MATTHEW WATKINSON • WEB: http://www.fishsnorkel.com • TWITTER: http://twitter.com/fishsnorkel
WHAT ARE THE LIMITS TO GROWTH? Matthew Watkinson
"All politicians, all economies, all trapped in capitalism's most sacred, rarely challenged, commandment: Growth or die." Paul B. Farrell SUMMARY •
Hypnotically chanting about eternal exponential economic growth does not mean it’s even remotely possible, or even mildly sensible for that matter.
EXPONENTIAL GROWTH I have come to hate the word ‘growth’ in recent times. Not always of course, but definitely always when it’s used by brainwashed zombies with reference to its economic necessity. Apparently, perpetual economic growth is a genuine long term possibility, even though that’s so stupid it’s stupidity squared... “There is still no intelligent life on earth.” Peter Goodchild (http://ht.ly/1Nxvj)
...firstly because eternal growth in consumption based economies (like all those in the Western world) obviously requires eternal growth in consumption and, thus, eternal growth in resource consumption... “…the industrial age is in some sense the ultimate speculative bubble, a three-century-long binge driven by the fantasy of infinite economic growth on a finite planet with even more finite supplies of cheap abundant energy.” John Michael Greer
...and secondly because the mathematics of growth make it so utterly impossible to sustain over time: "The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function" Dr Albert Bartlett
I don’t plan to review the mathematics of exponential growth in any great detail of course, but only because a review of the mathematics of exponential growth doesn’t actually need to go in to great detail. Despite widespread ignorance amongst literally everybody associated with promoting and sustaining the world’s economies, it’s some of the simplest mathematics in existence, and a brief review should be more than enough to make the constant chanting about ‘economic growth’ feel like someone is repeatedly pouring lemon juice into your brain. The key is simply the ability to recognise that anything that keeps growing will eventually double, and if it keeps growing it will keep doubling, and if it keeps doubling it will eventually overwhelm all realistic possibilities, as the quintessential rice grains on a chess board example conclusively proves: “...the ruler or India was so pleased with one of his palace wise men, who had invented the game of chess, that he offered this wise man a reward of his own choosing. The wise man, who was also a wise mathematician, told his Master that he would like just one grain of rice on the first square of the chess board, double that number of grains of rice on the second square, and so on: double the number of grains of rice on each of the next 62 squares on the chess board. This seemed to the ruler to be a modest request, so he called for his servants to bring the rice. How surprised he was to find that the rice quickly covered the chess board, then filled the palace!” http://mathforum.org
1
MATTHEW WATKINSON • WEB: http://www.fishsnorkel.com • TWITTER: http://twitter.com/fishsnorkel
Indeed, the final amount (264 grains) would be, apparently, a heap of rice larger than Mount Everest, which is an amount of rice that has clearly overwhelmed all realistic possibilities. “If you should put even a little on a little and should do this often, soon this would become big.” Hesiod
To be fair, the concept is traditionally only associated with constant compound growth rates (i.e. where subsequent interest is added to the principal figure plus all previous interest), such as the example given above (2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 etc. etc.), which literally never occur in the real world (growth rates vary). But, as David Coutts rightly points out, variable rate compound interest can be just as powerful as constant rate compound interest... “...variable rate compound interest results in a doubling of the original sum as surely as constant compound interest.” David Coutts http://ht.ly/31Ayy
...because something growing at a variable growth rate will, quite obviously, double faster than the constant doubling time for the slowest growth rate and slower than the constant doubling time for the fastest... “Repeated doubling means exponential growth, even if the doubling time is not constant.” David Coutts http://ht.ly/31Ayy
...even if humanity’s demographers find variable rate exponential growth a little bit graphically inconsiderate: “I think the problem that modern demographers suffer from is what can be described as graphilism they love graphs! Because they endlessly plot population growth on graphs they imagine that only constant compound interest rates result in exponential growth because only constant compound interest rates result in an exponential curve. Didn't it occur to anyone to question whether variable compound interest still doubles the original population? Modern demographers have lost the plot. What is important is whether the population doubles, not how pretty and neat your graph is! You can get exponential growth without an exponential curve!” David Coutts http://ht.ly/31Ayy
THE RULE OF 70(ish) Working out the doubling times for constant rate compound interest is extremely simple by the way, which means working out the doubling time range for variable rate compound interest is also extremely simple (you just need to do the calculation twice: once for the slowest rate and once for the highest). All you need is the rule of 70 (or 69 or 72, depending, to some extent, on which number you like best): “...the rule of 72, the rule of 70 and the rule of 69 are methods for estimating an investment's doubling time. The number in the title is divided by the interest percentage per period to obtain the approximate number of periods (usually years) required for doubling.” Wikipedia
