Want to Save the World? I’ll Tell You How

voids Says:

November 27th, 2008, 20:03 pm

agreed

JulieG Says:

November 27th, 2008, 20:10 pm

It seems like the people you call ‘green enthusiasts’ could be better described as ‘pale-green marketers’ or ‘PR managers’. Buying green products isn’t enough to save the world - it takes a real effort to re-think how we measure our happiness.

Your suggestions are great, and should be considered by everyone in the lead up to the most over-consuming time of the year. But they’re not original ideas, and have been put forward by environmentalists for years. It’s just that no-one has paid any attention until now, preferring to make snide remarks about greenies instead.

Trevor Says:

November 27th, 2008, 20:13 pm

We have talks about this often at school.

I think it’s great to lower what we use but at the same time, you have to be effective. If you’re using these without effect, then what’s the point of using it?

Neil Says:

November 27th, 2008, 20:16 pm

I understand your point, but it’s just too oversimplified.

You mention that we are in a financial crisis, and that people should consume less. If everyone in America, or better still the World, heeded your advice we would be in much more trouble economically than at present. Business income would decrease, unemployment rates would rise, more people would default on mortgages, etc. I’m sure you can see this is not a good cycle.

I agree with your points on environmental issues, but people have been harping on about this stuff for years now.

To relate ‘doing less’ to our current economic situation is not a good idea in the grand scheme of things.

Ryan McLean Says:

November 27th, 2008, 20:26 pm

I understand your point, but if this happened on a large scale (as it is currently) the world would be in an economic collapse.
Consumerism is what originally drove us to get to where we are now, but it will be consumerism and people demanding environmentally safe products which is what will cause us to find a way to fix this problem.
So doing less does not fix the problem, doing the same things in an environmentally friendly way fixes the problem

Amelia Says:

November 27th, 2008, 21:00 pm

I think this is a great set of points although to some degree I can see where Neil and Ryan are coming from. My frustration with consumerism is that nothing is made to last anymore - the problem is that everything is made to last just longer than the warranty period so after that time you have to buy a new one. I’m sure so many people would happily pay much more for a piece of equipment that could last much longer (think of the Nokia 5110). It seems quality doesn’t seem to be much of a selling point anymore which is a real shame.

Doug Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:03 pm

I love how “economics” is typically forgotten when talking about our “economic situation”.

Doing less would help the economy. Our production and demand are elastic, and adjust to changes in the market. A large part of why our economy is hurting is because people are “doing things”. People who should be renting bought homes, companies that should make better houses are only making more, and worst of all, more people are taking investments into their own hands.

The influx of people trading in markets adds an overwhelming amount of volatility to the market prices. And one fact about trading has been forgotten: whenever YOU make money, SOMEONE ELSE loses it.

Trading with investors who have done this for a living for YEARS, is as naive as thinking “I can swim faster than Michael Phelps” after just learning to swim.

“Doing less” would help, but I doubt that enough people will subscribe to it for change to happen.

Katie - an out of shell experience Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:08 pm

“So why do we avoid using less?”

Because we’ve been conditioned to be consumers, to want more and more, and have been told that it’s patriotic to prop up the economy with consumer spending.

As other commenters have noted, the economy could collapse if people try to embrace sanity. I think that’s a better argument for finding a new economy (I know, kind of a big goal…) than it is for me to shrug and say “well, I guess I’ll just buy the disposable plates then…”

As for green consumerism, I agree that’s a bit of a problem when viewed as “throw out all your old crap and buy shiny new ‘green’ stuff!” But after you reduce, reuse, and recycle, it’s good to have green options for when you need to buy something.

Shane Harris Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:15 pm

One thing that I think you miss: we will have to have a great deal of compassion for the millions of people, men, women & children, who will die starving and miserable as a direct result of doing absolutely nothing.

I worry that this approach encourages an elitism of the enlightened and those who just don’t know any better can just die in a fire.

Does non-attachment relieve us of any social obligation whatsoever?

Derek Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:16 pm

You know, I don’t think anyone can emphasize how important “less things” truly is to becoming both successful and happy.

Ever since I stumbled across the website http://www.unclutterer.com I have been much more productive and stress-free.

@Ryan - While I agree that consumerism drives our economy (did you know there are more than 2 cars per 1 person in California), it most definitely leads to stress.

Shane Harris Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:17 pm

I would like to point out that I believe my point is in sharp contradiction to Neil’s point above. If this system requires thoughtless consumption, it is certainly not worth saving.

There is, in fact, a very good argument that the PR/Advertising industry is specifically configured to make Less-informed consumers who make decisions irrationally.

Shane Harris Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:21 pm

There is a sharp disconnect in the logic of the assertion that consumption and consumerism will save us. This is the economic understanding of a largely immature electorate.

If the only way out is to just go buy more things that we can throw away to make places for just more things, then we have designed a poor excuse for an economy and I, personally, will do as much as I can to subvert it.

It is too bad that this kind of an approach to an economy only bails out those who are the tyrannical managers of our bankrupt moral and political economy. The true victims are, as I said before, ignored and allowed/encouraged to die in fires.

blisschick Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:34 pm

My partner and I gave up our car, intentionally, over seven years ago. We eat only organic. We recycle. We garden. Etc. Etc.

But the system of economics in which we live cannot simply be “overturned” overnight. If we think we understand poverty now, we know nothing compared to what would happen — and especially in under-developed nations — if all of us were suddenly to become green ascetics.

As usual, we are approaching this problem from the end results rather than from the beginning disease — a disease that this country is overwhelmed by — that of unhappiness and fear and anger.

These are the places that poisonous consumption originates in, and until we deal with a population of people who think it’s okay to be cogs as long as they can drive expensive (and/or green) cars or live in big (and/or green) houses, then we are destined to destroy ourselves en masse.

Harriet Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:39 pm

As someone with a masters degree in environmental management, I have to say this list is oversimplified to the extent of possibly being harmful. While all the points are thoughtful and inspiring of positive action, this is most definitely not a list to even begin to “save the world” with.

Simpson Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:42 pm

There are indeed many people with a much broader knowledge of the economic system’s impact on the environment. For the sake of upholding legitimacy:

Please stick to writing about topics of which you are well informed.

Tabitha (From Single to Married) Says:

November 27th, 2008, 22:54 pm

I agree with most of these - we can definitely do with less and be more mindful of our environment. I do think some “green enthusiasts” over do it since some of the solutions aren’t that practical, but I think they have the right end goal.

ON a personal note - when we bought our house last year, we purposefully got one close to the metro system. My husband rides that and I walk to work so we hardly use our car - it’s great! Not only are we being environmentally aware, but we’re saving a ton of car costs!

