Message-ID: <51792E5D4B6ED011B7DB00805FBE3836040EC0BD@xch-evt-06.ca.boeing.com>
From: "Van Zant, Peter J" <Peter.VanZant@PSS.Boeing.com>
To: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK <ppn@csf.colorado.edu>,
        "'rcollins@netlink.com.au'" <rcollins@netlink.com.au>
Subject: RE: Overconsumption vs Overpopulation?
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 07:03:31 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> ----------
> From: 	rc&am[SMTP:rcollins@netlink.com.au]
> Sent: 	Thursday, November 19, 1998 5:31 AM
> To: 	PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK
> Subject: 	Re: Overconsumption vs Overpopulation?
> 
> 
> 
> Ted Toal wrote:
> 
> > From my studies of economics, I believe that
> > profit maximization usually provides the most efficient way to get to a
> goal.
> 
> it seems to me that the only goal of profit maximisation is profit
> maximisation,
> and even then, given the effects and preconditions of such a goal, it
> regularly
> fails to attain even that goal.  as for capital accumulation being an
> efficient and
> effective system for the fulfillment of needs and enjoyment (and i don't
> moralise
> about the goodness of certain 'lifestyles' over others), well... you must
> be
> kidding.
> 
> angela
> 
I think we have to give the profit motive its due as a way of motivating
people. It creates a lot of problems, too, like making greed the emotion of
choice for society--actually, I don't think greed is an emotion, but that's
another conversation. However, for motivating someone to work hard over a
period of time, financial gain works pretty well. It's better than forcing
him/her to work. Idealistic notions, like doing the work for the betterment
of humanity, unfortunately lose their potency pretty fast.