Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Linda Woodrow (lindawoodrow@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 10:32:02 JST Linda Woodrow

   • Bread and Circuses
   • Gerry McGovern
   • Oliver Kohll

   @okohll @breadandcircuses @gerrymcgovern

   This is an interesting study. I think we live very simply but we overshoot a couple of the DLS standards. But with the 40% they talk about on top of individual household resourcing added as public goods (libraries, parks, public transport, research institutes etc), I think I could live very well. (It's long but scroll down to the heading "3. How much growth is required to ensure good lives for all?" if you don't want read it all) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452292924000493

   • Embed this notice
     curmudgeonaf 🇨🇦 (curmudgeonaf@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 15-Jan-2025 23:37:34 JST curmudgeonaf 🇨🇦

     in reply to

     @lindawoodrow We don’t need any growth. There is plenty of existing wealth in the world. The only problem is the distribution. If all the current wealth in the world were redistributed, it would solve all the world’s problems.

   • Embed this notice
     Linda Woodrow (lindawoodrow@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Jan-2025 06:12:29 JST Linda Woodrow

     in reply to

     • curmudgeonaf 🇨🇦

     @curmudgeonaf Yes, this research is a bit more sophisticated version of that. With some nice modelling and numbers. Maybe skip right through to the conclusion first, then go back to see how the modelling shows it. " The question of how much production is necessary to end poverty cannot be answered by assessing PPP-based incomes or aggregate GDP. It is necessary to assess what is being produced, and whether people have access to necessary goods and services.

   • Embed this notice
     curmudgeonaf 🇨🇦 (curmudgeonaf@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 16-Jan-2025 10:09:25 JST curmudgeonaf 🇨🇦

     in reply to

     @lindawoodrow Everything is simple, if you don’t make it complicated.