Neil Says:

November 27th, 2008, 23:09 pm

@ Doug

The reason your economy is hurting is not because people are doing these things, it’s because your Government allowed it to happen. Your Government (and the banks) had a duty to the people of your country that they didn’t uphold. They allowed regulation to slip that was in place for a reason. To blame people who don’t know any better is a farce. The people you should be blaming are ones in power who knew better, and did it anyway.

Also, I’m not sure of the logic behind your argument that everytime someone makes money, someone else loses it.

@ Shane

As someone mentioned above, there’s a sense of ‘enlightened elitism’ here. It is very easy to take an enlightened viewpoint and argue that a bad system is “not worth saving”, but in reality is that what you truly believe? To abolish a flawed system is completely disconnected. Do you seriously believe that the nation as a whole will be better off we choose not to partake in the economic system? If you choose not to purchase, save and invest, what do you really think will happen? It’s not going to be pretty.

There needs to be some rational judgement here. To be completely non-consumerist is just as bad as being completely consumerist. I agree that America is far too consumption centric, but to go completely the other way in practice is not going to work. People need to get off their moral high horses and actually start thinking about what works.

rizzy-Follow me on Twitter Says:

November 28th, 2008, 0:04 am

I can tell you are not an Economist.

Its like me saying the solution to everything is bend our backs and go back in the evolution cycle. Why not all become Farmers, so there will be plenty of food, no stress, peace, a great environment, no worries about money, no competition, great humble and organic conversations.

But who would want to suddenly go back to the old ways, when we know we have capabilities to do more, when we know we have capabilities to talk on the phone, make coffee, and printing papers all at the same time and have the ability to redo this process in case something goes wrong.

If we start walking instead of driving to more and more places, sure its better for our heart, but it makes us slow, we do less things then we can. We interact less, because we meet less people, we get tired more easily and lose our motivation, which puts us to sleep for more then we should. This is why our ancestors didn’t live as long as we do now, and now you are saying to go back to these ways and ruin our generations?

I agree with the rest of the article. Especially listening more and talking less.

@ Neil U.S Government is of the people, by the people and for the people.

Everyone things their answer is right.

Please avoid my grammar mistakes, I hate excuses but just to kind of intruduce my self here to the Zenhabits users, I am only 17 years of age and grammar is by no means my interest. You can tell I am of the Lazy age.

Regards: rizzy
http://twitter.com/rizzy81

Shane Harris Says:

November 28th, 2008, 0:04 am

@Neil
I also was the one who mentioned “enlightened elitism”.

I have one comment: perhaps you also have a problem with the moral high horse a Doctor mounts when removing malignant cancer from a system?

I suppose it would be easy to assume that I am so non-consumerist that I needn’t buy food for myself or my daughter. It would also be absurdly false. And it would be a great deal more respectful if you did not assume I am an idiot.

It might be more beneficent to get off of intellectual hobby horses and actually stop making gross generalizations. But no one ‘needs’ to do that: they just might consider it as an option.

Shane Harris Says:

November 28th, 2008, 0:06 am

A lot of the comments on this page are of exactly the same flavor as addicts who are faced with the possibility of entering rehab.

“WHAT? I can’t have my Starbucks and WOW?? NFW!!!! That’s Progress! Do you want to return to the old days?!?!?!”

Shane Harris Says:

November 28th, 2008, 0:09 am

“But we spilled the sacrificial blood of soldiers on the altar of FREEDOM so that I can have my 2 cars! How dare you suggest we not buy more and more and more until the world is paved?”

Neil Says:

November 28th, 2008, 0:23 am

@ Shane
I apologise if I offended you. That was not my intention.

We seemed to have swayed from my original point here. It is very easy to sit at a computer and make a simple generalisation about helping your economy by ‘doing less’. I am merely pointing out that this would not work.

FrugalNYC Says:

November 28th, 2008, 0:27 am

Save the cheerleader - save the world…Alas we don’t live in a fictional world and our solutions are not as simple.

Agree with others, its too simplified, though a good start for some.

Rob Perhamus Says:

November 28th, 2008, 1:44 am

I have linked to “Live Better by Consuming Less?Is There a “Double Dividend” in Sustainable Consumption?” It supports the argument. I would add there are stages of life, and that those in midlife 50+, should focus more on reducing consumption, and spend more time saving the world.

Chris - Zen to Fitness Says:

November 28th, 2008, 3:01 am

Great post and excellent point on walking I cannot emphasize how much better I feel when I get in 2-3 10 minute walks a day. It helps relaxation, gets blood flowing and clears the mind. If you do a desk job be sure to go for a 10-15 minute walk in your lunch break!!
Great points throughout and thanks for the link love the other day! Regards - Zen to Fitness

jesvin Says:

November 28th, 2008, 3:23 am

Look at the current state of cattle/chicken farming.The ways cattle are treated to maximise production increses the risk of mad cow disease in them. The milk and beef can wreak hormonal havoc in pre-teens. Say hello to major bird flu outbreaks due to the genetically “virtual clones” cooped in confined spaces that we call chicken.

My suggestion: put all cattle/ fowl business into environmentally friendly small farms.They should be allowed to roam about and fed on natural foods, rather than grain. This will:
1. Ensure that outbreaks of disease will be contained
2. Healthier and tastier chicken/ beef
3. Less chance of hormonal havoc in our bodies
4. Less stress to nature
5. More jobs in 10 small farm than in one mega-coop
6. Less stress on grain price. More food to the starving

Yes, for consumers this means more expensive meat. Let me put forward my view on dearer meat.I am an Indian guy having at most 2 small servings of meat daily. If I had daily boxed takeouts from the nearby Chicking, i would lose my appreciation of chicken. Also I get more unhealthy.

Thats a lot of words for my point ;-) now let me state it:
“Nature friendly and healthy DOESNT mean that jobs will be lost, the economy will slow down and your happiness will be lesser. Nature and man should go forward hand-in-hand”

Katya Says:

November 28th, 2008, 3:45 am

I do less. But mostly because I am lazy. Sometimes I want something, but I don’t feel like going to the store and getting it. Some things I avoid because they are wasteful (putting all produce in separate bags - that uses unnecessary plastic and then forces me to get the produce out of the bags later), but most are simply because I just don’t want to do what I don’t have to.

Maybe if everyone just slowed down once in a while, they could enjoy what they have and stop wanting more just to fill a void.

oskar lewis Says:

November 28th, 2008, 4:09 am

doing less: ok, doing it in a an environmentally friendly way: ok, but … I think, this problem is to hughe to handle by us. Our task is, to inform our governements about our concerns. We have chosen our leaders, didn’t we, so they have to do what we want, and if we want a better world, they should start organizing it. Inform your leaders about your needs!!!! I ‘ve put a post with a nice film made to help the rulers see what’s wrong. If everybody would send this film to them it would help!!! (it aready did !!) check the link. kind regards, osker.

