53 comments on From Peak Oilers to Citizens for Sustainable Living
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
53 comments on From Peak Oilers to Citizens for Sustainable Living
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Personnel
Classic posts
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
The Oil Drum: New York City archives
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
13. Take many of the economists (Alan Greenspan, Steven Levitt, etc... with Lou Grinzo and others excepted), line them all up against a wall and ... [fill in your own fantasy here]. Just so people won't believe the nonsense they hear about "people respond to incentives" or "when prices go up, we'll find more oil". And so therefore the Hoi Polloi won't be deluded and we will have some chance of making good on your excellent points 1 through 12, peakguy. :)
But consider: if peak oilers can't be more convincing than
economists (?! who ever believes economists?), then we have a credibility problem of our own to solve.
Be more convincing than economists? Unfortunately, this is not a debate but rather a struggle for hearts and minds with respect to reality. I remember when I was an undergraduate at The University of Chicago, the winner would get the glass of wine and the cookies. It was all academic. Not this time!
Economics comes across on the rational and emotional levels. There's some equations so people think that it's a hard science, rather than a social science, but at the same time it (currently) rings strong endorsement for an unsustainable lifestyle which is pretty comfy. Most North Americans are likely comfort addicts. How well do you think you'll be at convincing an addict to give up their drug vs. their dealer convincing them to get some money for more.
I agree that trying to bring it up as a sustainable living concept seems much more appealing, but I'm afraid that it's only going to appeal to a small percentage of the population. Heck, I've got a vermicomposting bin, long hair, eat unprocessed food, and I still react with anger when someone calls me a hippy.
And then there's the scary question of how many people are really sustainable on this earth? If the answer is significantly less than 6 billion, the uphill battle for sustainability has just become an assault against a fort located on Mount Everest.
from you as well.
Economics is all about the study of the production and distribution of SCARCE resources. There are limits to its usefulness, but it can be quite useful in many contexts. I don't understand why you become so indignant everytime an economist suggests that these things called "prices" might produce some changes in consumer and producer behavior.