Continuing Growth Is Not An Option

Mon, 2010-10-18 12:53 by tim

Anti-growth activists are caught in a vice. In large urban areas bursting at the seams with overtaxed infrastructure, the potent force of the growth lobby and the pervasive influence of the media that supports it makes opposition to the growth juggernaut hazardous to mind, body and spirit. Yet life in a rural locality presents an even more daunting challenge. The costs of growth are not so manifest to those who do not understand its exponential nature. The benefits of fresh air, tranquility and wildlife are taken for granted, and the allure of big city amenities is irresistible. Locals are beguiled by the promise that new development will solve unemployment, increase the supply of affordable housing and keep young people close to hearth and home. To stand up against growth in a small town is to invite ostracism and ridicule from uncomprehending minds that cannot understand why anyone would oppose "progress". The following letter was submitted to the newspaper of one such town, but it could have been the template for letters to almost any small town newspaper in North America or Australia or elsewhere---newspapers which live on the advertising revenue from the businesses that profit from growth.

Civic boosterism predictable and mistaken

From rural Nova Scotia to rural BC, the clichés of civic boosterism are as predictable as they are wrong. Sables-Spanish Rivers appears to be no different. Forum participants in the upcoming township elections seem to be reading from the same script that growth-addicts in my own community are.

“We need to bring in business to bring down taxes.” “Economic development is a priority...its not just about bringing new business...it’s about smart growth, maintaining the tax base.” “ New development will create needed jobs”. “We need to attract new families”. “We need to bring our kids back”. “There is nothing here for the kids”. “Once a school is gone a community begins to collapse”.

Reality

It is the same tired record heard across the land for time immemorial. But what are the facts?

Bigger towns, bigger taxes and lower average incomes

As a rule, the larger the town or city, the higher the taxes. Why? Because the tax revenues that are generated by growth do not offset the infrastructure costs of extended services that must be provided—water, sewage, road maintenance, police and fire protection, waste disposal and so forth. Creating new jobs may indeed attract newcomers, but is so doing it does not lower the unemployment rate. More people require more jobs. Moreover, business growth is correlated with lower per capita incomes, and lower paying jobs-- not limited housing stock or serviceable land--- makes housing unaffordable. And undeveloped property pays more property taxes than it costs in services---not many cows or trees demand medical or educational services.

Self-importance blinds local boosters both to real values and real limits

Some people seem to equate quality of life with more amenities, and having left the urban rat race wish to reproduce it in the bucolic paradise that attracted them, while accusing those who oppose them of being selfish. But the real question is not whether continued growth is necessary or desirable, but whether it is possible. It is astounding that civic debates are conducted without the slightest comprehension or awareness of Peak Oil and its implications. With triple-digit oil and ten dollar a litre gasoline on the near horizon, we will have more to worry about than keeping ice rinks and schools open. Feeding the mouths that are already here may prove to be an insuperable challenge. Forget fuelling the local Zamboni, fuelling tractors will be our focus. Growth ,“smart” or dumb, will not be an option.

Tim Murray

Quathiaski Cove, BC
October 14/2019

Topic:

Comments

James Sinnamon

Mon, 2010-10-18 19:59

Permalink

'Growth' a deceitful term

For some time now I have made a point of placing the term 'growth', as referred to by establishment economists, inside inverted commas, in order to make the point that what they claim to be 'growth' is nothing of the sort. 'Growth' is quantified by economists by fictitious measures such as the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The GDP fails to measure the true increase in the costs of living, the increases in the cost of housing, the necessity added in recent decades of more than one car being required per family, and hidden increases in charges for government and corporate services being the most blatant examples. So it can't possibly be used as a true measure of changes to the quality of life of people. Even if we were to adopt a far less fraudulent measure than the GDP, the amount of actual growth of the human global economy that such a meaure would indicate, could not anywhere near match the destruction in natural capital that it necessitates. Even if it were possible, using such a more honest measure, to claim that the quality of life were improving for humans on average (which I very much doubt) if that improvement is only gained as a result of the destruction of natural capital -- biodiversity, fossil fuel, fertile soil, metal ores, etc., then it cannot be honestly called termed 'growth'.

John Marlowe

Mon, 2010-10-18 22:13

Permalink

'Growth' is just 'economic lust'

'Economic Growth' is someone wanting more. It is not the noble essential desire of providing for one's family. It is a selfish greed that seeks far more, reaps more and profits more in order to acquire excess assets and typically at triple bottom line expense - i.e. short changing those providing the labour (society) and exploiting the natural environment below its replaceable value. Growth has become an addiction that feeds consumerism. It is not just human overpopulation that is driving socio-ecological destruction, but human overpopulation coupled with excess consumerism per capita are accelerating the destructive drive. Economic growth is 'economic lust' - it is a behavioural addiction blinded by self-centred gratification. The corporate culture of renewing company cars every two or three years is the epitome of economic lust.

James Sinnamon

Tue, 2010-10-19 08:25

Permalink

Those duped by 'growth' pushers not primarily responsible

John, This observation is mostly spot on. However, it seems to have the unintended consequence of confusing the relatively powerless who have been largely duped by the propaganda of the 'growth' pushers with the 'growth' pushers themselves. Consumers, not just corporate executives, who believe that they are wealthier, because they can renew their cars every few years, haven't grasped the objective fact that they are materially no better off than if than if they drove cars that were built to last decades and were maintainable and had standardised long-lasting parts. As vehicles built early last century can still be run by skilled mechanics I see no reason why a car can't be built to last well over a hundred years instead of just 5 years if the technical knowledge available were properly applied. No doubt this would have affected the 'profitability' of many of the companies operating under today's seriously flawed business model, but as a society, we would be far wealthier by having avoided so much destruction of our natural capital. I believe that the reason that we have not made the changes as a society that would have allowed us to have the benefit of modern technology without the cost having been anywhere near as great to our environment is that it suits the greed of the minority of 'growth' pushers that manufacture has been made so wasteful of natural resources and human labour. The "excess consumerism per capita" is of no objective benefit to the vast majority of society and certainly not to their descendents. Of even less benefit is the human overpopulation being imposed upon us by the elites in order that they can satisfy their rapacious greed through the consequent 'growth'. I think this is an argument we can win before the majority of society if we show determination and clear thinking.

Continuing Growth Is Not An Option

Civic boosterism predictable and mistaken

Reality

Bigger towns, bigger taxes and lower average incomes

Self-importance blinds local boosters both to real values and real limits

Topic:

Comments

'Growth' a deceitful term

'Growth' is just 'economic lust'

Those duped by 'growth' pushers not primarily responsible

Add comment

Filtered HTML

Tags in Topic

Help save injured wildlife

Recent comments