Zero Net Growth Global Economy

Share this article...

Zero Net Growth Economy

The global economy needs to reach a Zero Net Growth equilibrium point and Australia must take steps to reorganise its economy to match this goal.

The primary reason for this is to recognize that we live on a finite planet with finite resources.  Infinite cumulative growth can only consume all our resource in a one way ride to oblivion.  Albert Bartlett explains this very clearly in this linked video. [1]

The other reason we need this change is to provide the right environment for markets to constantly innovate and regenerate over time without destroying the finite resources of the world.  The current domination of huge multinational corporations that are allowed to operate in every industry on the planet is not providing that environment.  The lie of infinite growth must be taught from primary school, showing how quickly exponential growth consumes all resources.

“Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.” – Edward Abbey[2]

There must still be reward for private investment, but that investment model should be more like crowdsourcing – everyone can join in on supporting small, local business or larger ventures as required.  This means that the evolution of the market is determined far more by the masses than by selfish, rich individuals and corporations manufacturing consent.

Further investigation into alternative approaches to the current debt economy must be made rapidly and implemented in stages.  The systemic change will need to be spread over at least two decades to allow the shift to occur without major repercussions in the short term.  The gift economy,[3] positive money[4] and a return to local, multilayered economies with different currencies[5] must all be considered.

The option to do nothing has expired, change is necessary, but we must determine the pathway carefully and let our government make the decisions with the nation in mind; not financial institutions or corporations.

As a final note: Any economic theory that does not directly include consideration for global environmental and social impact in its modelling is to be discarded.  The archaic theories that don’t include these components need to be treated with the same disdain we now give flat earth theory and a geocentric solar system.  It is unmitigated nonsense worthy only of derision and exclusion from any serious conversation.


[2] The Journey Home : Some Words in Defense of the American West (1977), “The Second Rape of the West”, p. 183





Share this article...

Leave a Reply
See our discussion rules here

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>