How many times have we had to put up with some middle-class, tilty headed twat waving their little placard and shrieking that ‘you can’t have infinite growth on a finite planet’?
Well, says who? Mostly, over-educated idiots and spoiled ninnies like David Attenborough. In fact, he says exactly that: “Anyone who thinks that you can have infinite growth in a finite environment is either a madman or an economist.” Which should immediately make clear that Attenborough in fact knows fuck-all about economics.
Because the fundamental principle of economics is precisely scarcity. As Thomas Sowell, who is infinitely more informed on the topic than an upper-class British TV celebrity, drives home: Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources which have alternative uses.
More than economic theory, though, history is the most brutal demolisher of the uninformed gibberings of the likes of Attenborough.
The idea that we live on a finite planet on the brink of collapse dates back to at least 1798. Thomas Malthus, an English preacher and economist, famously predicted an impending famine. The population was growing at an exponential or compounding rate; the food supply had historically grown at a linear or constant rate. One plus one equals starvation. The only solution, he argued, was moral restraint – people needed to suppress their natural urges and refrain from having children to save the planet. Sound familiar?
As you may have noticed, Malthus was conspicuously wrong about the impending collapse. In fact, almost as soon as he’d made his prediction it was proven spectacularly wrong. The Industrial Revolution, which had just begun, led to an astonishing rise in prosperity.
But Malthus’ intellectual heirs didn’t learn a thing from his basic mistake.
Perhaps the most striking example is Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich’s 1968 book “The Population Bomb.” Its opening declaration was apocalyptic: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”
Ehrlich was absolutely unequivocal: nothing could be done to avert the imminent catastrophe. Even in the USA, widespread famine was inevitable. It may have occurred to those of you with long memories that that didn’t happen. In fact, the reverse is true: obesity is a growing problem and not just in the West.
Ehrlich’s predictions faced an even more direct challenge in 1980 when economist Julian Simon wagered that any five metals of Ehrlich’s choosing would be cheaper in real terms a decade later. Simon won decisively as the average inflation-adjusted price of the metals fell 36 percent despite a nearly 20 per cent increase in the global population.
And the economic growth – and its concomitant growth in not just human progress but environmental flourishing – hasn’t stopped. Even on our finite planet.
In honor of the great economist, the Human Progress team at the Cato Institute has created the Simon Abundance Index, which measures the abundance of 50 commodities across food, energy, natural resources, and other categories. Their research reveals these commodities have become 509.4 per cent more abundant. Meanwhile, their “time prices” – work hours needed for an average worker to afford them – have fallen by 70.4 per cent.
How could this happen? Human ingenuity.
Each new person brings not just another mouth to feed but another mind to solve problems. Thus, attempts to limit population growth to save the planet are self-defeating – they reduce humanity’s capacity to innovate and develop solutions to environmental challenges […]
More people equals more geniuses and more progress. Fewer people mean the opposite. Increasing fertility rates is thus one of the defining issues of our time. A world with fewer people is one with fewer Borlaugs, fewer Einsteins, and fewer minds to tackle humanity’s most pressing challenges.
Far from exhausting our finite planet, as economic growth continues, the opposite is happening.
As MIT economist Andrew McAfee highlights in “More From Less,” we’re now experiencing widespread “dematerialization” – achieving greater material prosperity while reducing resource consumption. Of the 72 resources tracked by the US Geological Survey, 66 have peaked and are declining in use. We’re creating more wealth while leaving a lighter footprint on the planet.
Growth is not the enemy. Growth is good. Growth is also green.
Rather than viewing human progress and environmental stewardship as opposing forces, we should recognize them as complementary goals achievable through continued innovation and economic development.
The evidence is clear: human ingenuity, when coupled with economic freedom and technological advancement, has consistently overcome environmental constraints while improving living standards. Our challenge isn’t to limit growth or population but to foster conditions that allow human creativity and enterprise to flourish.
So, Tiltyhead Hypenated-Surname glueing they/themselves to the road isn’t just a minor irritant stopping you from getting to work: they’re the active enemy of the very planet they claim to be saving.