Valeria | TimelessLessons Says:

November 28th, 2008, 5:11 am

Hey Jonathan, great pots. I totally agree with the first one. Fifty percent of the planets air pollution comes from cars. Most journeys are still less than 2 miles. There is no more important issue that we have to face together. It’s amazing that we have yet to understand the severity of the oil world and pollution situation. I say give it up! Get a bike!

Giuseppe Says:

November 28th, 2008, 5:14 am

Yes, I agree

Dumitru Tira Says:

November 28th, 2008, 5:53 am

I totally agree on having less stuff, since I moved to this new rented flat I carried less stuff with myself and surprisingly I don’t miss it. My room just feels much more zen and after some small changes I’m thinking about it’s going to rock, zen baby!!! :P

I also agree with the car-bashing part, Getting by with a bike is much more convenient(in shorter distances of course), see the Netherlands or Belgium or other north-european countries, they are among one of the happiest places to live on earth.(I know this is debatable and it’s influences by so many different factors, but you can’t deny that doing regular exercise, like riding a bike, isn’t helpful to you mood/health).

cheers.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 6:58 am

Love this blog, but I agree with everyone who thinks that this post oversimplifies things. I do subscribe to the “power of less”, but that alone won’t save the world.

Take cars for example: I never owned a car because I decided very early on in my life (I was 3 years old) that they are smelly, and smelly can’t be good. Of course I knew nothing about air pollution and the environment back then. ;)

I never had any problems managing my life without a car. All it takes is some planning ahead, knowing the train schedules and nice hikes to the places you need to go to. It also helps to choose your home carefully (living near a train station and in walking distance to shops).

The few times that you actually need to go somewhere fast you can always call a taxi, but that’s not more than 3 or 4 times a year for me.

Of course, when you’re 17 years old like rizzy, you probably won’t have the patience, but we all calm down sooner or later.

As for getting less done without a car: when I walk I can use the time to think about a project, when I go by train I can take my laptop along and get some work done. Many high speed trains here in Germany are now equipped with wifi hotspots. :)

BUT: this won’t work for everyone. I’m a single no kids freelance webdesigner. If I were an insurance agent with a family to feed I would never manage to see enough clients in one day if I didn’t have a car. That’s just one example. So we do need to develop “green” cars. The only way to get around it would be to disestablish everything that requires a car. And where would we be then?

You can’t just change everything back to how it was 200 years ago. And even if we could I’m not sure I’d like it. Just think of all the diseases we would still have. Also, we wouldn’t have computers, blogs, the chance to talk to people all over the planet while sipping our morning coffee. Would you rather let go of your blog than support the development of “green” computers?

The modern world is not all evil, but we have to take some action to find a balance, and a lot of what the “green enthusiasts” suggest supports that balance. Agreed, sometimes they go to extremes, but how else do you balance an extreme situation, like extreme consumerism?

Somewhere on this blog I read an Einstein quotation that life is like riding a bicycle - you have to keep moving to keep the balance. And that really sums it up for me. :)

Your suggestions are great, but not the solution to everything.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 7:24 am

PS: As for “We don’t need to do anything about it.”, why not e-mail that to Obama? :D

Dimitri Says:

November 28th, 2008, 7:50 am

I agree totally. I am one of the regular readers and I am convinced that “Less is More”.
I never buy things that I don’t absolutely need and I have a few things only.
But,

What if everbody would act like this? Wouldn’t the world enter in a big economical crisis? Don’t we need these big consumers who permit us to live in simplicity?

Paul R. Davis Says:

November 28th, 2008, 8:19 am

I believe that many of us are over-extended in our possessions, activities and debt. The United States needs a makeover of immense proportions. The US has strayed from the ideals of its founders and has become a nation of having and wanting, instead of a nation of creating, doing and saving. Our consumerism and greed have created the financial crisis we now face. Personally, I do not believe in saving businesses of any size that do not have the ability to get themselves out of the holes they themselves have created due to lack of foresight and planning. I say let them die. The displaced workers should be retrained in industries of the future, paid for with government financing, repayable by the workers from their new jobs over a long term. Also, our President must be a leader, a cheerleader, and a motivator so that we see and believe in a future where America is a partner with the rest of the world in creating a world where people can live in safety and comfort with their basic needs fulfilled. Some ideas I have are: universal single-payer health insurance; a national high-speed rail network; metropolitan monorail systems; re-regulation of public utilties; government-business partnerships where business is guaranteed a reasonable profit and where the role of government is primarily to ensure consumer and product safety; tighter regulation of broadcast television so that 30 minute snake-oil infomercials are limited to a small band of non-prime time, that public affairs programming on commercial stations is increased and not relegated to Sunday morning before people are awake.

I may have wandered off-point here, but I believe without massive reform, America is ripe for social revolution. Each of us must talk with their neighbor about the need to enjoy what we already have, share what we can do without with those who are in need, and most importantly, restore a sense of community and neighborhood by talking with those who live around us, so that, together, we can find and enact solutions to improve the quality of our lives.

Niels Bom Says:

November 28th, 2008, 8:25 am

Agreed.
Typo in “drama do to misunderstandings” –> “drama due to misunderstandings”.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 9:12 am

@ Paul R. Davis: Could you point us to a site or book that explains your idea of letting the businesses die and retraining their workers a little more in-depth? I would love to believe that there is a way to do it within a reasonable time-frame, but I don’t believe it’s a practicable solution, considering how much of our economy actually depends on, say, the car industry (here in Germany as much as in the US, if not more).

Also: Do you have friends or anyone you love who would in fact lose their job if their company dies? If so, what do they think about your plan?

Al Says:

November 28th, 2008, 9:12 am

I agree with everything is this post except for one.

Disposable razors are actually so much cheaper in the long run than the more expensive ones. The recharges for those used to add 10-15$ to my grocery bill. Now, I spend about 4$/month for disposable razors… and you know what? They work as well as the other ones…

Paul R. Davis Says:

November 28th, 2008, 9:25 am

Dear Sandra,

My nextdoor neighbor is about 5 years from retiring from Daimler-Chrysler. She has to travel several hundred miles from her home to where she works, and stay there for weeks on end so she can keep her job, which keeps her away from her family. I have empathy for her. However, while I myself am fairly comfortable, lack for little, and am not extravagant, selfish, or wasteful, I believe many Americans would benefit from being forced by finances to downsize their homes, and their possessions. If a major corporation, like General Motors, went out of business, I believe our Federal Government would have a moral obligation to assist displaced workers survive, and would do so. I myself would do whatever I could to help someone in need, as would most people I know. Perhaps Americans need to be rudely shaken out of their complacency and self-centeredness by means of a major economic dislocation.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 9:56 am

Dear Paul,

thanks for your reply.

While I agree with your original post in many points I can also see how the jobs of friends of mine are in danger, even though they’re not directly working for the auto industry. General Motors is not just GM, or Opel here in Germany, it’s also all the sub-contractors and suppliers (for example of semiconductors) down to the extractive industry.

