Well written, I am going to have to buy this book and check it out for myself.

However the authour states :"Powerful and ruling classes have never at any time willingly ceded their wealth, privilege and status, and there is little reason to expect them to do so now."

I would point out that in most instances where the powerful and ruling classes have had thier wealth and privilage taken by the people those former ruling classes have usually lost thier lives also. There is an old saying - those who fail to learn from histroy are doomed to repeat it.

It seems to me that too many futurists seem to dream that we can get to their ideal future with little pain. I agree that the future will have to be very different from the economic growth at all costs world that we live in now. I agree that there will have to be a reduction in population, consumption, etc. But I cannot be convinced that this can be achieved without a great deal of struggle; the currently wealthy will not go quietly, handing over their money in any "gift economy". Dream on Nick!

Graham, isn't this a repeat of the other Nick Rose article, the one with 22 comments?

Cheers.

David G

I think we could and should redesign the economy so it works for us rather than enslaving us to it and or the pursuit of the endlessly devaluing dollar?
What we have designed turns friend against friend, in rat eat rat competition, which has only one destination in the endless downward spiral it creates!
We cannot remove reward for endeavour, otherwise we will just be repeating the mistakes of the communists, who thought all that was required was to confiscate the endeavour and enterprise of others, which all to often is the product of a lifetime and or several generations; and or, slave labour!
To that end, we need to embrace social credit, rather than rely on banks to do it for us, all while demanding their usual unearned pound of flesh.
In social credit, the govt is the issuing authority and loans itself; and or the entrepreneur, the money they/it needs to create income earning assets, like say low cost low rent housing.
Once the asset is created, it goes from the debit side of the ledger on to the credit side; given the asset, like gold, has recoverable, increasing monetary value!
We made a fundamental mistake privatising either energy or capital; and indeed, cash cow essential service.
I don't know exactly how one would return these things to their rightful owners; namely we the people, but if needs be, create a competing duopoly that has natural advantages, i.e., no debts or tax to pay or fund/service and no shareholders, per se, to prop up!
The prices that could then be charged, would have the corporate world complaining every which way.
But then, the true entrepreneurial class and the innovators, would be seriously advantaged, and if common sense prevails, ought to find a cashed up government ready willing and able to fund genuine cooperative enterprise and innovation.
We need to get back to an economy that makes things, rather than one that tries to service those who do!
Rhrosty.

Mr Eisenstein reminds me of Wendell Berry, the American poet-cum-farmer-cum ecologist, and the prophetic Jeremy Rifkin (Entropy etc).