<< …you've done a little dreaming about sustainable capitalism but you haven't made any practical suggestions how this miracle will be accomplished. >>

Squeers, Herman Daly has made a study of this for decades. Here’s a relatively recent overview: http://steadystaterevolution.org/files/pdf/Daly_UK_Paper.pdf . Note the ten point policy summary at the end of this paper.

<< I don't "condemn the notion of a steady-state economy", but I don't believe capitalism, that is the competitive cultivation of profit and its retention in private hands, can ever accomplish that. >>

If capitalism is incompatible with a sustainable economic system, then what is compatible with it? A full-on communistic regime where the whole economic system is operated by the state?

<< I don't believe in fiscal competition or private wealth, period. >>

It seems that you do believe in Communism. No offence intended, but this is my summation, at this point of our discussion. With respect, you seem to be <dreaming> of a much less realistic solution to continuous growth economics than I am.

We (in Australia and the rest of the democratic world) are never going to achieve anything like a non-capitalistic regime, are we? We’ve simply GOT to achieve a non-expansionist regime within a private enterprise capitalistic economic system.

<< it is simply not acceptable that a tiny minority enjoys obscene wealth, or that one half lives in comparative affluence while the other half starves. >>

Absolutely.

<< We have to learn to husband resources and tailor our development according to "material" and "ethical" contingencies. >>

YES. These things sit right at the core of SSE (steady state economics) and Daly’s suggested reforms to the current system.

*none of your fatalism and rationalism is worthy a response.
I think it's worth seeing what human nature is or could be if it wasn't distorted from birth.*

Of course Squeers. Lets just ignore the laws of nature and claim
that we are above nature. Brainwashing those kiddies the right
way will fix it all. Squeers, you are dreaming. I'll just stick
to the evidence of human behaviour, how we observed it in the past.
For that is most likely how humans will behave in the future.

Yup, peak oil will sort out alot, but it won't be the end of
capitalism. For those with the oil that is left, those with
scarce resources, are not going to meekly hand them over to the
rest. Those with oil wells, like the Middle East, will cash in
and live it up. For the rest it will be back to the laws of
the jungle, for the veneer of civilisation is thin indeed, as
we see when calamity hits.

All very predictable really. The elephant in the room remains
population and for all that claimed clever humanity, we can't
even fix that one and agree.

So my prediction is that we'll go down as a species which was
clever enough to invent new things, not clever enough to use
them wisely. So be it.

But of course what will happen, we'll have a whole bunch of
academic types who think that they are the 1% with all the answers
and if the rest of us 99% just followed there dictates, all will
be well. It won't happen, sorry.

All of them ignore the law of unintended consequences, for of course
none of them can predict the future. So good intentions, as per
Squeers and others, just won't be enough.

All I'm saying, Ludwig, is that a steady-state economy cannot, by definition, be capitalism. If such a capitalism were achievable it would still be debasing employees at the level of production, and society with the same economic disparities. Importantly, while I'm against private or conspicuous wealth, I'm for genuine individuality. Despite the hysterics of the system's minions, wealth does not the individual make; it distinguishes those with money but doesn't sort chaff from corn. By taking away the profit motive I don't believe we would leave individuals empty husks; they might actually draw their inspiration then from genuine need and propensity, both practical and creative, thus restoring them to their distinctive strengths as potential. It's a furphy that material equality would degrade humanity at some low level; this popular notion actually makes no sense.
My views do not mean, according to knee-jerk logic, that I crave <A full-on communistic regime where the whole economic system is operated by the state?> I don't know what this means? What you describe is a popular caricature, ideological fodder, nothing more. I believe in "real" democracy, not the anti-democratic perversion we have at present, but responsible and "inclusive democracy" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclusive_Democracy wherein no individual has anything to gain, materially, beyond the mutual prosperity of society, yet everything to gain in merited distinction and personal fulfilment.
Our only disagreement then seems to be that I don't believe the current system can be reformed, such is non sequitur, and the worm (profit motive) remains in the bud.
Thanks for the link. I also have a new book by Tim Jackson called "Prosperity Without Growth" (you can download a pdf here http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/file_download.php?target=/publications/downloads/prosperity_without_growth_report.pdf , but what he advocates is not capitalism, nor is there any sign of capitalism reforming itself anywhere in the world.
Capitalism is like any other cancer, if it doesn't grow it shrivels and dies, though in this case takes the host with it.

Yabby,
I don't claim to have all the answers, but I have chucked of doctrine, such as "laws" of human nature. Btw, where did I <claim
that we are above nature>?

I did not see anyone here make the point that growth is essential to
pay the interest bill and repay the capital.
That is why our present economies reliance on credit and interest has
had the whole world in a tizz over the banks in America and Europe.
They are now reaching the point where there is no growth to repay their
debts and pixel money is flooding the world in attempt to make water
flow uphill.

Squeers, what you are totally overlooking, is that innovative people
need capital investments to act on their innovation and without
profits, they could not do that.

Companies like Apple Computer would still be stuck in Steve Job's
garage, unable to grow, unable to innovate, unable to take risks.

At the end of the day, if humanity is going to overcome the
problems its facing, it will be through innovation, with the
smartest people taking calculated risks, or it simply won't happen.

Bazz:
<I did not see anyone here make the point that growth is essential to
pay the interest bill and repay the capital.>

I did make that point above, Bazz, but neglected to add that capitalism also put the world in this debt trap.

Yabby,
you've made that plea before, but it just doesn't wash. We got into this mess thanks to economism and your "smart" people. There are ways out without more of the same! In my view we have to abandon the whole capitalist enterprise and start living modestly and within our means.