Pretty good read. I think the sentence about happiness is perhaps the most important. Despite all of the crazy productivity, energy, and geographical movement increases we’ve had over the last century, some people simply aren’t happy. Would be nice if we could judge growth based on other metrics more closely related to happiness and enjoyment. Find ways to live where people are more connected to one another and the world around them, not just through screens but in a tangible sense that adds to overall well-being. Not jetting around the globe to enjoy a new view for a matter of days, but living in harmony with beauty and nature on a regular basis.
It mentions a 4 day workweek, which could be a good start, but doesn’t really even dissect that although we fought for a 40-hour week, many people now work well more than that, despite the productivity gains. Why is the backward drift happening and what can we do to stop it?
Growth objectives could be revisited beyond GDP and oversimplified metrics about the “health” of the economy rather than its people. But of course, capitalism has its inherent focus. And we’d have to decouple our government leadership from that of large corporations, or at least remove the exclusive focus on profit growth. Companies judged based on the wellbeing and happiness of those who work for it. One hell of an uphill battle, but change can happen. Fiduciary duty is the only true legal obligation most executives and board members have. Why not add more to that list? It may seem daunting, but a swipe of the pen can add responsibilities to corporate leaders. EPA, OSHA, etc. all once didn’t exist. Time to put on our forward-thinking caps again.
Also, I understand that energy storage is a monumental challenge in the face of EV and sustainable energy production, but this article doesn’t really address how it compares to the alternative (fossil fuels). To the untrained eye, it might seem that sustainable energy production isn’t a net positive, which obviously isn’t the case. If we start dumping more money into energy storage research and development, it seems inevitable that we’d figure out a way to minimize the harm, especially when combined with decreased movement. This is yet another amazing opportunity for us to advance beyond the known limits of today, and when prioritized/incentivized properly, who knows what can happen.
Pretty good read. I think the sentence about happiness is perhaps the most important. Despite all of the crazy productivity, energy, and geographical movement increases we’ve had over the last century, some people simply aren’t happy. Would be nice if we could judge growth based on other metrics more closely related to happiness and enjoyment. Find ways to live where people are more connected to one another and the world around them, not just through screens but in a tangible sense that adds to overall well-being. Not jetting around the globe to enjoy a new view for a matter of days, but living in harmony with beauty and nature on a regular basis.
It mentions a 4 day workweek, which could be a good start, but doesn’t really even dissect that although we fought for a 40-hour week, many people now work well more than that, despite the productivity gains. Why is the backward drift happening and what can we do to stop it?
Growth objectives could be revisited beyond GDP and oversimplified metrics about the “health” of the economy rather than its people. But of course, capitalism has its inherent focus. And we’d have to decouple our government leadership from that of large corporations, or at least remove the exclusive focus on profit growth. Companies judged based on the wellbeing and happiness of those who work for it. One hell of an uphill battle, but change can happen. Fiduciary duty is the only true legal obligation most executives and board members have. Why not add more to that list? It may seem daunting, but a swipe of the pen can add responsibilities to corporate leaders. EPA, OSHA, etc. all once didn’t exist. Time to put on our forward-thinking caps again.
Also, I understand that energy storage is a monumental challenge in the face of EV and sustainable energy production, but this article doesn’t really address how it compares to the alternative (fossil fuels). To the untrained eye, it might seem that sustainable energy production isn’t a net positive, which obviously isn’t the case. If we start dumping more money into energy storage research and development, it seems inevitable that we’d figure out a way to minimize the harm, especially when combined with decreased movement. This is yet another amazing opportunity for us to advance beyond the known limits of today, and when prioritized/incentivized properly, who knows what can happen.