The End of Economic Growth Is Inevitable. Let’s Plan for It.

[EMJ]

So how do we stop growth without making life miserable — and maybe even making it better?

https://undark.org/2019/01/15/economic-growth/

[jacob]

Japan is a good example of how to do it right. While GDP has been stable/declining since the 1990s, individual income has still been rising because the population is declining faster => GDP/capita keeps growing and individuals are better off even if the country is no longer expanding its resource consumption/waste production. One of the smartest solutions to a lot of problems is therefore to have fewer children, biologically felt imperatives be damned. It makes sense. The decline in productivity growth is one of the strongest economic trends in existence and so adding younglings to a workforce that doesn't really need them is doing them a huge disfavor. If anyone thinks all the whining about the lack of "good jobs" and children being unwilling to leave their parents' basement is bad now, just wait: it's going to get much worse. This is what zero-sum means. If you want an idea of what that feels like as someone in the beginning of their (likely non-materializing) career, see all the articles about millennial burnout currently circulating and how it originates in having to maximize optimization of everything in their lives yet not seeing any IRL(*) returns on it (basically overworked but no results => any sense of agency getting crushed).

(*) In looking for alternatives that was why I inquired about virtual living. It works well from a basement too. Imagine a world where the majority of humans have given up on "real world" activity and spend most of their time developing their sense of meaning/value/worth online. Some of it is happening now... and I think it's going to become far more prevalent.

Sometimes, it's also suggested that we need to keep increasing population because we need to have young people pay for all those nice (and optimistic) pensions we have promised each other that they will pay for. This might sound callous but some people really think like that. This is easily fixed: We (older generations) simply get less as democracy inflicts a haircut on our pension plans. This is already happening as retirement ages are adjusted upwards (see most of Europe) or "free money" is eliminated (see Greece).

And with less people, we just learn to love robots. Again, see Japan.

Without growth and with increased population pressure (which is where we'll probably be for the next 10-30 years), it's a negative sum game. If you want to plan for it as an individual, you need to make sure that what you're doing can not be outcompeted, taken from you easily, or seen as hurting others. ERE is a very good start for this.

[iopsi]

Most of the population growth should be located in Africa, which is already poor overall. I think it is to be expected an increase in immigration towards Europe, and therefore an increase in xenophobia, right-leaning parties etc.
On the other hand the population of european countries should decrease (unless immigration is high enough to alt this, i hope not), which is a positive thing. Less people = more resources for every individual. Tho the transition will be a bit painful at first since us youngsters will have to pay the pensions of the boomers.

ERE is a good starting point yes, but won't financial investments become less viable with economic stagnation (or even decline)? I mean the principles of ERE are valid, but the "standard" practical application (extreme savings rate + investing in the stock market) might not longer be suitable (i.e ROI not high enough). I mean the more prosperous and advanced an economy is, the easier it is to achieve FIRE, the opposite should also be true.

[daylen]

r/K selection theory is not a bad place to look for strategy. Humans are more K-selective generally, but now that we have reached our carrying capacity the K-selective pressures will be even greater. The K-selection strategy encourages low fertility rate, kin loyalty, appeal to local authority, well-defined borders, and increased competition with perceived outgroup (correlated with conservatism).

Seems that it is possible to play a positive-sum game if everyone agreed on the same virtual values, but humans are predisposed to being socially competitive so this seems unlikely (hence future fragmentation).

There was an interesting study done with rats where researchers created a "rat heaven" with effectively unlimited resources/space. The colony grew rapidly at first (r-selective strategy), then the colony started to compete for abundant resources/space long before scarcity kicked in. K-selective species prolong reaching ecological maximization by competing for a sub-set of potentially abundant resources/space. This preserves their competitive instincts for when the species does max out their environment and migration becomes an obsolete strategy.

This also gets into higher-level selection which is highly controversial, even for biologists. There does appear to be special circumstances or adaptations that cannot be understood without accounting for group-level selection.

[Mister Imperceptible]

Given that the biological imperatives are not going away, and the overwhelming number of people are not going to willingly have less so others can have more (most people preach equality because they are envious of those who have more) I find it hard not to see this heading towards population capacity overshoot and mass death on the one hand, or totalitarianism/centralized control on the other.

There’s always space colonization.

[tonyedgecombe]

most people preach equality because they are envious of those who have more

I don't think that's true.

[Mister Imperceptible]

I don't think that's true.

Well, as a perpetually guilty lapsed Catholic, I ask myself how many of my resources and how much of my time I actually dedicate to the wretched of the earth, and the answer is, almost none. And I extrapolate my cynicism to the rest of the human race.

To those of you who are truly saints, I apologize.

There will be no utopia. We have to get off this rock.

[daylen]

We have to get off this rock.

..or accept death on it.

[Mister Imperceptible]

The struggle against nihilism is amongst the greatest of struggles, maybe the greatest.

[Stahlmann]

most people preach equality because they are envious of those who have more

level 1 - being envy when someone has more than me
level 2 - "most people preach equality because they are envious of those who have more"
level 3 - undertanding that even level 2 might be true, unfortunately it's sometimes sucks to be poor and not so many people would be level 2 and be poor in the same time...
level 4 - "planet with finite resources vs people now live better than kings 300 years ago vs decrease in incomes in last 40 years vs creative desctruction"- opinions "debate"

level somewhere between 7 and 10 - the ERE way

level 9000 - cybernetic communism

[chenda]

I wonder if our religions will need to evolve to deal with this new reality. Perhaps we'll see a rise in monastic living or hermits (basement dwellers as much as mountain dwellers) Finding meaning in self-realisation and spirituality rather than consumption. A greater detachment from the material world might be an alternative to virtual reality.

[daylen]

A greater detachment from the material world might be an alternative to virtual reality.

Or just a different perception of it. A drive towards understanding larger scale phenomena that span across large periods of time. Meaning is found in stability, and the cosmos shows us tiny humans what persistence looks like. Ancient cultures were no strangers to astronomy, but their methodology was a bit underdeveloped. No wonder so many religions derive symbolism from the sky or why heaven is "up".

[chenda]

@daylan Indeed, and now we know the universe is probably only temporary. Religion I think is the one thing which can give some kind of ultimate meaning to life.

[daylen]

@chenda The multi-verse!

I like many-quantum worlds + extra spacetime dimensions. If you are going to imagine a reality, it better be interesting/complex; that is my motto.

[luxagraf]

I wonder if our religions will need to evolve to deal with this new reality.

Oswald Spengler covers exactly what will happen in this regard in considerable detail. The Decline of the West. Highly recommended reading.

[suomalainen]

FINALLY! Anti-natalists arise!

[BRUTE]

The struggle against nihilism is amongst the greatest of struggles, maybe the greatest.

why struggle

@topic:
is brute the only one here who's not particularly concerned about the End of Growth? brute doesn't even really think it'll end.

[Jean]

I'm not worried about a possible end of growth. I'm more concerned about a continuation of growth.

[Mister Imperceptible]

Oswald Spengler covers exactly what will happen in this regard in considerable detail. The Decline of the West. Highly recommended reading.

https://hammeringshield.wordpress.com/2 ... -the-west/

http://people.duke.edu/~aparks/Spengler.html

http://people.duke.edu/~aparks/SPENGL.html

Seconded

[Mister Imperceptible]

why struggle

why not