Two points that have to be considered:
First:
No one claims that capitalism creates simply "growth." Capitalism creates not just growth, but improvement.
A modern computer does many times the work of an old machine, using far fewer resources. A modern SUV gets similar mileage to what a Volkswagen beetle got when I was in college. Light bulbs give more light for less energy. Even incandescent ones.
In almost any field of economics and industry, you can find examples of our modern society doing a hell of a lot more with a hell of a lot less. While it doesn't get a lot of publicity, recycling is not only a major industry, but a profitable one for a great many materials.
U.S. energy consumption per capita has been largely flat for the past thirty years, which considering the increasing population, ain't bad.
You can't make soil out of electricity, but then if you ask yourself exactly what you are using the soil for, you might come up with some more creative answers.
Second: Return on investment.
Assuming that NASA's numbers will always define the space industry is like assuming Univac to be the permanent model for computers.
As for potential moneymakers, I will try and post my asteroid resource paper on the space board.
Current Events » in reply to Empty-world / full-world
Re: Empty-world / full-world
The whole thread (73 posts)
- A site I like
- Taking one at a time...
- I love joke sites too. Thanks for the laughs. n/t (n/t)
- I suppose you would.
- thanks
- Re: thanks
- thanks again...
- The statement 'when all resources run out' is null
- Monetized resources are not a problem in a market economy
- Re: When resources run out
- I think you know the answer as well as the rest of us. (n/t) (n/t)
- Re: thanks
- Re: thanks
