To build a better world, stop chasing economic growth

The problem is that seeking growth at all costs allows the accumulation of economic and political power. The people in charge do not distinguish between personal success and a better world, and therefore see no difference between economic growth and a better world.

Where they call plutocracy democracy and democracy is basically plutocracy
It also funds everyone's retirement. People start revolting pretty quickly when they learn they get paid almost nothing and they have to rely on a magic money making machine in the stock market to live out their twilight years.
- Sounds like a good argument for government pensions. Thank you, comrade!

but what of the shareholders?

/s

This is the biggest problem with economical growth.
All the FAANG or whatever their called these days can hit 1000% growth tomorrow, and suddenly, our economical growth skyrockets.
But that doesn't mean anything for the average person. At all.

Destroy capitalism.

Got it.

Capitalism has one positive, and that's the notion of competition leading to the best outcome as they try to win over consumers.
We've lost that though with how unfettered it's become in general. Companies merge and conspire, eliminating competition.
- Public universities and research actually produce the most amount of innovation. Another one of capitalisms lies
- It's become more of a competition as to who can fool and subsequently fuck over the consumers more.
- Competition doesn't lead to innovation in improving people's lives, but company profits. See: enshittification.
- This is how capitalism has always worked.
  When companies compete, eventually some of them lose. This means they go out of business.
  The remaining companies become more powerful.
- "Best outcome" covers for a lot. The "best" coffee is still grown in the global south and shipped using grossly polluting methods. The "best" computer will eventually be obsolete e-waste with minimal recycling value. The "best" EV is still reliant on car-centric infrastructure that is strangling cities.
  What is "best" is highly variable, and competition cannot possibly cover all possibilities of what is best.

It drives me fucking nuts that continued growth isn't enough - 10% growth two years in a row will tank you.
Nope you have to gain an ADDITIONAL 10% growth every year or RIP your company.

for context

Thank you for the pizza.
- lol, pizza economics sounds much better than doughnut economics
That looks... a lot... like the Greendale Community College flag.

Billionares:

"Fuck more!"
How can we expect those lines to keep going up without a steady supply of fresh recruits for the grinder.

I'd bet at a certain point of societal development economic growth is linked with many positives. Unfortunately, we probably adopted it as our only metric and the min/max'ers have taken it to its most extreme. Now when we look at the data we are way outside the range where it's a useful indicator. Our targets are too high and we need to monitor other indicators of prosperity.

The wealthy have certainly reinforced growth as the ultimate metric.
So far as it represents human toil, yeah, it's good. It's not that anymore, though.

“Lol. Um, what.”

capitalists

If your only goal is that most people can live decently and reduce exploitation, abuse, and such, yeah, sure.

But if you just want to amass money, then, no.

A choice was made.

I hate this elitist sentiment. 😒

Strong "i got mine so fuck you" type of mentality.

A degrowth society has to be an equitable society. Otherwise your criticism is entirely valid.
We are going to have a degrowth system regardless of any policy decisions, as the current growth system is burning through critical resources and destroying the environment. We can either plan for this, or we can have an unplanned existential civilizational crisis.
- Degrowth for the west, let the rest of the world suffer yeaaaaaa. Everyone knows only the west matters anyways.
It's too late for sentiments, my friend. We are not the winners of this game, but we might all be losers if we don't reduce our habits of reckless consumption.
- Yes, i have the same sentiment. I have been calling for everyone to accept higher taxes for years. Garnish wages, let the extreme wealth gap grow wider. If everyone is poor then we dont have to worry about what shiny thing to buy as long as we can get that dog meat on the table.
- I know you put a /s in there, but that's actually spot on. It's very difficult to convince people to give a damn about nature if they don't have decent food, shelter and a hopeful future for their children.
  e: spelling

Economic growth is fine to a point. Problem is measuring economic growth through the arbitrary price of a small group of companies using a market system designed for gambling rather than long-term investing. Better is to base it on the amount of goods exchanged across all levels of society. When the top has all the money and increases their stock prices by buying and selling their own stocks, and the rest can't afford to participate in the economy beyond necessities, that's not a good economy.

Unpopular opinion: If we ended fossil fuel use immediately a lot of people would die and the entire economy would collapse. People would starve because stores wouldn't be stocked. People would freeze to death because they wouldn't be able to heat their homes. Looting and violence would soon follow.

The only people who would likely be ok are the ultra wealthy.

Change takes time and right now there are no alternatives that can immediately absorb the extra load from cutting off fossil fuels.

I don't think anyone is seriously advocating for stopping fossil fuels cold turkey.
The truly unpopular opinion is the one you're pretending is popular, people aren't advocating for immediate replacement without building up green energy and replacing it entirely.