<< Then we're totally screwed >>

Yeah. That’s about the size of it!!

<< Deregulation (which was heavily promoted by private business) has been … political spin >>

I’d reckon so, Ammo.

Business is based on the profit motive. It is the thing that drives people to work hard, compete hard and maximise efficiencies in their businesses. It is understandably geared to the short term.

It couldn’t really be any other way in a free-enterprise society, which is why government regulation is ALL-IMPORTANT.

This sort of regulation is a fundamental duty of government, and a fundamental failing.

The only hope we might have, in the absence of good government regulation, is if big businesses could see the dangers for their own profit and viability in the future if they keep on pushing expansionism in a world with finite resources and an ever-more stressed market (more stressed populace due to all the negative factors associated with growth, to the point that they greatly reduce their purchase of goods provided by the relevant company)

But then, any company that can see problems in the future still has to compete in the here-and-now, which makes it a whole lot harder, if not impossible.

The only way that most companies could really gear themselves towards a more sustainable future would be to collude with their competitors and reach agreements whereby they all did the same thing. But collusion is a no-no!

So it all comes back to government regulation, and the blame or at least the lion’s share of the blame lying with government for not regulation the free market anywhere near well enough.

But, given the overwhelming power of big business, this just ain’t gunna happen. So yeah, we’re screwed!

Ludwig

Using your logic, we would not have moved on from gas-lamps and kids down coal-mines, bit by bit we have managed. Thanks to public action, government regulation and more future focused business.

Things are certainly skewed ATM and deregulation and privatisation of necessities such as public transport, heat has proven to be a complete disaster - one cannot have healthy competition between monopolies such as rail for example.

Successful businesses have been those which can manage change and adapt or else go the way of the horse & cart. Nothing is static and it is this that gives me hope, both that and the nature of greed. Losing markets due to changes in demand - such as more people installing solar panels and actual vision regarding staying in business for the long term.

Not about to give up just yet, vested interests are just that and opportunistic enough to see when it is time to change.

How many incandescent light bulbs are on the shelves these days?

And (your favourite) we do stabilise our populations - across the globe, no point in just Australia having a stable population, however that should not be the reason to do nothing, which has been the refrain all along and simply does not excuse us from sitting on our backsides any longer.

Ammonite, the greatest problem is that the corporate world pushes for continuous growth. They push for continuous population growth to increase markets. They push for continuous economic growth to cater for continuous population growth. And so it goes up and up… until it all comes crashing down.

<< And (your favourite) we do stabilise our populations - across the globe >>

Huh?? We do?

<< no point in just Australia having a stable population >>

Oh dear. There is a huge point in us doing what we can to bring demand and supply into balance and develop a sustainable society in this country.

It really is the gravest failing of government to not regulate growth with an end to expansionism in the near future as the primary goal. Well, with a sustainabile society as the primary primary goal!

<< Not about to give up just yet >>

Neither am I. But I’d dearly like to know how to move forward on this issue. All potential avenues seem blocked!

Ludwig, if its all corporations to blame as you seem to claim,
what are all those millions of people doing, rushing out to buy
their lotto tickets every weekend?

You ignore human nature at your peril.

Yabby, I wrote:

< the greatest problem is that the corporate world pushes for continuous growth >

Perhaps I should have said that the greatest problem is that this corporate push for growth is not managed properly by government, and indeed governments around the world are complicit.

It is primarily government’s fault, in their failure to regulate corporations.

But of course, it is all of societies' fault for not insisting that we have a governmental regime that regulates this aspect of human nature.

Yes corporations are really just following human nature.

Actually, the greed or competition factor is not just human nature, it is a fundamental ecological principle inherent in all species.

But in the vast majority of species this is balanced by limiting factors.

In humans it isn’t. You’d think we’d have the collective intelligence to realise this and deal with it. But we obviously don’t.

Ludwig

I wasn't quite clear enough.

I wrote: And (your favourite) we do stabilise our populations - across the globe.

Should've written NEED TO stabilise.

I agree with you that we must maintain a stable population, we can still make room for immigrants - we don't need to close our borders entirely. Same goes for trade, I don't expect us to cease selling coal and uranium any time soon, however, as we and the rest of the world transitions to renewable energy, there will not be the same demand. I don't see Australia as an island, but part of the world, for this reason having SOME immigration (including the tiny percentage that is boat people) is viable.

Ceasing the 'baby bonus' would be a far better move. We need capable adults more than we need babies, and our years of immigration has provided us with a skilled and diverse workforce.

Governments could, should do more. However, when they do we (the public) get hit, for example, by $17 million propaganda campaigns by the mining industry whining about paying profits tax. Pathetic.

Geoff Lemon writes:

"Imagine offering the 2005 executives (profit $6.4 billion) an offer of $19 billion in six years' time. You'd have been prising their teeth from your belt buckle. But in 2011, you offer $22 billion with, say, $3 billion going to tax. And they say "Tax? We only keep $19 billion? We'll all beeeee rooooooned…." While Tony Abbott says that you are hounding business offshore because they just can't turn a dime under this regime, you heartless bloody socialist...
...Mining, like pokies, cites its support of local communities. Except that's an incidental result of making buckets of money near those communities. Let's be clear. BHP does not give a flying duck about Australia. Nor Rio Tinto, nor Hancock Prospecting, aside from naming bits of it after Gina's relatives. They are interested in Australia for as long as Australia is useful. China's mineral acquisitions people won't be so chummy when the ore dries up. Friends, once we're out of sh!t, we're getting dumped like an Ex-Lax curry."

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2800654.html