Manitoba Museum Botany: What ecology has taught me about economics

In order to get my degree in environmental studies I had to take six classes in economics so that I would have some understanding of how the economy worked.* In reality, I only needed three weeks of economics to understand that much of what they were teaching was a load of bunk.* When I asked [...]

More...

 

Couple of misconceptions at play in the article (at least): "externalities" aren't forbidden territory, economists discuss them at length. Basically, just positive or negative outcomes that are unintended. Typically, in society, the space where regulation comes in. Quite ecological, when you think about it, the notion that positive and negative effects occur incidentally in a given system: after all, isn't the evolutionary process in part driven by such externalities? Second fallacy: 'unlimited growth' is impossible. Physically, yes. But when economists say 'growth', they mean economic growth. And this can be purely social: ever increasing transactions between individuals, often for non-material things such as services. Growth in social media occupies no space, and itself consumes no resources, but generates incredible wealth. Never heard an economist define growth as a purely material phenomenon; don't know why the author thinks so.