News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On? by unprepare on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @10:20AM (#9731895)
We are clearly discussing two different things.

You are saying overconsumption by the super rich is ultimately environmentally damaging. (which i don't disagree with)

I am saying underconsumption by the middle/lowerclass is immediately economically damaging.

Prioritizing investment over consumption leads to inequality and poor economic outcomes.

Re:U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On? by _yosefk on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @05:36PM (#9735472)
I dont distinguish between billionaires and middle class folks in this respect. Overconsumption by the middle class us likely much more environmentally damaging. Does it drive the economy? Perhaps; if so, it's a problem. And certainly the Russian middle class consumes more of what it makes than European or American because lacking reliable property rights they do not trust investments to pay off.
Re:U.S. Tech Funding – What’s Going On? by unprepare on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @07:01PM (#9735821)
Seems to me like an argument for sustainable manufacturing, rather than anti-consumption

Curbing consumption is immediately damaging to the economy. The better solution would be to heavily tax unsustainable business practices, rather than try to curb consumption. If you go after consumption you give more power to the super rich, while simultaneously doing nothing to discourage environmentally unsound business practices.

Why is it better to continue producing products in an environmentally unfriendly way with lower consumption of goods, rather than lowering the production of environmentally damaging products, while raising consumption rates of sustainable products?

Go after the supply not the demand.