exists. You totally ignore very real things that can change everything, like, social innovations, technological innovations that can power from sunlight or oceans or wind instead of cutting down all the trees and burning them or digging up coal and blackening the skies…..That’s why ‘de growth’ is something that automatically turns intelligent people off and loses your audience. - Dave Huntsman

@@dphuntsman ALL human technologies and almost all human activity causes further destruction of the ecosystems we depend on. We are currently overshooting Earth's sustainable carrying capacity by about 75% per year, and the only way to prevent worsening ecological and societal breakdown is to shrink the global economy by about 50% and return to much simpler lifestyles with more manual labor, almost no air travel, much less meat/beef in our diets, more localized economies, far less man-made chemicals, plastics, and products, and much more use of natural materials.

@@dphuntsman Put more succinctly, industrialized civilization is an inherently unsustainable and self-terminating system.

but it's the truth... that certain part of town you drive looks ruff for a reason....