The Modern Market Economy: Evolution or Devolution

"It's a story about us. People. Being persuaded to spend money we don't have on things we don't need to create impressions that don't last on people we don't care about."

In this excerpt from his presentation over at TED, economist Tim Jackson discusses the status of our international economy and the perception that currently drives it. It should be understood that to keep our game running, we need to have players. In order to attain economic growth, we first need a healthy market. Jackson's point is that our current philosophy in attaining economic growth is not suitable for our current situation. And what is that situation you ask? This is the first time in history that a recession actually helps the even larger global issue of the overallocation of natural resources. Since our output is not as high, we aren't using as much. This means that if we were to continue having an expanding international economy, if all rules still apply, it would continue to hurt our environment. Yet, the only way to escape this current recession is to collectively spend money and keep the wheels turning. So we can't make a move and we're in this position of stalemate.

That's clearly stalemate.


This situation has three obvious actions:

1.) Regenerate the economy, continue to expand internationally by increasing carbon levels in the atmosphere and making Captain Planet angry. I'm sure this will eventually lead to some unhealthy outcome. Pick your favorite Science Fiction disaster movie.

2.) We can continue in our recession since it's so "green". This solution is not very expansive and will definitely decrease the standard of living for most people in the long-term.

3.) We can somehow change what we want, and have that desire be both highly marketable and healthy in terms of environmental effects.

The third option above is almost like changing the rules of Chess to escape a stalemate. Sure it's possible, and will probably upset the very best of Chess players. But it seems to be the best option to achieve the most desired outcome.

This is a very big thing we're asking here. In his presentation, Jackson showed a diagram illustrating the human heart.

Notice how I've recreated his illustration with optimal skill:

I've always thought that the reason capitalism works so well is because of the fact that we're so greedy by nature. This skillfully drawn diagram shows where we lie according to Jackson. Apparently in our economy, we want everyone stuck on the new and to be very competitive. So my question to you all:

1.) Is it possible to have a healthy economy without it's consumers remaining Selfish and stuck on Novelty? And if so, how can this desire be marketable?

2.) If we can shift our wants, how long do you think this will take? Can we do this in 50 years? How about by the end of the century?