TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 14 °C Tuesday 21 May, 2013

Column: Economic growth won’t save us – in fact, we’d be better without it

The manic pursuit of growth tipped Ireland into economic crisis. It’s time to look elsewhere for inspiration, argues sufficiency expert Anne B Ryan.

Anne B Ryan

IN THIS TIME when businesses are failing and people are losing their jobs and in some cases their homes, it may seem crazy to criticise economic growth.

But the kind of growth we saw in recent decades did not provide long-term security, nor is it capable of doing so in the future. In the drive for economic growth at all costs, we brought monetary wealth to a few. At the same time we lost sight of limits, destroyed ecosystems and created huge global and local social injustices. The culture surrounding growth also encouraged many of our worst human capacities: indifference, cruelty, denial, cynicism, a narrow materialism and short-term thinking in an effort to compete with others.

For years in Ireland our cultural tendency was towards misery, then in recent decades towards excess. Now, however, is the time to reflect on how we might create a culture, economics and politics of just ‘enough’.

Embracing the beauty of enough is counterintuitive for many, because modern English has degraded the meaning of the word, equating it with poverty and mediocrity. But in Irish, the phrase go leor has a dual meaning: enough and plenty. It is time we restored that understanding about the richness and satisfaction that sufficiency can bring.

Enough has an immediate personal value. If one can work out what is sufficient in life, it is a way to be content – not in the sense of tolerating poor quality, but in the sense of knowing what is valuable and what is not, and relishing the good things we have already. Having this sense can provide security in times of boom and recession.

Enough helps us cope with the world as it is, but it is also good for us morally and ecologically. If we apply enough to our health, finances and personal energy, we automatically restrict the kinds of damage we might be unwittingly doing in the wider world. Practising enough allows us to get what is needed from the world to sustain human well-being, but without taking too much from individuals, or from social and natural systems. It is also about how to give adequately to the world around us. A sense of enough could give at least some of the earth’s ecosystems a chance for renewal and at the same time foster social justice.

Enough is about creating many different channels for human growth and expansion. A culture of enough would judge human progress in diverse ways – not just in the quantitative sense of increasing GDP. Such a culture would always attempt to balance the considerable scientific and scientific achievements we humans have made with an increase in our moral, ecological, spiritual and emotional development. Humane and ecologically sound cultures would be a mark of progress and human advancement.

However, most of our elected leaders, along with orthodox economists, are currently focusing on recovering the kind of economic and financial systems that have just broken down. Even if it were desirable to get back to such systems, it is unlikely that we can. We are near the end of cheap oil, have immanent crises over water, and face the huge challenges of climate change.

The philosophy of enough provides a sane basis for moving into the future, and underpins many proposed frameworks for economies of sufficiency and genuine sustainability. One of these frameworks is a universal basic income.

Financial security for everyone

Under a formal scheme for Universal Basic Income or UBI (also called Citizens’ Income), every citizen and legal resident receives a regular and unconditional cash income from their state, from birth to death, whether they engage in paid work or not. This replaces social welfare benefits, the minimum wage, child benefit and the state pension as we currently know them.

Ideally, a UBI would be sufficient for each person to have a frugal but decent lifestyle without supplementary income from paid work.

UBI creates social inclusion by means of equal basic financial security for all. It benefits small enterprises, family farms, anyone whose paid work is precarious, the self-employed, the elderly, the young, unpaid carers and those doing other types of unpaid work. It gives all kinds of employees increased bargaining power within their jobs, because it reduces their reliance on income from paid work. It benefits employers since it acts a kind of employment subsidy, albeit one that goes directly to the worker rather than the employer. It also gives those currently on welfare a way out of the poverty trap: if they get decent paid work, they can take it without losing benefits. UBI fosters social solidarity and reduces resentment and divisions among groups that currently experience different levels of income security.

The proposal is not new; there is a huge body of work and thought behind it since the middle of the eighteenth century. In this country, work has already been done to demonstrate the economic and financial viability of UBI. One creative and ecologically sound source of finance is to tax the use of earth resources such as land, airwaves and water, while simultaneously reducing the tax on labour. Earth resources belong to the whole community and anyone who wants to use them should pay a fee to the community, represented by the state. The state would then issue a payment directly to individuals. In Alaska, for example, residents receive a direct dividend from the profits from the state’s oil resources.

