« Is Cap and Trade Dead? | Main | The Problem with Policy »

February 18, 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b14c69e20120a8b22c5f970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What's in a Name?:

Comments

Muriel Strand

economics will certainly become more ecological when maslow's hierarchy of needs is fully incorporated into the theory. trademarking of intangible names would inevitably belong to a different category of need than trademarks of tangible handicraft items.

(btw, results that don't fulfill your hopes are not necessarily failures.)

Dave Iverson

Thanks Muriel,

I know that "results that don't fulfill your hopes are not necessarily failures". Thanks for reminding me.

And I will likely begin to write here again relatively soon. As for Maslow, I need sometime to pick up on his idea of "self actualization" as a contextual thing where it isn't all about self-interest self actualization, but rather working in the context of greater societal purposes that themselves are emergent.

I have been thinking of changing the name of my blog for quite some time, since at least last I looked the ecological economics community was populated with too many "quants" and would-be economists that have been poisoned by neoclassical economics nonsense. Not that all economists trained in the neoclassical tradition fit Dobson's "Mad Hatter" profile, but too many do.

Steven Earl Salmony

Dear Dave Iverson, Thanks for saying things almost everyone already knows but few will talk about. Perhaps the greedmongering "bubble barons" of Wall Street have deceptively 'engineered' cancerous financial products that are now the scourge of the real global economy. Is it possible that biggest problems the human community faces today are on one hand blasts of magma and ash exploding out of the volcanic crater in Iceland and on the other, the monstrous toxic inventions of racketeers on Wall Street that have exploded within the bowels of countries such as Greece and resulted in the cratering of the global political economy? Even though the self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe among us are not capable of setting off actual volcanic eruptions, these racketeers have demonstrated the readiness, willingness and ability to blow up the world's political economy, I suppose, and award themselves bonuses for their scandalous behavior.

Sincerely,

Steve

Steven Earl Salmony

Everyone is going to have to speak out. In the last decade the collusion, corruption and cover-up of massive fraud in the global economy by greedy, self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe among us as well as their willful blindness and elective mutism in the face of the rampant dissipation of natural resources, relentless pollution of the environment and reckless degradation of Earth's ecology is as unconscionable as it is unforgiveable.

The fulmination of irresponsible leadership in the first decade of Century XXI gave rise to the cratering of the world's political economy and to the irreversible destabilization of the Earth's climate. From 2000 to 2008, whatsoever was politically correct, economically expedient, socially convenient and culturally prescribed was automatically espoused loudly as "the truth". Ideological idiocy prevailed over science. Greed ruled the world. Intellectual honesty, personal accountability, moral courage and doing the right thing were eschewed. Gag rules were enforced. As a consequence, the human community was persuaded to inadvertently make a colossal mess of our planetary home, Earth. Everyone could see what was happening, but few people were willing to speak out. No one with power listened to those who did speak out about what was observed occurring around us. Millions of people were encouraged to engage in conspicuous per-capita overconsumption and scandalous individual hoarding of resources; in megabillion-dollar pyramid schemes and unsustainable large-scale industrial enterprises.

Nothing can happen until many people speak truth to the greedmongers and power-hungry. New leadership and a new direction such as the one presented by President Barack Obama need to be freely chosen and actively sustained.

Steven Earl Salmony

Dave Iverson is speaking out loudly and clearly to the family of humanity about what people somehow need to hear, see and understand: the reckless dissipation of Earth's limited resources, the relentless degradation of the planet's frangible environment, and the approaching destruction of the Earth as a fit place for human habitation by the human species, when taken together, appear to be proceeding synergistically at a breakneck pace toward the precipitation of a catastrophic ecological wreckage of some sort unless, of course, the world's gigantic, ever expanding global economy continues to speed headlong toward the monolithic 'WALL' called "unsustainability" at which point the runaway economy crashes before Earth's ecology is collapsed.

Many scientists have remarked eloquently on the collapse of civilizations. The global challenge we appear to face today, one that singular and unimaginable, is that the collapse of human civilization in Century XXI is not simply the end of another human civilization. What is occurring now is likely not only the collapse of a human civilization but also the human-driven destruction of the natural resource base, the ecology, and biodiversity of Earth.

Concern for the future of life as we know it and for the Earth as a fit place for human habitation by the children leads me to point to the great value I attach to the open discussion of the global predicament looming before the human family. We simply must make good use of the best available science to adequately explain the population dynamics leading to the collapse of our civilization. Without such knowledge, I cannot see how necessary changes in the behavioral repertoire of humankind can be made.

Is there doubt in the mind of anyone in the E and E community that the future will ultimately be brighter for children everywhere if people choose now to consume and hoard less; to protect, preserve and share more; and to effectively check the unbridled increase of unsustainable large-scale production capabilities as well as to humanely regulate the propagation of the human species?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Want Email Updates?

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Disclaimer


  • This is a personal web site, reflecting only the opinions of its authors. It was built and is manitained in occasional spare moments. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than the person offering up the views.

PURPOSE


  • Our Ecological Economics web-log is designed to daylight and refine economists’ and ecologists' views, agreements, and disagreements on current environmental and natural resource issues. We also hope this blog will help ecological economics ideas gain traction in social and political discussion and policy making.

Contributors

Ocassonal Contributors

Would-Be Contributors

Strategic Thinking Blogs

Blog powered by Typepad