Something that just dawned on me. Something fundamentally wrong with our system.

[Smith_3]

Partially because I am currently reading about Darwinian evolution, I came to wonder:

How can a country that promotes an economic system that is founded on a "survival of the fittest" view of the market be so friggin WASTEFUL of energy. Energy and resource consumption are one of the main selection criteria in nature. In other words: you waste, you die. You simply don't see big fucking animals with a huge arsenal of weapons and features rolling around in nature. Why? Because nature relentlessly cuts away anything that is superfluos and unnecessary. Such an animal would never find enough food to power all its features.

If the USA wants to survive as a worldpower the new slogan must be "efficiency". Efficiency as a top priority. Otherwise our praised free market system is eventually going to "select" against us.

[Believing Is Art]

1. Because "survival of the fittest" corrupted the "free market"

Innovation and new technology in the energy market are not as profitable in the short term as raising rates and keep us addicted to unsustainable fuels. We have a system that subsidizes this waste, promotes corporate tax breaks and loopholes, and screws the consumer. As soon as these fossil fuel energy kings get enough money, they buy politicians and lobbyists to make sure they keep making money. It's not a free market. There is no money for them in sustainable energy, and they have such a monopoly that without government interference (mainly in the form of giving the coal and gas kiddies a time out and telling them "no" for the first time in their lives), it will be difficult if not impossible for sustainable energy to become competitive with fossil fuels.

[Chulanowa]

2. It already has

The "Free market" is a self-devouring system. There is absolutely no way to get around it. Capitalism costs more than it provides. It's an economic version of the second law of thermodynamics. You put in X amount of resources - materials, energy, manpower - and get Y amount of wealth back. In any system, X will be substantially greater than Y. In some systems, a portion of Y is used to replenish X - we call these socialist systems.

In capitalism, though, X is never renewed by any means. Thus the value of Y is higher than in the socialist system, but X is spent far faster.

[Believing Is Art]

3. Try explaining to any Republican that the free market

is not an isentropic system, and their head might explode.

[RC]

4. Doubtful. They wouldn't get it. You need to be in touch with reality and

the Right makes up their own as they go. Without their talking points they are lost.

[lelgt60]

7. But isn't reinvestment replenishment - in both systems?

I also don't see that you are comparing apples to apples. There's no reason you can't have a free market within a socialist system.

It's also is a little hard to discuss because I'm not sure of your definition of socialism here: state control of all means of production at one end, to something approaching a fair tax system with a government safety net at the other (my preference).

On edit: add to last sentence: with honest regulation to keep the free market "free" and to prevent corporate plundering of jointly owned resources (like water, air, etc)

[Locrian]

5. survival of the fittest

As said above - its NOT survival of the fittest.

And if the system really was survival of the fittest, I suspect that most of the freepers living in their basement would be the first to be eaten by the tiger (so to speak).


But they can **pretend** they are superior warriors, because the GOP tricks them into thinking they are part of the ruling class. When in fact they are just their bitch.

[snake in the grass]

6. This is a fascinating point of view.

[cobalt1999]

8. Because the selection criteria in nature is different than it is for economic/political systems.

Efficiency isn't the only factor.

[Smith_3]

9. I think that only appears so because currently the USA hold monopoly on the resources.

We are allowed to waste more because we have ensured that we have access to all the worlds reserves. It doesn't mean that this can go on forever though. I think our national debt is one sign that it is coming to an end.

[deaniac21]

10. Brilliant

[The2ndWheel]

11. Increased efficiency in the extraction and harnessing of energy is why we waste so much energy

"In other words: you waste, you die. You simply don't see big fucking animals with a huge arsenal of weapons and features rolling around in nature. Why? Because nature relentlessly cuts away anything that is superfluos and unnecessary. Such an animal would never find enough food to power all its features."

Which is why civilizations must grow and expand, because if they do not, they die. We have to increase our energy use just to keep the food on the table, thanks to distance traveled, the loss of topsoil, etc.

Wouldn't the computer be a waste of energy? We don't need it for survival. Just another one of our features that cheap energy has allowed.

"If the USA wants to survive as a worldpower"

A more massive waste of energy trying to build a world power, maintain a world power, and not let a world power die, there cannot be.