Coca Cola’s aluminum bill is half as much, it can then put that money into advertising, new plants, new products, bigger dividends, whatever it feels like is best. GDP is the worth of everything produced so Coca Cola’s portion goes up. Likewise other purveyors of canned beverages reduce their aluminum budgets and spend the money on other things. These other things add together to form economic growth.
Yes, distinguish between growth as in getting bigger - more expressways, more cars, more malls -versus grwoing sideways - internet, smart phones, netflix, ebooks, DVDs and numerous other products that really did not exist 10 or 20 years ago.
Growth as in simply producing more of what we have, is not useful or sustainable. Replacement-level production is the ideal. However, so far technology continues to evolve and the new product is better than or a lot cheaper than the old product. I suppose another issue is the need to recycle.
I suppose the point about solar cells is very true - the current level of western lifestyle, with private cars and nice houses, air conditioning and central heating, nice big living spaces and huge amounts of food - that does not scale out to 8 billion people. However, there is likely a standard of living using sustainable resources and solar or other renewable resources, that will scale well.
The American God is Capital. What do you expect?
more people are more consumers which needs more production which is provided by more people who use more materials to produce those goods which takes more energy which costs money lent by more financiers and somewhere a shoe event horizon is reached.
I think the point of the OP is that once we reach level or even shrinking population, what is the purpose or logic of growth and what happens if we try to grow when we don’t need to? Or, if growth is the target, what happens when we can’t grow or there is no demand?
I think we are seeing the early effects of it now. We built far too much housing in the USA this last decade, that so much of it lies empty, we can’t afford it. Meanwhile, overconsuption in this one direction has resulted in a crashed economy, meaning that w are suffering until the supply and demand cycle sorts itself out.
Social security and other government finance problems are typical of this too - the spending pattern was based on ever-growing revenues to cover perpetual overspending… “So what if we spend a 400 million more than we take in? That wll be peanuts compared to the revenue in 20 years…”
Pretty much my thoughts.
I am eligible for early SS, and retire from government service next year.
My income will be fixed, but my house is paid for and my only expenses will be consumption (and taxes).
Md2000 your last statement “So what if we spend a 400 million more than we take in? That wll be peanuts compared to the revenue in 20 years…” expresses my original concern very succinctly.
400 million with be peanuts, because it seems to me that growth, by definition seems to equate to inflation.
So if I live another 20 years, my comfortable retirement may not be so.