You don’t particularly need to worry about why you’re using 70 (or 69 or 72); you just need to use it, remembering not to forget that the results are a rough estimate rather than a precise prediction. For example, since 1955 the UK’s GDP has grown by about 2.4% per year (in inflation adjusted terms), which, if we divide into 70... 70/2.4 = 29.17
...means the UK’s GDP has been doubling every 29 years, approximately. It also means the UK’s GDP will, if things proceed as desired, quadruple in the next 58 years, approximately (see the red line on the graph below for a very amateur graphical representation of this expansionary insanity, that isn’t even exponential really)... 2
MATTHEW WATKINSON • WEB: http://www.fishsnorkel.com • TWITTER: http://twitter.com/fishsnorkel
UK GDP in millions of inflation unadjusted pounds
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
1955 Q1 1958 Q4 1962 Q3 1966 Q2 1970 Q1 1973 Q4 1977 Q3 1981 Q2 1985 Q1 1988 Q4 1992 Q3 1996 Q2 2000 Q1 2003 Q4 2007 Q3 2011 Q2 2015 Q1 2018 Q4 2022 Q3 2026 Q2 2030 Q1 2033 Q4 2037 Q3 2041 Q2 2045 Q1 2048 Q4 2052 Q3 2056 Q2
0
...almost all of which will be based on the growth of competitive consumption... “The explosion of media and media-delivery devices has aided this program immensely. Advanced-economy consumers are now immersed in a sea of marketing, which essentially sells one thing: insecurity. While advertising still offers "bargains" and "sales" as an enticement to spend and acquire, the more profound message is: You don't measure up. The standards offered as "measuring up" are impossibly high, guaranteeing that most people will feel inadequate, insecure, and needing some sort of external validation which can only be granted--surprise!--by some profitable product, service or accreditation...But alas, fulfillment and happiness are always (by careful design) just beyond reach.” Charles Hugh Smith, Effort Shock, Future Shock and the Promise of Transformation (http://is.gd/czHb7)
...driven by the ruthless exploitation of human vanity... “The rich man glories in his riches, because he feels that they naturally draw upon him the attention of the world..." Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations (1776)
...which is easy to exploit... “Just as an addict becomes habituated to cocaine, heroin or alcohol, the 'normal person' possesses neural architecture to become habituated via a positive feedback loop to the 'chemical sensations' we receive from shopping, keeping up with the joneses (conspicuous consumption), pursuing more stock options and profits, and myriad other stimulating activities that a large social energy surplus provides.” Nate Hagens (http://bit.ly/bJNJ6p)
...impossible to satisfy... “...humans are believed to be subject to evolutionary drives towards rivalry and competition, which motivates individuals to pursue positional goods (i.e. social status, wealth and material
3
MATTHEW WATKINSON • WEB: http://www.fishsnorkel.com • TWITTER: http://twitter.com/fishsnorkel
possessions). This positional psychology, thus, explains the individual’s urge to stay on the ‘hedonic treadmill’, practising the relentless accumulation of material things in the belief that this will make him or her happy—even though this is an irrational, zero sum game when many others in the same society are in similar social positions, all struggling for the same coveted forms of status or possessions. Moreover, psychological evidence tells us that humans quickly adapt to changes in status, meaning that we are never satisfied for long with what we achieve and acquire.” Hanlon and Carlisle, Do we face a third revolution in human history? If so, how will public health respond? (http://ht.ly/1V6pj)
...impossible to avoid (without externally applied positive checks)... “...no general increase of the community's wealth can make any approach to satiating this need, the ground of which is the desire of every one to excel every one else in the accumulation of goods.” Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class
...impossible to perpetually support... “Continual increases in population and consumption cannot continue forever on a finite planet. This is an axiomatic observation with which everyone familiar with the mathematics of compounded arithmetic growth must agree, even if they hedge their agreement with vague references to ‘substitutability’ and ‘demographic transitions’ [see What are the Principles of Population? http://ht.ly/2ramv].” Richard Heinberg (http://bit.ly/c4yT2z)
...impossible to intelligently deny... "These people believe that perpetual growth is desirable, consequently it must be possible, and so it can't possibly be a problem. At the same time there are still a few remaining "spherical earth" people who go around talking about "limits" and in particular about the limits that are implied by the term "carrying capacity." But limits are awkward, because limits conflict with the concept of perpetual growth, so there is a growing move to do away with the concept of limits." Dr Albert Bartlett (http://ht.ly/1RKSL)
...biologically justifiable... “Competitors must compete.” Me, Here
...biologically justified... “Competitors do compete (by definition).” Me, Here, Again
...biologist justified... “…it should be remembered that the competition will generally be most severe between those forms which are most nearly related to each other in habits, constitution, and structure.” Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species (1859).
