Ignoring the “Limits to Growth”
Larry Shultz reacted to my post that began: At a certain point in U.S. history, it appeared that Americans had grasped what Rachel Carson said here. For a brief period, it looked like our country was on a path towards rethinking its practices that are doing such great violence to the natural environment.He wrote: We did not like the “Limits to Growth” study, thus we created predicaments rather than solution pathways. Now our choices center around less severe predicaments today or more severe predicaments tomorrow depending upon our political and biological future discount rates.
Astute comment. Like alcoholics and drug addicts, we have a huge discount rate. We know what we’re doing is harmful, but we demand instant gratification regardless of the expense to the future.
In fact, our situation is even worse. An alcoholic may be aware that his liver is giving out, and that he himself will one day have to suffer accordingly. Conversely, the people who call the shots on this planet today really couldn’t care less about what happens here a generation or two hence.