I just don’t believe that we can rescue all those workers by “helping someone in need”. This thing is just too big.

If there was a real, practicable way, I’d say let’s change it like you suggest, but I’m afraid that’s utopia.

As much as I dislike cars personally, I think that the only solution for now is to help the car industry, but only under the condition that they change their ways and produce “greener” cars that do less damage to the environment.

Niels Bom Says:

November 28th, 2008, 10:11 am

Not solving a problem because it is too big sounds weird to me.

Letting capitalism do its magic will make a lot of people unemployed now, but in the long run it will (imho) improve things. I’m leaning towards evolution here: let the individuals suffer (even if that’s me or my loved ones) so the long term result will be improvement. Which might mean my children/grandchildren having jobs at more healthy companies in a more healthy economical system.

But then again, everyone is genetically programmed to say: “me (and my genes) first”, so I think such a move (not protecting faltering companies) must come from a majority who don’t fear change.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 10:20 am

@ Niels: I’m not saying we shouldn’t solve the problem. I’m just saying we shouldn’t go cold turkey but instead set up a methadone program to get rid of the car addiction slowly. ;)

First switch to greener cars while saving the jobs, then start and change the industry as a whole and create jobs in the renewable energy sector and so on.

Greg K Nicholson Says:

November 28th, 2008, 10:49 am

“Use real dishes instead of plastic/paper.”

Seriously?! Does anyone actually use disposable crockery? …Is America really that foreign?

Alison at Diamond-Cut Life Says:

November 28th, 2008, 11:10 am

Excellent post and discussion. There is solid evidence that Americans can thrive on lowered consumption: http://www.diamondcutlife.org/the-peak-of-happiness-and-its-causes/
And we can also thrive while driving less: http://www.diamondcutlife.org/the-very-best-diet/

Shane Harris Says:

November 28th, 2008, 11:42 am

@Niels
Capitalism has no “magic” that it can do to automatically save itself. There is ALWAYS intervention. Every stage of history: always. You need to find some books that challenge your preconceptions on this. Keynes or Galbraith, for instance: capitalists who, unlike the prevailing myth spreaders, were well aware of capitalism’s weaknesses.

Pop quiz: Because the public relations (propaganda) phrases ‘free market’ and ‘free trade’ contain the word free, they naturally are functions of freedom. True or false?

Hendry Lee Says:

November 28th, 2008, 11:49 am

We don’t need to do anything about it. So true, but if only if the world know that it all starts by changing one self, not the world.

Ian Says:

November 28th, 2008, 11:57 am

You speak a lot of sense, Leo, but the people at the very TOP do not want us to want less and they do everything they can to keep the economy growing, despite the fact that it is unsustainable.

Only a fool would think that perpetual growth is possible in a finite world, with finite resources, yet most economists base their models on this.

And for everyone who decides to want less, the government decides to up-the-ante to try and make us want more again. e.g. sales to make us buy things we don’t want.

I am actually celebrating at the moment because the current situation is the proof of the very shaky foundations economics is built on. I am hoping that more people will wake up and see that perhaps governments and global corporations don’t know what they are talking about.

Carla Golden Says:

November 28th, 2008, 12:16 pm

Great article! You may also like my Economic Crisis Diet (really, the Silver Lining Diet) which follows some of the same principals here:

http://tiny.cc/5sFRL

Genesis Says:

November 28th, 2008, 12:54 pm

I find it interesting that people think it would be a bad thing to stop buying so much. Perhaps there would be an economic crisis . . . but wait, aren`t we already facing that? And which is better, losing the planet or an economic crash that we could recover from? Not to mention, most people are so apathetic they would never actually change their habits.

I live in Guatemala, though I`m originally from Canada and here, while green is not in, there are certain things that are simply accepted here. Like reusable market bags, for example. You just toss all your fresh fruit and veggies from the market in there and haul it home. On the bus. Which usually is filled with twice the recommended number of people, so that`s pretty eco-friendly . . . especially now that they are passing pollution laws. My husband and I own a motorbike to get around which is handy for quick trips or going out after the buses stop for the night, but it uses very little gas.

People here have very little, and yet, the majority of them are quite happy as long as they have a roof over their head (my family of four lives in just under 200 square feet and most people cram several families into that) and food for their children. We could learn a lot from them! I admit I`m not yet there myself, since I do like to have “things” still, but it`s a good goal, to simply appreciate the ability to have the basic necessities of life and be happy about it.

Jan Says:

November 28th, 2008, 13:19 pm

Hey

Great article!
Did you saw the campagne of the Nic Balthazar?
http://www.thebigask.eu/

sd Says:

November 28th, 2008, 13:44 pm

There are few types of consumers. And they will never walk if they can get on the car.
1.the dollar store people.they make less money but spend everything for cheap “stuff”from dollar store and other cheap places
2.the middle class people.they make more money but spend more for liabilities(new car,cell phone,vacations)
3.the people who make millions and spend millions for things like renting the whole restaurant for a date, or going to a vacation that costs 1 million per day.
That type of people will never change. They go to school just to make money after they graduate, they work to make money,they get married to make money, they will die to make money. They are the consumers. The US model made the society of super consumers, and forget to teach them how to live their life. It’s like in the movie Matrix. Sometimes, you don’t know is that the real life or a program you are in. Scary!

Rahul Says:

November 28th, 2008, 14:20 pm

We have a saying in Nepali “Duniya lai badalna chahanchau bhane, suru aafai bata gara?

This means that If you want to change the world, then you should start from yourself. No matter what your target is, if you want to do anything new then you should be your own starting point. Else there would be no point in trying to do anything new.

I’d like to see less of trash talk (which most of the politicians do, and something which is also utterly important) and more of real work done or implemented practically.

Paul R. Davis Says:

November 28th, 2008, 14:42 pm

It seems we are dealing with human behavior, on all its varying levels. Those who are rich will always try to control and have all they can grasp and prevent others from having it. The “middle class”, as generally defined in the industrialized world, will mostly be hypnotized by ceaseless advertising into believing that the quality of their lives will improve if they have bigger, better and newer possessions, which will mean desecration of natural resources, and inescapable lifelong debt. The poor of the world will continue in their slavery to the rich and corporate greed, unable to escape. Perhaps the answer lies in the middle class becoming more educated about environmentalism and consumerism so that they (we) can effect change in the chambers of government and in the corporate board rooms. It is through becoming informed and educated that we can then act to create needed change. In the meantime, each of us must act “green” and “lean” in our communities and create community associations of neighbors and like-minded citizens to start the process that will reduce consumerism and keep our planet livable .