...philosopher justified... “Life itself appears to me as a mere instinct for growth, for survival, for the accumulation of forces, for power: whenever the will to power fails, there is disaster.” Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist
...philosophically biological... “Capitalism is an economic manifestation of people’s natural desire for financial well-being. Unlike in other systems, however, this is made possible by competition, which encourages the pursuit of self-interest—often at the cost of someone else’s interests and well-being.” William Welch, Everymoney: Capitalism, Democracy and Global Wealth (http://ht.ly/1Wfeo)
4
MATTHEW WATKINSON • WEB: http://www.fishsnorkel.com • TWITTER: http://twitter.com/fishsnorkel
...biologically philosophical... Anthropology is the science of humanity studying itself.
...ethically bankrupt... “If energy is to be concentrated at the centre [the West], it must come at the price of a lower energy level in the periphery [the rest], and the energy loss in the periphery must be greater than the gain at the centre [according the laws of thermodynamics]… The centre gains resources while avoiding many unpleasant externalities, but the periphery must suffer a loss of both resources and surpluses due to labour, and must tolerate all the externalities involved in providing for itself and for the centre.” Nicole Foss (http://bit.ly/9gsA8J)
...morally bankrupt... “Wealth is heavily concentrated in North America, Europe, and high income Asia-Pacific countries. People in these countries collectively hold almost 90% of total world wealth.” World Institute for Development Economics Research of the United Nations University (UNU-WIDER) (http://ht.ly/2Etqd)
...managementally convenient (are we being farmed by the lucky few?)... "Without economic security, the love of servitude cannot possibly come into existence...” Aldous Huxley, Brave New World (1931)
...and, ultimately, extremely lucrative (if you’re one of the lucky few): “The richest 2% of adults in the world own more than half of global household wealth...the richest 1% of adults alone owned 40% of global assets in the year 2000, and the richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of the world total. In contrast, the bottom half of the world adult population owned barely 1% of global wealth.” World Institute for Development Economics Research of the United Nations University (UNU-WIDER) (http://ht.ly/2Etqd)
No wonder it’s so heavily promoted by those in control of the information we receive: “...we now live in a realm of compulsory fiction, reinforced through repetition in the echochamber of the media...” Dmitry Orlov
‘SUSTAINABLE’ EXPONENTIAL GROWTH Even the greens have sold out to this mind-bogglingly impossible devil worship. “...time has not been kind to the greens. Today’s environmentalists are more likely to be found at corporate conferences hymning the virtues of ’sustainability’ and ‘ethical consumption’ than doing anything as naive as questioning the intrinsic values of civilisation. Capitalism has absorbed the greens, as it absorbs so many challenges to its ascendancy. A radical challenge to the human machine has been transformed into yet another opportunity for shopping.” The Dark Mountain Project (http://ht.ly/31zmF)
They call it ‘sustainable growth’ of course... “Like the word “green”, “sustainable” or “sustainability” has become the buzzword of the millennia. Corporations and governments of the left or right feel compelled to dress up the most ecologically invasive development proposal or economic activity with assurances that it is “sustainable”. Employed as an adjective it coats the unpalatable with the sweet syrup of delectability rendering the bitter pill of upheaval and damage neutral in flavour. Growth not couched in green psychobabble went down like Buckley’s Mixture, but “sustainable growth”, “sustainable tourism” and “sustainable agriculture” on the other hand tastes like sugary cough
5
MATTHEW WATKINSON • WEB: http://www.fishsnorkel.com • TWITTER: http://twitter.com/fishsnorkel
syrup. Such is the Newspeak of contemporary growthism, the vocabulary of deceit that promises a new kind of capitalism, capitalism in a green velvet glove, business as usual with apparent sensitivity to environmental concerns that will nevertheless satisfy the shareholders.” Tim Murray (http://bit.ly/a8TsSp)
...or ‘smart growth’... “Remember that politicians will try to claim that there isn’t a conflict between saving the environment and smart growth. Unfortunately, both smart growth and dumb growth destroy the environment. The only difference is that smart growth destroys the environment with good taste. It’s like buying a ticket on the Titanic, if you’re smart you go first class. But the outcome is the same…the boat still sinks.” Dr Albert Bartlett (http://ow.ly/1vbGL)
...but whatever they call it, they’re being no less stupid than anybody else who believes in the infinite growth model. In fact, the words ‘infinite’ and ‘stupidity’ have previously been combined to create a sentence that probably applies better to this kind of capitalist prostitution than almost any other: “The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by Infinity is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity.” Voltaire
