<story><title>The Case for Degrowth</title><url>https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v44/n16/geoff-mann/reversing-the-freight-train</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>impossiblefork</author><text>The problem with ideas like this is that it takes the ladder away from middle class and the poor.&lt;p&gt;Both need growth in order to improve their conditions, and their place in society exists only because they can produce growth.&lt;p&gt;Without it the power of the wealthy over them would become a weight pressing down with such force that it would intolerable.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pessimizer</author><text>The conditions of the middle-class are actually too luxurious. Everybody in the world can&amp;#x27;t have a suburban lawn.&lt;p&gt;What the middle-class (and the poor) don&amp;#x27;t have is &lt;i&gt;security&lt;/i&gt;. They live in a state of fear that the entire bottom will drop out of their lives if they get fired, or have a heart attack, or any of a million things. Supplying security to people is actually cheaper that what we do now, just as socialized health care is far cheaper than an ad hoc privatized patchwork.&lt;p&gt;We don&amp;#x27;t need more growth, we need more humanity.&lt;p&gt;edit: I&amp;#x27;d trade most (though maybe not all) of the great meals I&amp;#x27;ve ever had for the guarantee I&amp;#x27;d never go hungry.</text></comment>
<story><title>The Case for Degrowth</title><url>https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v44/n16/geoff-mann/reversing-the-freight-train</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>impossiblefork</author><text>The problem with ideas like this is that it takes the ladder away from middle class and the poor.&lt;p&gt;Both need growth in order to improve their conditions, and their place in society exists only because they can produce growth.&lt;p&gt;Without it the power of the wealthy over them would become a weight pressing down with such force that it would intolerable.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>dredmorbius</author><text>This observation begs the questions:&lt;p&gt;Is this the &lt;i&gt;only&lt;/i&gt; such ladder?&lt;p&gt;And &lt;i&gt;why&lt;/i&gt; is it that economic growth seems to be the &lt;i&gt;only&lt;/i&gt; ladder recognised in the economic mainstream for poverty alleviation?&lt;p&gt;The latter question is one that&amp;#x27;s addressed often in the writing and talks of Herman Daly, one example I&amp;#x27;ve recently come across being a 2020 Thanksgiving edition of the CASSE podcast, which discusses Daly&amp;#x27;s work and academic heritage:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.iheart.com&amp;#x2F;podcast&amp;#x2F;269-the-steady-stater-72324277&amp;#x2F;episode&amp;#x2F;giving-thanks-a-conversation-with-herman-74282469&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.iheart.com&amp;#x2F;podcast&amp;#x2F;269-the-steady-stater-7232427...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;A more useful framing of the question might be to &lt;i&gt;assume&lt;/i&gt; that degrowth is a given, &lt;i&gt;whether you believe this or not&lt;/i&gt;, and proceed from there with a discussion of concerns.&lt;p&gt;The obvious advantage of growth over degrowth, or even steady-state economics, is that a larger pie allows portion sizes to increase (at least in theory --- actual history shows that both growth &lt;i&gt;and&lt;/i&gt; absolute shrinkage have occurred, see particularly the introduction to Gregory Clark&amp;#x27;s &lt;i&gt;A Farewell to Alms&lt;/i&gt; which notes that the richest &lt;i&gt;and poorest&lt;/i&gt; people who&amp;#x27;ve ever lived are alive now), without reallocation.&lt;p&gt;But wealth and livelihood allocation &lt;i&gt;are&lt;/i&gt; social functions and constructs.  A philosophy of commmon weal rather than personal gain might address this.  It can be found in unexpected places, including Adam Smith&amp;#x27;s &lt;i&gt;Wealth of Nations&lt;/i&gt;, several times.</text></comment>