B and s liquidating corporation salem
Daniel O'Neill of the Center for the Advancement of a Steady State Economy says: "t this point in history, having too many people, or too high a level of consumption, is much more likely to result in the end of economic progress, via ecological collapse, than having too few." The costs of economic growth in the U. began to exceed the benefits sometime in the late 1970s.
An economic "slowdown" that results from slowing and eliminating population growth is distinctly different from that caused by a credit crunch or the messy bursting of a speculative bubble.
During the 1800s and 1900s, up to half of world economic growth was likely due to population growth; Georgetown University environmental historian John Mc Neill explains: "A big part of economic growth to date consists of population growth.
More hands, more work, more things produced."Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a measure of economic success or failure, is the number of people multiplied by per capita income.
The US, with a 1% population grow rate, increases by more than 2.9 million people annually, the equivalent of almost four new San Franciscos.
Developers said these cities would eventually price the middle class out, and start to empty, but this hasn't happened.
Instead We should be looking at per capita GDP, which corrects for population growth.
While Japan's economy has been touted as 'bad', based on its national GDP it has actually enjoyed the biggest gain in average income among the big three rich economies.
Instead, the free-for-all cities like Las Vegas, the Phoenix metro area, South Florida, this valley - are the most troubled, the suburban slums.
Karen Gaia says: Population growth feeds these 'booms'.