i know i just thought it was funny, let me have my 7 words or however many they are, of amusement smh.
I mentioned second hand stuff, as well as other non physical methods of cosumption in my comment, so some of this is quite redundant. The tidbit on carbon emissions is interesting though.
Also books are really incredibly usefull resources. They are much better at actually explaining more complex ideas, then shorter articles.
i mean yeah, i just don’t know how much one would need to explain the concept of “hey just don’t buy things, or if you do minimize the impact of it.” But that’s just me i suppose.
So please do not just presume, somebody is going out to buy something.
i guess so, but owning things is an inevitability in a materialist society. Even if you’re homeless, you’re still going to own something, even if it’s just the clothes on your back. Seems like the most obvious first step to the concept of “degrowth” to me. I suppose continual consumption could be a bigger deal, but most of that is unavoidable (eating food for example) though you can still optimize it, i feel like that should be much more obvious frankly, considering how much we do it every day at the very least.
i mean yeah, i just don’t know how much one would need to explain the concept of “hey just don’t buy things, or if you do minimize the impact of it.” But that’s just me i suppose.
Thats because degrowth is not just anti consumerism although it is part of it, but to limit economic growth to stay within planetary boundaries. This means that degrowth also wants to built up systems to stop over consumption for everybody, while providing everybody with a good quality of life. This is far from simple, since we currently overuse earths resources, while billions are starving, despite us having enough food to feed everybody with ease. So you end up with stuff like universal basic income, forced recycling systems, commons, global justice, measuring well being and a lot more. There is easily enough to write a book about.
that’s fair i suppose, i wouldn’t call it degrowth though. I’d call it global economic minimalism or something. Degrowth is pretty broad, but then again people probably aren’t going to buy a book titled “economic minimalism” are they? Lol.
i know i just thought it was funny, let me have my 7 words or however many they are, of amusement smh.
I mentioned second hand stuff, as well as other non physical methods of cosumption in my comment, so some of this is quite redundant. The tidbit on carbon emissions is interesting though.
i mean yeah, i just don’t know how much one would need to explain the concept of “hey just don’t buy things, or if you do minimize the impact of it.” But that’s just me i suppose.
i guess so, but owning things is an inevitability in a materialist society. Even if you’re homeless, you’re still going to own something, even if it’s just the clothes on your back. Seems like the most obvious first step to the concept of “degrowth” to me. I suppose continual consumption could be a bigger deal, but most of that is unavoidable (eating food for example) though you can still optimize it, i feel like that should be much more obvious frankly, considering how much we do it every day at the very least.
Thats because degrowth is not just anti consumerism although it is part of it, but to limit economic growth to stay within planetary boundaries. This means that degrowth also wants to built up systems to stop over consumption for everybody, while providing everybody with a good quality of life. This is far from simple, since we currently overuse earths resources, while billions are starving, despite us having enough food to feed everybody with ease. So you end up with stuff like universal basic income, forced recycling systems, commons, global justice, measuring well being and a lot more. There is easily enough to write a book about.
that’s fair i suppose, i wouldn’t call it degrowth though. I’d call it global economic minimalism or something. Degrowth is pretty broad, but then again people probably aren’t going to buy a book titled “economic minimalism” are they? Lol.