Egirl Says:

November 28th, 2008, 14:58 pm

Very good point Rahul, and well taken. Last night as I was reading blogs and surfing the net I came upon a site called “The Story of Stuff”. There is a 20-minute movie hosted by Annie Leonard that tells — in condensed form — the lifecycle of all the stuff we consume. I can’t verify the statistics she uses but the point is clear: buy less, consume less = less waste. It starts with each of us, worldwide, taking one step at a time to change our own direction and mindset.

We as consumers have the power. “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” (Margaret Meade) This is where it starts.

Check out the movie at http://www.storyofstuff.com.

Niels Bom Says:

November 28th, 2008, 14:59 pm

@Shane
I’ll readily admit I’m no expert, but then again even the so-called experts we have got us into this mess, time for some fresh ideas.

In my opinion capitalism should reward people who make smart investments, whether that is with their time, energy or their money. People and companies that make bad decisions should not be rewarded. The government should be the backup for individuals that can’t take care of themselves, as is done in smaller communities. The same thing should not be done for companies that make bad decisions as this “rewards” or stimulates risky behavior.

Another role of government as I see it is in protecting the natural resources we all share on this planet (air, water, environment). Which means preventing abuse of those resources by people and companies.

@Rahul
Hear hear!
I’ve got no car (no license also), I don’t eat fish, I don’t eat meat, I live cheap, 1-room apartment and I try not to buy too much stuff. This Christmas I’d rather have a hug instead of a gift. But there are many many things I can still improve.

Another person who has an interesting take on this is Seth Godin.

Niels Bom Says:

November 28th, 2008, 15:02 pm

@Egirl

“We as consumers have the power.”

So true. I’m always inspired by looking at what Gandhi did, with the little means he had when he started. In the end he peacefully freed a whole continent, that’s power!

Michael | Go Success Now Says:

November 28th, 2008, 15:20 pm

I agree with the first point. That’s the first step to a cleaner world. Use public transport and buy hybrid cars.

More paper bags and no plastic bags to be used in supermarkets.

I heard that, when you leave your phone charger plugged, it also takes a lot of energy, so use less energy at home. unplugge all the devices when you leave home.

Great post Jonathan.

Daniel Fackrell Says:

November 28th, 2008, 15:48 pm

@Niels, @Paul, @Shane, and probably others.

“Free market” and “free trade” in their original meaning truly do stem from individual liberties. In their current twisted meaning, they refer to what is allowed to happen by government after all the regulations, taxes, bans, and so on.

I agree with whoever said that wise decisions should be rewarded, and that’s the natural state of things. Government intervention has enabled people to make less and less wise decisions without fear that they personally will ever see the consequences. I’m making products that people don’t want? It’s okay, because my company is deemed important to the economy, so I’ll be bailed out if things don’t pan out.

Economic downturns serve the purpose of helping people find and turn away from the unwise investments they have made with their time and money. Using government as a “backup” system eliminates that single and vital good that can occur as a result of the inevitable pain that poor investment choices cause.

Not to mention that government can only pay for things with money taken by force through taxation, inflation, or debt that will become greater taxation and/or inflation for our posterity. Since that effectively adds up to institutionalized theft, government spending should always be scrutinized carefully.

The real solution to our economic woes is very close to what the original article suggests. We need to steer our spending toward things that have a greater payout in terms of useful life, avoid buying things that lose their value quickly (or immediately after the first use), and steer production in that direction as well.

Unfortunately, most prevailing economic theories are based on the concept that as long as money is moving around, things are great. And when the money stops moving, things are horrible. But that view completely ignores the reasons that money is moving, how long any value produced lasts (and hence whether the total value is increasing or decreasing), and other important factors.

Apologies for the length of this comment, and thank you for reading this far.

Abril Says:

November 28th, 2008, 15:58 pm

1. I dont use cell phone, I use email.
2. I dont have tv or dvd, I got to see nice movies for free in Cultural Center. I get to see good france movies, from Spanish.
3. I bought just three nice suit ( and a little bit expensive) and I match them. A black good pair of shoes and a black bag. (I am woman!!)
4. I pack my lunch in reusable conteiners. It is a lot cheaper and heatheir.

Vincent Says:

November 28th, 2008, 16:31 pm

By being more conscious and be aware of what is happening to our surroundings, we can help to cut down on the amount of garbage we produce.

I believe that there are lots of people with the mentality that says, “One person trying to conserve the earth don’t really help much.” It may be true to a certain extent, but if everyone can do their little part and try to conserve, the result will be fantastic.

Cheers
Vincent
Personal Development Blogger

Jonathan Mead Says:

November 28th, 2008, 16:46 pm

This is some awesome discussion, to say the least. I think it’s great to have a good debate about the differences consumerism and being more conservative with spending.

Whatever your opinion is, I think we can all agree that there can only be so much growth. There’s a breaking point. But many economists are so obsessed with growth, they even classify declines as “negative-growth periods.” That’s just ridiculous.

Tim Says:

November 28th, 2008, 17:10 pm

Many years ago the Ishmael series pointed out the problems created by putting food behind lock and key.
I’m not suggesting going back to that. However there is also the underlying theme that the root of the world’s problems that we are overpopulating the planet.

So I think the one thing you can do personally to save the world is do your part to control the overpopulation. No, I’m not talking about genocide or making sure everyone else is using effective birthcontrol. Everyone personally needs to be more careful in the sack. AND limit yourself to 2 kids per couple. That atleast stalls the growth.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 17:16 pm

@ Daniel Fackrell et al

OK, so let’s for a moment imagine we’re going to just sit and do nothing about the current economical crisis.

Did any of you think it through to a point where you can paint a vivid picture for us of what the years 2009/10 will look like? How many people will be unemployed or on welfare? And what that will cost us?

Is any of you a factory worker who will lose his job and house? Do you really have the heart to tell someone who’s going to lose his job because the government does not rescue the company he’s working for, “Hey, bad luck, you picked the wrong job, you should have known better!”? And it will always hit those hardest who have the least choice in finding a job.

What about all the small companies that depend on business with the large ones? What about their employees?

I totally agree with you that our economy needs to change dramatically, but you can’t do that in a day, it takes time.

Right now we are in an emergency situation that requires quick action, and we will have to work with what we have _now_.

This is definitely not “rewarding” bad businesses, but merely rescuing the livelihood of tens of thousands of people.

I’m not for government intervention per se, but in this case I don’t see how else we could bridge the time till we have a better plan _up and running_ (not just constructed in our minds).

In the meantime there’s of course nothing wrong with living frugally and all. If I wasn’t of that opinion I wouldn’t read this blog. :)

Daniel Fackrell Says:

November 28th, 2008, 17:30 pm

@Sandra,

Agreed. We didn’t get in this situation overnight, and we won’t get out of it overnight.

If we’re going to get out of it at all, though, we need to take steps to remove the perverse incentives that have been artificially added to our markets.

