Thank you for the great summary of our work In Superabundance. One of the original sins of economics is that we assumed only atoms could be resources. Atoms have no economic value without knowledge. Knowledge is what transforms atoms into resources. While the number of atoms on our planet may be finite, undiscovered knowledge is infinite. This is why resources can be infinite. Policies and cultures that prevent or discourage us from discovering and creating and sharing valuable new knowledge are the enemies of prosperity. When human beings are free to innovate we lift one another out of poverty. We can defeat the deadly ideology of scarcity, which has caused countless wars and so much human suffering, by recognizing the dignity and infinite potential of every human life. Thanks again for advancing these truths.
A very timely essay! I'll be referring to this essay (specifically the impact of dematerialization and knowledge on growth) in my upcoming piece on the importance of economic growth. Thanks :)
Even if the fictional Thanos (and the real-life Malthusians) were right that resources are limited in a meaningful way, killing off half the population -- or reducing or stopping economic growth -- doesn't solve a problem. That remaining half of the population (or a slower growing economy) will reach the same point of resource depletion; it will just take a little longer. Why is it better to suffer for longer but reach the same point? It's better to burn up that to fade away! (Especially if actual, living people are better off and there are fewer generations of people who haven't come into existence.)
I tend to agree, but you are making a "past performance indicates future results" argument a bit. There is absolutely a limit to resources. Only so much sun hits the earth each year, and the soil contains a finite (if large) quantity of resources, both mineral and "prior solar energy" in the form of fossil fuels.
We can certainly use those resources more efficiently, but that does not make them infinite, and if our rate of use exceeds our rate of productivity improvement (which it likely does) then there will be impacts that are permanent. For example, deforestation in the past 5-600 years by most major empires (China, Britain) has been largely permanent, as has the destruction of arable land since the time of the fertile crescent. There has been very little progress on restoring barren land, and evidence that the nitrogen-based maintenance of land has limits.
You also elide over the destruction of resources, including ocean acidification, destruction of the fertile soil cover in the great plains, or PTFEs. It is certainly possible that technology will find approaches to these over time, but it is not accelerating.
In the end, I am a supporter of the approach that minds can conquer "unsolvable" problems. The issue is that a mindset that because we can use information better we can be sloppy, greedy and wasteful seems, for lack of a better term, childish. Mature people and societies take care of their resources, and immature ones, which is virtually every Empire including the Romans, squander and destroy.
By the way, there is a much bigger issue with Thanos' approach, and that is reproduction. Depending on the gestation and maturation cycle of the various organisms he deleted, restoration of population could take little more than a few decades. If he really wanted to make an impact he would have to do something more on the order of 99% ;)
Thank you for the great summary of our work In Superabundance. One of the original sins of economics is that we assumed only atoms could be resources. Atoms have no economic value without knowledge. Knowledge is what transforms atoms into resources. While the number of atoms on our planet may be finite, undiscovered knowledge is infinite. This is why resources can be infinite. Policies and cultures that prevent or discourage us from discovering and creating and sharing valuable new knowledge are the enemies of prosperity. When human beings are free to innovate we lift one another out of poverty. We can defeat the deadly ideology of scarcity, which has caused countless wars and so much human suffering, by recognizing the dignity and infinite potential of every human life. Thanks again for advancing these truths.
A very timely essay! I'll be referring to this essay (specifically the impact of dematerialization and knowledge on growth) in my upcoming piece on the importance of economic growth. Thanks :)
Even if the fictional Thanos (and the real-life Malthusians) were right that resources are limited in a meaningful way, killing off half the population -- or reducing or stopping economic growth -- doesn't solve a problem. That remaining half of the population (or a slower growing economy) will reach the same point of resource depletion; it will just take a little longer. Why is it better to suffer for longer but reach the same point? It's better to burn up that to fade away! (Especially if actual, living people are better off and there are fewer generations of people who haven't come into existence.)
I tend to agree, but you are making a "past performance indicates future results" argument a bit. There is absolutely a limit to resources. Only so much sun hits the earth each year, and the soil contains a finite (if large) quantity of resources, both mineral and "prior solar energy" in the form of fossil fuels.
We can certainly use those resources more efficiently, but that does not make them infinite, and if our rate of use exceeds our rate of productivity improvement (which it likely does) then there will be impacts that are permanent. For example, deforestation in the past 5-600 years by most major empires (China, Britain) has been largely permanent, as has the destruction of arable land since the time of the fertile crescent. There has been very little progress on restoring barren land, and evidence that the nitrogen-based maintenance of land has limits.
You also elide over the destruction of resources, including ocean acidification, destruction of the fertile soil cover in the great plains, or PTFEs. It is certainly possible that technology will find approaches to these over time, but it is not accelerating.
In the end, I am a supporter of the approach that minds can conquer "unsolvable" problems. The issue is that a mindset that because we can use information better we can be sloppy, greedy and wasteful seems, for lack of a better term, childish. Mature people and societies take care of their resources, and immature ones, which is virtually every Empire including the Romans, squander and destroy.
By the way, there is a much bigger issue with Thanos' approach, and that is reproduction. Depending on the gestation and maturation cycle of the various organisms he deleted, restoration of population could take little more than a few decades. If he really wanted to make an impact he would have to do something more on the order of 99% ;)
Knowledge, experimentation and an expansive mindset can turn finite games into infinite games.