| Patagonia 08:18 - Sep 15 with 658 views | NthQldITFC |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62906853
Yvon Chouinard said that under a new ownership structure, any profit not reinvested in running the business would go to fighting climate change.
This is a good thing, and I'm not knocking it, but if the investment to run the business still means an adherence to the growth and profit cycle and the promotion of unnecessary discarding of functional equipment in favour of bright, shiny new things, it's still a problem. |  |
| |  |
| Patagonia on 08:37 - Sep 15 with 607 views | Darth_Koont |
True.
But it’s an important message to other companies and billionaires. Or to those that defend the accumulation of wealth for its own sake which is fairly well proven by now not to help people or the planet.
I suppose the thing that sticks out most is how impossible (or at least very difficult to do) this kind of step forward is for the vast majority of large companies. The traditional public-listed and shareholder model ties them into maximising profit rather than assuring sustainable and beneficial value through the company’s activities.
Profit needs to come second to actual utility and having a positive (or at least not a negative effect) on the world. But that’s not going to change without some massive economic upheaval. |  |
| |
| Patagonia on 09:05 - Sep 15 with 564 views | NthQldITFC |
| Patagonia on 08:37 - Sep 15 by Darth_Koont |
True.
But it’s an important message to other companies and billionaires. Or to those that defend the accumulation of wealth for its own sake which is fairly well proven by now not to help people or the planet.
I suppose the thing that sticks out most is how impossible (or at least very difficult to do) this kind of step forward is for the vast majority of large companies. The traditional public-listed and shareholder model ties them into maximising profit rather than assuring sustainable and beneficial value through the company’s activities.
Profit needs to come second to actual utility and having a positive (or at least not a negative effect) on the world. But that’s not going to change without some massive economic upheaval. |
Yes, a great message, well put. The traditional model of profit being good and the ultimate aim is a deeply ingrained, dangerous and almost religious fallacy in our finite and dying world.
Profit as the goal has to die out soon or we will, but it's so hard to challenge because so many believe so deeply in it, or at least are still desperately trying to cling on to it in the face of the overwhelming evidence of an urgent need for a radical change of model.
"I'll work myself to the bone selling water for gold until I die of thirst, a rich and successful man". | |
| |
| Patagonia on 09:26 - Sep 15 with 529 views | Darth_Koont |
| Patagonia on 09:05 - Sep 15 by NthQldITFC |
Yes, a great message, well put. The traditional model of profit being good and the ultimate aim is a deeply ingrained, dangerous and almost religious fallacy in our finite and dying world.
Profit as the goal has to die out soon or we will, but it's so hard to challenge because so many believe so deeply in it, or at least are still desperately trying to cling on to it in the face of the overwhelming evidence of an urgent need for a radical change of model.
"I'll work myself to the bone selling water for gold until I die of thirst, a rich and successful man". |
Agree totally.
There’s also the problem that the growth/profit model is also what makes up people’s savings and retirement fund.
And I can see that tension/imbalance creating a lot of problems, given the inability of the younger generations to save to the same extent but also them having to pay for it with the long-term climate effects.
In the developed world, I think we’re going to see some kind of great economic reset or we’ll see revolution in its place. The sentiment is already there re: wealth imbalance, climate change and democratic disenfranchisement and will only increase as more and more people realise how they’re being cheated and indeed their lives and well-being threatened by the path we’re still on. | |
| |
| Patagonia on 10:43 - Sep 15 with 472 views | NthQldITFC |
| Patagonia on 09:26 - Sep 15 by Darth_Koont |
Agree totally.
There’s also the problem that the growth/profit model is also what makes up people’s savings and retirement fund.
And I can see that tension/imbalance creating a lot of problems, given the inability of the younger generations to save to the same extent but also them having to pay for it with the long-term climate effects.
In the developed world, I think we’re going to see some kind of great economic reset or we’ll see revolution in its place. The sentiment is already there re: wealth imbalance, climate change and democratic disenfranchisement and will only increase as more and more people realise how they’re being cheated and indeed their lives and well-being threatened by the path we’re still on. |
Is there a decent, reputable source of information out there that has a go at calculated values for things like energy requirements, pollution levels, species extinctions, earth surface disturbance for a stable or reducing human population each living a 'comfortable' but not excessive life?
I think your *economic reset* | *revolution* will come in a series of small versions of each, one after the other. The latter will probably induce a few, fake, manipulatively placatory versions of the former, and scale up until something real happens. I suspect the mini-revolutions will start within a year or so. Which way it breaks from there is anybody's guess. | |
| |
| Patagonia on 11:03 - Sep 15 with 436 views | Darth_Koont |
| Patagonia on 10:43 - Sep 15 by NthQldITFC |
Is there a decent, reputable source of information out there that has a go at calculated values for things like energy requirements, pollution levels, species extinctions, earth surface disturbance for a stable or reducing human population each living a 'comfortable' but not excessive life?
I think your *economic reset* | *revolution* will come in a series of small versions of each, one after the other. The latter will probably induce a few, fake, manipulatively placatory versions of the former, and scale up until something real happens. I suspect the mini-revolutions will start within a year or so. Which way it breaks from there is anybody's guess. |
Our World in Data is a great resource for lots of world issues. But they don’t really have the modelling you’re talking about more the underlying data in different areas.
Would be very interesting to see but googling around it looks like more of an academic exercise at the moment. And I’m not sure how much things like the United Nations’ Green Economy Modelling is an add-on to the current system or at best a model for other developing economies.
I certainly think honesty and transparency is needed. Including honesty and transparency about the status quo given we’ve nearly tripled global borrowing in the past 50 years ostensibly to keep the system working and growing. And those eye-watering global borrowing levels show we can always afford to make a serious shift and make a green economy work.
By the way, you’re probably right about mini-resets and mini-revolutions. But I’m always wary of governments, politicians and the various movers, shakers and controllers behind them responding in any other meaningful way than talking their way out of it and ultimately protecting their own interests. To stop that we need those people and their interests out of the way and that will be through force – democratic force ideally. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