A brilliant idea that existed in the past and helped to alleviate some of these things was the law of the jubilee, which effectively meant that once every fifty years anything that was being rented, borrowed, or was otherwise not in its proper place was returned to its rightful owner. People starting contracts that would otherwise pass the jubilee year adjusted the lengths of the contracts accordingly. This provided the long-term benefits of a recession or depression without so many negative effects, because everyone knew to expect it.

If such a thing could be somehow implemented today, it would (as an example) mean not driving down the road and seeing a sign in front of a mortgage company claiming that they expect local house prices to double in the next three years a mere year before all this turmoil became evident and home prices started falling dramatically. And yes, I actually saw that sign and knew enough about economics to expect the opposite considering the local over-building and frenzied speculation.

Daniel Fackrell Says:

November 28th, 2008, 17:34 pm

@Jonathan,

Thank you for posting this article and being willing to face the criticism of some. It takes a great deal of courage to post your words, not knowing how they will be received, and I think this is a very productive conversation for people to have.

Kelly Says:

November 28th, 2008, 17:38 pm

Civilization: An advanced state of intellectual, cultural, and material development in human society, marked by progress in the arts and sciences, the extensive use of record-keeping, including writing, and the appearance of complex political and social institutions.

Every Civilization comes to an end. Historical records show us again and again that great civilizations have come and gone throughout the ages (i.e, Rome)

Maybe we are next and on a much more global scale….

Just a thought.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 17:50 pm

@ Daniel: agreed. Maybe the law of the jubilee is not practicable nowadays, but we have something else in our toolbox: education! As you said, it helps to not fall for irrational promises and just drive past that sign. :)

Niels Bom Says:

November 28th, 2008, 17:59 pm

@Sandra

I’m not saying I have all the answers and I’m not even saying that I’m right :)
But I will restate my opinion that keeping businesses alive that have clearly failed seems the wrong thing to do. I keep seeing a heroin junkie asking for one more hit, which leads to short term alleviation and more long term pain. Or I see a person with a highly infected arm that has to be amputated but keeps on delaying out of fear.

The money that is being spent everywhere on bailouts could alternatively go into reschooling and or supporting the unemployed. My suggestion to people that are out of a job is to find some way to return to value-adding activities as quick as possible. If people need to leave their house, sad as it may be, it may be because they were living above their means, which they should never have done and the best time to stop that is right now. I also understand that they were highly stimulated to overspend but in the end it’s your own responsibility. I know I have debts and I take full responsibility for them.

I just realized that the (webdesign) company I work for has an automobile producer (Kia) as their biggest client, so I may be the one looking for a job pretty soon.

@Kelly
Yes, change would be welcome, although the signs I see coming from the president-elect are making me nervous.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 18:01 pm

A little off-topic but it looks like we now have a solar powered pope. :)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/renewableenergy/3527161/Vatican-installs-huge-solar-panel-energy-system.html

Good night everyone and thanks for all the interesting ideas.

ScreenOrigami | Sandra Says:

November 28th, 2008, 18:52 pm

@ Niels

If everyone were as well educated as you I would agree with you about responsibility, but many people are not well educated and unfortunately some of them will never be.

I’ve never been in debt, mostly because I live my life at a low standard (no house, no car, no fancy dresses, expensive travels etc.) and I save up before I spend.

But I understand how tempting it can be to buy stuff on credit to pretend to be someone you’re not - especially if you come from a lesser educated background. I think what’s going on with advertisement nowadays is irresponsible to a point where it’s at the border of being criminal. Having some sort of consumer protection in place is certainly not a bad idea if you ask me.

Thanks for your thoughts. While I still don’t agree with you I also know that there’s not just one truth in this complex problem and it’s important to consider all opinions.

I’m really curious to see what things will be like a year from now. While we’re all free to make our decisions on a small scale, I hope that the ones in charge of the large scale decisions do the right thing, whatever that may be. :)

J.D. Meier / Sources of Insight Says:

November 28th, 2008, 21:47 pm

One area I think we’ll see more of is brilliance in resource technology innovations. For example, the fuel injector changed the game in the late 80’s.

Louis Says:

November 28th, 2008, 22:45 pm

Nice message. A bit disappointed to look just right of it to find an amazon ad for Black Friday savings. Come on.

Frisky Librarian (formerly known as Glee Girl) Says:

November 29th, 2008, 0:40 am

Doing less is still doing something. Any committed “green enthusiast” worth their organic salt (as opposed to trendy greenie) would also argue that consuming less is vital.

Your advice is good…though nothing I don’t already know. I fear that is one of the problems with blogs such as this - you’re preaching to the converted. The people who really need to hear the message are busy storming Wal-Mart and trampling maintenance workers to death.

pj_maybe Says:

November 29th, 2008, 2:26 am

People need to be given less options, I heard the CEO of a major supermarket putting forward the argument that it was hard to decide which was more environmentally damaging, growing flowers in Africa and flying them here or using a greenhouse here which needs to be heated. It was treated like a valid point. It wasn’t.

The answer mate is to not sell the flowers at all… Sure we wont have Begonia’s on the kitchen table every day through winter, we will live however. Frisky Librarian is right, but those same people would easily adopt a more frugal lifestyle if it was necessary. In the same spirit as they swallow Christmasercialisation (yay, I just made that up!) and the latest toothpaste commercial. I am from the UK and while not old enough to remember rationing after the war I have heard a lot about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing#United_Kingdom People just get on with it, they always get behind whatever the man in the oval office and his marketing dept says, even if they don’t it happens anyway and then they get used to it. In my oh so humble opinion it wouldn’t be a catastrophic happening if entire economies slowed right down. It would be compared to reality as we see it now but given a year or so I bet people would accept things at face value.

And yes, as you may be able to tell that was my first ever blog comment. Please excuse any sideways motion in my ramblings.

immediately turned off Says:

November 29th, 2008, 3:07 am

Our planet isn’t in very good shape right now. The air is polluted. The ocean is becoming plastic soup. We’re in a financial crisis.

you wish people to heed your solid advice? then i suggest not beginning your commentary with hyperbole.

katinka - spirituality Says:

November 29th, 2008, 12:42 pm

Hi,

You’ve been tagged :) I’d be honored to see you play the game along with us.

See: http://www.allconsidering.com/2008/6-random-things-about-me-ive-been-tagged/

Daniel Fackrell / Intchanter Says:

November 29th, 2008, 13:25 pm

Just to inject some retrospective into the mix, here’s a video with some clips of financial news from before and in the early stages of the crashes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

Bonus points if you can watch it without screaming “idiots” several times.