The green vicars of environmentalism are even prepared to accept trade-offs between their environmental concerns and the infinite growth economy, as if the latter’s exponentially increasing exploitation of the former can be reconciled in some way if everybody talks nicely to each other: “As can be witnessed in the tourist industry, economic considerations have achieved a delusional parity in a ‘holistic’ paradigm that sees ‘environmental’ sustainability balanced off against “economic” and ‘cultural’ sustainability. In this three-legged stool model of viability, environmental issues must compete with other ‘sustainability’ concerns on a level playing field with other equally valid objectives so as to achieve the optimal “trade-offs”. This misconception may be termed ‘The Fallacy of Equivalent Concerns’.” Tim Murray (http://bit.ly/a8TsSp)
Much of this stems from the ill-considered belief that service economies are shining examples of sustainability, even though this is clearly just a manufactured illusion: “The explosion of economic activity based on financial services and information technology in the dominant economies during the early 90’s gave some credibility to this concept of the “weightless economy”, although it is now clear that globalisation simply shifted the consumption of resources to other countries to support this growth in the service economies.” David Holmgren
Incidentally, it’s probably also worth pointing out that the green cry-baby brigade probably only exist because of the infinite growth economy, just like the occupants of any other niche that exists to solve the very problem that created it... “Whoever lives for the sake of combating an enemy has an interest in the enemy's staying alive.” Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human (1878)
This is aside from the fact that predatory globalisation... “[Globalization is just] a mildly positive-sounding word to describe parasitic financial colonialization." Charles Hugh Smith (http://is.gd/coDDv)
...may well have provided the resource glut needed to allow competitive altruism to reach such nauseating levels in the first place: “If kindness and comfort are, as I suspect, the results of an energy surplus, then, as the supply
6
MATTHEW WATKINSON • WEB: http://www.fishsnorkel.com • TWITTER: http://twitter.com/fishsnorkel
contracts, we could be expected to start fighting once again like cats in a sack.” George Monbiot
That conspicuous compassion very rarely achieves anything (hardly surprising given that life is a zero sum game; i.e. those lucky enough to help the unlucky are probably lucky at the expense of the unlucky) seems to be irrelevant... “If altruism is a signal, the benefits of the altruistic act to the recipient may be largely incidental.” Gilbert Roberts, Competitive altruism: from reciprocity to the handicap principle (http://ht.ly/308bD)
...as does the fact that very few of the most garish philanthropists ever give everything away: “‘I feel guilty about my good luck,’ say some. The reply to this is simple: Get out and yield your place to others." Garret Hardin
Indeed, being ‘good’ can often directly lead people to be ‘bad’ (through what’s called ‘licensing behaviour’), which is yet more evidence against the existence of genuine selfless altruism (see: Is it possible to Perform a Selfless Act? http://ht.ly/30s0D): “Building on recent research on behavioral priming and moral regulation, we found that mere exposure to green products and the purchase of such products lead to markedly different behavioral consequences. In line with the halo associated with green consumerism, results showed that people act more altruistically after mere exposure to green products than after mere exposure to conventional products. However, people act less altruistically and are more likely to cheat and steal after purchasing green products than after purchasing conventional products. Together, our studies show that consumption is connected to social and ethical behaviors more broadly across domains than previously thought.” Mazar and Zhong, Do Green Products Make Us Better People? (http://bit.ly/aYHjTh)
Regardless of why the greens are behaving the way they do, however, their submission to the ever-inflating pound sign does not mean they can actually change its fundamental nature. “It is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting.” H L Mencken
THE LIMIT TO GROWTH In summary, growth cannot continue indefinitely on a finite planet (even the amount of sunlight reaching the planet’s surface per unit time is finite) and even though I don’t know when the limit will be reached, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist... “…I cannot help again reminding the reader of a distinction, which, it appears to me, ought particularly to be attended to in the present question; I mean, the essential difference there is between an unlimited improvement, and an improvement the limit of which cannot be ascertained.” Thomas Malthus, An Essay on the Principles of Population (1798)
...or that the arrival of such a limit won’t inevitably lead to the beginning of the end for industrial civilisation. "..it is St. John's Four Horsemen of war, famine, plague, and death who will signify the future of the industrial world." Peter Goodchild (http://ht.ly/1Nxvj)
(And I didn’t mention peak oil theory once: "It's quite a simple theory and one that any beer drinker understands. The glass starts full and ends empty and the faster you drink it the quicker it's gone." Colin Campbell)
"We're damned if we grow. Damned if we don't." Paul B Farrell 7