sup bro same here

my sustainability homework

cao Christina ikejejenjs

Just now, mine

cao Christina same, I hate science

Unfortunately quarterly profit forecasts still rule the world.

@@josecortez5213 People NEED to be re-educated.

We need a bigger change, a change in mindset. We have to stop buying things. We need to live simpler lives, with less stuff. Stuff doesn’t make us happy. Happiness is found through relationships, hobbies, etc.

We need many more such videos and explanations to raise public awareness. The challenge starts with the vocabulary we use to talk about economics, and the semantics that have been built into the economic vocabulary over the last century (winning = more, wealth = financial assets, human nature = striving for personal gain, etc.), which makes it very hard for people to articulate alternatives without being misunderstood. Videos and illustrations can help overcome this difficulty. Beyond the challenge of language, there is also the real danger of inventing "alternative" systems that are simply reincarnations of the old system in a new package. For example any system that attempts to define a universal metric for "better" will run into the same old issues. Currencies such as Bitcoin that are designed for universal use are concrete examples of misguided alternatives. There is a need for domain-specific metrics, to track flows of all the different categories of resources and externalities. Only then can we begin to systematically think about the construction of waste-free value cycles.

Jorn Bettin , I agree with most of what you say. However I am not so sure that efforts to define a new metric for "better" should be avoided. Clearly the public, the media and the politicians want a metric to measure success, otherwise growth in GDP would not play such a big role. It seems the most realistic way to displace that misguided use of GDP is to advocate the use of an alternative, all the while of course continuing to warn of the inherent danger of any single metric.

I am not opposed to metrics for _better_. I am simply pointing out the need for *many* metrics for _better_, and not a simplistic universal one. For example a dedicated metric for measuring _better_ health is desirable, as well as dedicated metrics for measuring _less_ chemical externalities in production, transport, and agriculture, etc. The priorities that different local communities will attach to the various metrics heavily depend on the local context, specifically on the means that are (or are not) available locally to address economic externalities, and on the local severity of the effects of different kinds of externalities.

Interesting. Perhaps there should be an app for that: Using open government data, the app would provide a summary of "progress towards better" tailored to the user's local community and personal priorities. The app would also allow the user to opt in to feeding back anonymously to government this progress towards their personal priorities and those of their local community. That would provide valuable information for shaping government policy. Furthermore, that feedback could be aggregated into a single metric that could replace GDP. Do you think that metric might provide a useful and beneficial way to measure a government's success? Perhaps the measurement of "progress towards better" will not be the most important benefit of such an app. Instead the educational effect that choosing their own priority settings in the app will have might be substantial. I wonder, is the creation of such an app perhaps feasible already with currently available open data? And if it is, would a representative cross-section of the population adopt it? Or would it just again give even greater influence to the digitally savy? But, given the widespread adoption of smartphones, and the appetite of the public for personalised information, I don't think the idea is altogether unpromising. Perhaps this idea is not new? Perhaps there is already an app for that? I would really like to try it.

I very much like the app you outline. In my work I use the following approach s23m.com/methodology/index.html to value chain/cycle engineering. This 5-minute video s23m.com/logistics/index.html illustrates the essence. The approach can obviously be applied at any scale, including at the scale of economic relationships between customers and suppliers. Together with my colleagues I am working on software for representing the links within concrete local economic subsystems. I see no real technological obstacle for implementing the suggested app. The main stumbling block could be a lack of open data on resource and waste *flows*. Remember that waste flows are only required to be tracked to a certain extent, and only for materials where relevant and effective regulation is in place. Indeed the educational effect of gaining a better understanding of the effects of specific priorities could be the primary benefit of the app. I would expect priorities to be readjusted on a frequent basis , leading to an economy that becomes much more conscious of undesirable waste flows (externalities).

I agree with your second half of your statement but confused about the first half. sharing could create more jobs same with not using plastic bags. Just different jobs.

in my opinion the world is forgetting why we develop economies. we are becoming an overpopulated place for the number of real economy involving jobs.

time to move to timbuktu or deserted island?

Yeah I agree. I care very much about the environment and I do my best to lower my ecological footprint. But "better" to me does not equal plastic bag bans despite the fact that I don't use plastic bags.

Better=G.O.A.L.

You might be interested in an article of Mine... stateofglobe.com/2014/03/07/liberty-and-the-american-way/ Redefine "wealth."

How often to you need to use a power drill? and have you heard of designed for the dump? People are making things so that they break just so people will buy more! We need better stuff that will be able to last longer. Its thoughts like that, that stop things like like the goal of better from happening

There are many products that are made to last a long time, they just cost more money. By purchasing a nice power drill, I have the ability to take care of that power drill and use it until something irreplaceable (like the motor ) breaks. If that same power drill had been shared between me and 4 of my neighbors, its lifespan would have been more than 4 times shorter. The reason it would not last as long is because of the idea called Tragedy of the commons: by utilizing a publicly shared piece of property, the upkeep tends to be neglected because no single person wants to claim responsibility for the damage others cause to the publicly shared property. By saving up to buy the nice drill myself, I am choosing to buy 1 nice tool that will last many years, while decreasing the number of power dills I would have otherwise bought. In order to decrease the quantity of things we buy, we have to choose the quality of the tings we buy.

Okay but not everything works that way, like table saws, you don't need one that often. And thats part of what shes says quality v.s quantity

Yes; everything is subject to the tragedy of the commons. Everything from public roads to publicly shared construction equipment.

+Igomene Joseph One thing is obvious is that we are on a crash course. Everyone will eventually realize this, it's just by the time most people do, it will be too late.

How about you make actual good arguments instead of saying some vague shit in the comments that doesn't add to the conversation. What did this comment actually contribute? Absolutely nothing. I can't stand people that say vague things like this to make themselves sound smart.... what a waste of a comment.

You're right Warren. It used to be called a Rat Race. Now we are on a Hamster Wheel. The real wealth is health and time to spend with our loved ones living a fulfilling life. Greed is not good, and sharing is not evil as much as some political 1% backed think tanks want us to believe it is.

Easier said than done, for a variety of reasons.......but maybe in large mostly self sufficient communes of around 300 people.

Same old story as the one in the 1950s telling people that nuclear power would produce electricity that would be 'too cheap to meter'. And the story that having all kinds of new household appliances would give everybody more time for leisure? Maybe not so much. If only you could keep up with the monthly payments and interest on them and the cost of running them!

Living off grid might be the solution ;)

Me too!!

Me too

@Begin Transformation but some things she's saying are sadly true

Same

Searching for all the world's treasures again?

We all are

***** check out Will Work For Free 2013,Humans need not apply and technological unemployment 60 minutes

Shane Nolan Thank you, I will check it out! :)

i believe that is implied when the goal is to constant growth

Oh yeah, I agree to you man.

It is we man!

Luis Henrique Malaquias Vieira I agree to you? It is " I agree with you". don't use google translator dude coz that's a crappy web

Hohoho stupid baixaki349

Totally agree

newsroom.fb.com/news/2014/10/internet-org-app-launches-in-tanzania/

I was wondering the same thing...

0:01 "free range studios"

+Feral Cares You look for perfection and it does not exist.

U poor ;)

Felmer washere No, I just use things as long as I can.