And to be fair to Arthur Laffer, who was giving such a hard time to the lone voice of sanity at the start of that video, here’s an article he wrote a month ago that’s more closely in line with Schiff’s points (and maybe some of the points made here):

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122506830024970697.html

Jason Says:

November 29th, 2008, 16:42 pm

This is a terrible article. Awful. The author is clearly delusional if he thinks that he can solve the problems of the world with a few minutes of reflection and an education based on personal development books and blogs.

That being said, some of the points made may be correct, but I’m pretty sure that the writer has no evidence proving them, given that there are no citations. Proper scientific thought and methods will lead us to an eventual solution(hopefully before irreversible damage is done), but it is well beyond the scope of a blog article, and will take the combined effort of many experts in various fields.

Below is a video of Jared Diamond giving a speech on societal collapse that I think is relevant.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jared_diamond_on_why_societies_collapse.html

Heather Says:

November 29th, 2008, 17:40 pm

As someone who has already been living in poverty (happily) before this economic crisis, and someone who was also on the green bandwagon before the pr dudes started making it cool, I totally agree with you. Sure there are steps to take to make the world better, but before we waste energy to do so, or take the wrong steps, we first need to take some time to stop doing everything that is wrong to begin with.

Fit Bottomed Girl Says:

November 29th, 2008, 19:44 pm

Such an important message this time of year when consumerism is going bonkers.

Tickled By Life Says:

November 30th, 2008, 2:36 am

I think this all save the environment thing is a lot of hum bug!
we as humans DO NOT understand a zit of how the world/nature works.
WE FLATTER ourselves into believing that we somehow have the power to change the earth …

Daniel Fackrell / Intchanter Says:

November 30th, 2008, 3:09 am

@Tickle

I don’t know how much I believe myself about that yet. I haven’t studied enough environmental science to really know how much we do understand beyond the fact that industrial pollutants and some military technologies have a track record of causing disease in humans and other living things.

What I do know, however, is that every one of the suggestions in the article will make our individual lives better, and reduce any negative impact that could be happening.

That part is simple to understand, and it’s enough for me to take them to heart.

Parag Shah Says:

November 30th, 2008, 9:07 am

Very important message. Wanting more to feel successful is the way our society functions. Instead if we focus on experiencing more, learning more and making progress as humans, we will have a much more positive impact on the planet.

gwinne Says:

November 30th, 2008, 17:35 pm

While I agree with many of the practices you suggest, I think describing them as “doing less” is incredibly problematic. Walking, for instance, takes effort that getting in a car does not. That’s not *doing* less; it’s using a car less frequently. “Doing less” will not save the world. But making eco-friendly conscious choices that involve “less” contamination and consumerism might help.

oskar lewis Says:

November 30th, 2008, 17:59 pm

i think, doing less, is avoiding the problem, is avoiding start changing your behavior. You don’t need a platic bottle to drink water! And drinking less water will not solve problem :-)

Daniel Becerra Says:

November 30th, 2008, 18:51 pm

I agree with all of it. I had heard about your blog before, Leo, and I never got around going over your articles, now that I do, I’m hooked.

You truly are dedicated.

Daniel.

Umbratikus Says:

December 1st, 2008, 10:53 am

It’s really not that simple. Yes, we all need to be more responsible with our consumtion, but think about this for a second. What if everyone started practicing Voluntary Simplicity at once? What would happen to the global economy? It would collapse, starting with the US of A and then Western Europe and then progressively the rest of the globe. The economy has to have time to adapt to a change in consumer behavior. Over all I think the world, as a whole, is moving in the right direction. Slowly, I admit, and sometimes it feels like we move one step forward and two steps back, but a net forward movement is in effect. So while we all do our part by doing less, more has to be done from a global economic infrastructure perspective to compensate.

oskar lewis Says:

December 1st, 2008, 11:53 am

Ok, but I didn’t mean to go to simplicity, I meant te change the packages. You can drink as much water you like, but buy it in galss bottles. Buy bread in paper bags instead of plastic bags. Drink from glasses instead of plastic cups. Drink your coffe out of a ceramic cup instead of ….

Godssecret Says:

December 1st, 2008, 12:56 pm

Let supernal wisdom lead you, then you will be able to fix all you can !

This upper wisdom is as a flash of lightening that enters into the mind. It is a revelation of creativity, by which the world is created continually.It is not heard by all men as its written “never heard outside”.

Wisdom can emanate and create in the physical elements. Yet this is supernatural quality as the thing we call “wisdom” here is not some thing of this world. Creativity is a power that is from beyond oneself.

Here is how you do it, read the rest at

http://godssecret.wordpress.com/

Nice Art there too

Ellie Walsh - Living the Law of Attraction Says:

December 1st, 2008, 13:23 pm

Appreciate More - I agree with that one….

Do Less - Hmmm - We Do More and Consume More because We Are More!

The world - the Universe has been expanding according to the desires of humans. This expansion has brought us into more creativity - which does indeed lead to more consumption and more doing.

Why do people think that is wrong?!?

I always find it interesting that there are people complaining that we have too much - we do too much. If we wanted to stay stagnate - we certainly would have not come into this time/space reality.

Had we decided not to do or be more - the people on this planet would still be using fires outside to cook on - we would still believe the world is flat and we wouldn’t be reading this blog!

The idea of doing and having less - is about lack. The more lack we focus on - the more lack we live.

Thank goodness for those who will not turn their attention to that lack!

Instead of seeing the environment or economy as broken - why not look at it as the opportunity that it truly is. It is within the opportunities of life that we expand even greater - that is how we have found cures for diseases and technology to unite us all.

I will not see this world or it’s beings as broken! We have before us great opportunities to expand into the greater beings that we all are!

The Universe is infinite - its resources never dry up. We need to shift our attention onto the greatness that is within each and every being!

Instead of looking at what is wrong and trying to solve the problem - Why not shift our attention to the opportunities in front of us. Instead of pointing fingers at what is wrong - why not uplift all beings and the Universe and ignite the passions deep within all!

This is truly an exciting time to be alive!

Allen Says:

December 1st, 2008, 16:58 pm

This all sounds like a quote from Satish Kumar of Resurgence Magazone. Not that that’s a bad thing.

morgin1013 Says:

December 1st, 2008, 17:53 pm

I find it interesting that so many people have such a knee jerk reaction to the statement that maybe we should buy less. So many people in the comments predicted the end of the world (total economic collapse) if people start buying less. So trained to consume they react like an addict if you even suggest that they cut back or *gasp* stop buying things they don’t need (no one is talking about cutting back on food or shelter more like CD’s, Televisions, and the like).

