He had me right up until the "Radical redistribution of wealth" part. You cannot get to sustainable by keeping people dependent on the state. There are lots of things we should "fix" a 90% tax rate is not one of them.
Here is the answer in 6 points: 1. Abollish capitalism and class society (higher classes in society use more energy and natural resources than working classes and the poor). 2. Yes, technology is important for sustainability. 3. No, technology alone will not make society sustainable. 4. You must also find out what things in society are actually good, that we want to have to life happily (like healthcare, education, friendship, food, parties, music, art and so on). 5. Take away the stuff that we don't need that use energy and too much resources. For example, we can stop adveritizing for products. 6. Finally, share the things that require a lot of natural resources and energy (that means for example collective living with friends and family in houses built environmentally friendly for collective living, sharing cars, bicycles, printers, tools, washinmachines, equipment and so on. )
Jonathon - writing more books. A sustainable future is actually about practically doing it. Respect your words- love to respect ur actual actions. What are they? cheers, John PS No disrespect intended - this is a very serious Q.
These innovations in green technologies and self-sustainability (in energy production, sewage treatment and water purification) looks to be just an on-going process of greater fracturing and splintering. Business as usual for larger powers who will strive to keep potential contenders and rivals separate, best way to do this is by encouraging them to be self contained. Even if entire communities or nations took up these systems, they would be nothing but a group of segregated clans and tribes under the thumb of larger energy producing powers (with the means to affect entire ecologies and weather patterns?). Would photovoltaic panels really be adequate to power the continued development and innovation necessary to stay competitive, with such threats as extreme weather patterns and climate crisis always on the horizon? Australia and New Zealand for example, have always been known to be staunchly opposed to Nuclear energy, but is this only because of their geographic location next to 2 giant land (if not 3) masses/power bases with distinctly different cultures and peoples? While these commercially driven innovations in Green technologies occurring in China at present, would they fit very well with this plan
i'm sure he means well, however he's not up to speed on technology or economics LFTR liquid fluoride thorium reactors are as green as it gets and environmentalists are catching on, and you mine for rare earths you get thorium and vice versa to improve the human condition, including curbing population, we need more energy not less and i agree with hastingr, dependency on the state isn't sustainable regards
The problem is capitalism, why is it so difficult for people to see this? We are always going to have scarcity issues while things are purposefully made to be scarce! The rich are not going to allow any of this to happen to improve the life to their product! In Japan they cement the feet of lamb so that they dont have the need for big areas for them to graze. Same thing happening to all of humanity, cemented feet, tying of hands, however you want to term it.
Capitalism isn’t the problem. There is no other system that is better. You get what you work for. Every other system is failing and every time a country get more socialist things go bad. With capitalism comes innovation and creation. Ever wonder why every private company is able to produce things much cheaper than the government? That’s because government business is always inefficient and never works. We should continue with capitalism, but with control of some taxes we can convince businesses to be more efficient. It’s about coming up with agreements with corporations not screwing the corporations over.
how about socialism without a state? we should agree that the government is inefficient and doesn't represent everybody, and capitalism is also inefficient because it promotes overproduction and artificial scarcity. there is enough to go around if we share. think outside of the box
