“This book demonstrates that empty-world economic theory has failed on its own terms and that its application by policymakers has resulted in the failure of capitalism itself. Pursuing absolute advantage in cheap labor abroad, First World corporations have wrecked the prospects for First World labor, especially in the US, while concentrating income and wealth in a few hands. Financial deregulation has resulted in lost private pensions and homelessness. The cost to the US Treasury of gratuitous wars and bank bailouts threatens the social safety net, Social Security and Medicare. Western democracy and civil liberties are endangered by authoritarian responses to protests against the austerity that is being imposed on citizens in order to fund the wars and financial bailouts. Third World countries have had their economic development blocked by Western economic theories that do not reflect reality.
All of this is bad enough. But when we leave the empty-world economics and enter the economics of a full world, where nature’s capital (natural resources) and ability to absorb wastes are being exhausted, we find ourselves in a worse situation. Even if countries are able to produce empty-world economic growth, economists cannot tell if the value of the increase in GDP is greater than its cost, because the cost of nature’s capital is not included in the computation. What does it mean to say that the world GDP has increased four percent when the cost of nature’s resources are not in the calculation?
Economist Herman Daly put it well when he wrote that the elites who make the decisions “have figured out how to keep the benefits for themselves while ‘sharing’ the cost with the poor, the future, and other species (Ecological Economics, vol. 72, p. 8).
Empty-world economics with its emphasis on spurring economic growth by the accumulation of man-made capital has run its course. Full-world economics is steady-state economics, and it is past time for economists to get to work on a new economics for a full world.”
These conclusions reflect my views both on how the "empty world" economic system is working, and the need for the development of a "full world" economic system that is responsive to the threat of global warming. I have focused primarily on the problems of the empty world economic system because that is the system that we have. The changes required to implement a full world economic system are so enormous that politicians won't go there. Its easier to solve the unemployment problem by growing the economy than it is to figure out how keep people employed in a steady state economy.
Thank you for posting this, Norm. It is becoming quite clear that adherence to conventional economics without relation to the biosphere (or "ultimate means" in the Daly Triangle) reflects simply blind ideology, and increasingly indefensible.
ReplyDeleteAs much as I like the "cowboy economics" and "spaceship economics" terms, I think your "empty world" and "full world" are simpler.
Best regards