The thing is people will realign no matter what happens, people will find a way to make do just as they always have done through out history in both lean and abundant times. For example think about during the world wars when Americans were told to stop buying things (pantyhose, chocolate, etc) so production could realign for the soldiers or the items themselves could be sent to them. The world kept on going all the same no great collapse because people did their part as asked and reduced their consumerism. To think that buying cheap stuff at Wal-Mart is somehow saving the economy is delusional especially since most of the money you spend in retail shopping ends up in China not here. Who do you think makes all the cheap stuff you’re buying? Not Americans that’s for sure. True people may lose jobs if we buy less junk but they will have to adjust and find other employment opportunities or maybe go back to school to get different skills and instead of working in retail maybe they can find work in a different sector like in agriculture or health services (there is a HUGE shortage of nurses and Doctor’s all over the world and those jobs certainly pay better then Wal-Mart does).

oskar lewis Says:

December 1st, 2008, 18:21 pm

oeps …! the link above ‘plastic soup’ has changed to http://www.oskarlewis.com/weblog/about/plastic-soup/

sorry.

stephanie Says:

December 2nd, 2008, 10:32 am

oh good! i’m not the only one with this crazy idea! :)

-s

Takumi86 Says:

December 2nd, 2008, 13:29 pm

Nice advice i couldn’t agree more with the point you just posted above

dtj Says:

December 2nd, 2008, 17:41 pm

I pretty much agree, except for the “Talking Less, Listening More”. That is sometimes the case, but often times one should speak up more, rather than let the usual people speak. People should also make an effort to talk to people more that they haven’t spoken to in a while.

deecoz Says:

December 3rd, 2008, 3:35 am

I realized recently that my husband and I have been shopping less this year for amusement. We weren’t trying to economize or live simply: we’ve taken up birdwatching.

Now when we have a free daylight hour, we head for local spots where birds are likely to be found. Over the change of the seasons, in the same places, there is astonishing change taking place. I think the birds provide the beauty, variety, novelty, and intellectual challenge we found browsing in far too many bookstores.

alis Says:

December 3rd, 2008, 6:33 am

Thank you for putting my thoughts into words.

I believe we are compensating for our dissatisfied instintcs by shopping. Shopping is the modern foraging (that comes at a great cost). We are living so against our nature with our 9-to-5 jobs that we are making up for our unsatisfied lives with consuming. You are bored at home, what do you do? Go to a cafe, drink something, buy something, just pay money for something. We can’t function without consuming. That really has to change.

“What if everyone started practicing Voluntary Simplicity at once? What would happen to the global economy? It would collapse, starting with the US of A and then Western Europe and then progressively the rest of the globe. ” I feel pity for this mindset because the economy is of no importance compared to humanity and our planet! There already is poverty, starvation, difficult circumstances in the world. It’s just happening to other people, not you. The current economy is only serving some people, while many others have to pay. Turning it upside down means less people suffering in the long term.

Think of it this way, if you were trapped in a cave in a blizzard and had limited rations, wouldn’t you divide it and consume it moderately so it could last you longer? It’s the same with the planet, we have to consume moderately if we want it to last longer. Simple as that.

ps: I too find “green cunsumerism” to be missing the point. “Plastic bags are bad so go buy a canvas bag, hell, buy 5.” How about not buying ANY and using one of the gazillion bags you already have at home?

Healthy Weight Loss with Lauren Says:

December 3rd, 2008, 17:05 pm

Great Tips! If only everyone did their part to save the world we could really make it happen.

BigManWalking Says:

December 4th, 2008, 20:45 pm

I searched for Illuminated Mind on Twitter and got zero. I understand about doing less, but what about doing more to get the message out? I strongly believe that Twitter could boost your reach virally with reTweeting & what not. Need convincing? I have two articles linked on my blog - Business Microblogging and Guy Kawasaki Use Twitter - they are listed under Sites & Blogs I’m Checking Out along with this article.

Have a wonderful (be filled with wonder!) weekend!

Blessings,

Charlie

Marcel Ray Says:

December 11th, 2008, 2:23 am

I think Tim is on the right track in saying we need to limit our population. But unfortunately, most of the people reading this blog are likely middle to upper class and from very industrialized countries (US, Canada, Europe), meaning their two kids still make a monumental impact on the world. Much, much more so than your average lower class or third world child.

And as much as we like to think our child will be the one to cure cancer or become the next leader of our country…chances are their impact is going to be little more than consuming more goods, producing more waste and indirectly exploiting populations abroad to meet their ever growing needs and desires. Of course they will add joy and biological “purpose” to our lives, but is it really worth it? Is this not incredibly selfish?

I know this is a completely radical standpoint today, but take a moment to think about all of the things you yourself use on a daily basis and all the people and things that go into supporting and creating those things. What a huge impact that is.

I truly believe life is precious, but as the His Holiness the Dalai Lama has said…there is simply too much preciousness. Live and enjoy your life responsibly, but seriously reconsider the necessity to bring more life into this world at this juncture in humanity.

I’m middle class, educated, in my late 20s and have absolutely no intent of ever creating or raising a child at my standard of living. And amazingly, I have friends who are both single and married, male and female who are making the same decision for the same reasons.

Stop breeding! That’s the single biggest thing one average person can do to help save the world.

Niels Bom Says:

December 11th, 2008, 3:44 am

@Marcel Ray
Consciously not procreating will only work for a small amount of people imho as there are high genetic pressures to procreate, I believe this is one of the most powerful drives a human being has.

Secondly: if some people stop procreating and others don’t that will lead to the extinction of the genes that support “not procreating”.

I personally think that limiting yourself to one child as they did (are doing?) in China is a more attainable goal for the average person.

If the population still explodes we will probably get some nasty infectious diseases (HIV,H5N1, Ebola) to curb our growth. I’d prefer not doing it that way but I’m not sure we’re capable of taking the more humane route.

Tiki Says:

December 14th, 2008, 17:36 pm

I love the fact that someone has taken the time to write all this! I love Zen Habits!

Brian Says:

December 28th, 2008, 14:42 pm

Mining plastic? Haha, wtf?

Kristine Says:

December 31st, 2008, 13:59 pm

I think the problem is that everyone wants to “change the whole world”. I mean, tackling things that are too large. Worrying about what the government should be doing, how the government is doing badly. Thinking about what can make the economy better, blah blah blah…

The point of the article, in my opinion, is that YOU should change. Meaning each one of us. “Think small, act big.” It amounts to much. It’s a shift of perspective from all the negativity into a more optimistic outlook.

I think the suggestions in this article is great. It only means that “we can only do so much” in this lifetime, in our range of control. And this much, we can do. If we all do it, it amounts to a staggering change in the world.

Chris Says:

May 15th, 2009, 8:21 am

All great points, and I’m sure they would have a dramatic impact on resource utilisation and the environment.

But what about clean power? Even if I buy less stuff, I still have to have a roof over my kid’s heads. What about the electricity and the heating (god, the heating!) that comes from those?

Over 20% of all power generated (mostly from nasty coal plants - even still today) goes to the residential market. That amount can be reduced 80% easily (and 100% if we really try) with simple, proven solar, geothermal and wind technologies.

Solar power is the future!