A new citizenship

The function of government, in the philosophy of enough, is to regulate for basic securities such as climate, income, energy, transport, food and water, at the broad parameters of economy and society. Within those parameters, people are encouraged to engage in all sorts of creative and ecologically sound enterprises. In the absence of politicians and policies that provide basic securities, ordinary people stand in the gap between what is and what might be. We all have the capacity to be leaders in bringing about cultural change. Acting together, we can educate elected leaders and lawmakers.

An appreciation of enough can help us to get away from the obsession with getting back to ‘business as usual’. Imagination is crucial in this project of developing our capacities and resources for enough. Enough facilitates a consideration of what true advancement would look like for the human race. The philosophy supports hope and possibility, rather than cynicism, denial or despair. It can help us to survive in a difficult present world; it can help us to critique and resist what is wrong, and it can help us create new social forms and exciting personal ways to live.

Anne B Ryan is currently a lecturer in Adult and Community Education at NUI Maynooth. She is a trustee of Feasta, the Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability.

Read more detail about the philosophy and practice of enough at enoughisplenty.net. You can find more information about UBI at bien.org. To find out about a fledgling movement for UBI in Ireland, email basic.income@nuim.ie

Read next:

Comments (15 Comments)

  • “But in Irish, the phrase go leor has a dual meaning: enough and plenty.” – beautiful observation

    Reply
  • Excellent stuff. Refreshing and imaginative. We really all stop being shopping centred.

    Reply
  • Obviously she hasn’t heard anything of our €18bn budget deficit. Call me an “orthodox” but last time I checked, the only way to boost our tax returns is through GROWTH.

    Growth isn’t just banking, trading and reckless lending.

    Look at our multinational sector. IT and pharmaceutical companies that are creating new technologies that will ease our lives and in many cases save them. This is growth, but GOOD growth.

    I don’t see why good growth should be discouraged. If it’s creating the newest computer systems or life changing medicine, I don’t say enough is plenty. I say plenty isn’t enough!!!

    Reply
    • Damn right. If we all just stopped, where would we be? It is human to try harder, to solve problems, to compete. Any economic system that ignores human nature has failed in the past and will fail again.

      Reply
    • Growth, however, can’t continue forever. Yes, innovation is wonderful! But an ever-expanding economy isn’t the same as research and innovation. You don’t need to conflate the two.

      Reply
  • 06/07/11 #

    Sounds very interesting in theory. I agree that economics focus on growth distorts society but the universal benefit sounds like a variation of communism, and we all know how that doesn’t work.

    I don’t see this happening in practice, at least not in the foreseeable future. It would work in a post scarcity society where energy & resources are plentiful (like Iain M. Bank’s Culture novels). And I doubt the singularity is going to happen in our lifetime.

    Reply
    • As far as I’m aware (and it’s been a few years since I studied these things in any depth), the UBI is closer to an ideal of associative democratic than communist ideas. It might seem similar at first glance, but the two ideas do have very different bases and different structures.

      Reply
  • I have enough of being stripped bare by the government. Tell the ass holes who robbed our country blind that they have more than enough and to give back the surplus. One persons enough might be different than another’s.

    Reply
  • This is the kind of article I like to read. Good work!

    Reply
  • Darren 07/07/11 #

    And thus ends the monologue from the communist party.

    Reply
    • Odd that. The only Communist parties I know of don’t actually advocate Communism. It’s a common misconception brought on by people who adopt titles and names for themselves – did you know for example that the far right uber nationalist Nazi party was actually officially called the National Socialist German Workers’ Party or Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei in German. They saw themselves as Socialist!!! People look at the word Communist and they immediately see images of the USSR and the People’s Republic of China. But neither of these countries were ever communist. China was Maoist and is now a weird combination of free market economic practices combined with state-controlled economic legislation within a Maoist political framework. The Soviet Union was Stalinist-Leninist in politics which basically meant one political party, no private enterprise and state-dictated economic goals. True communism does not allow for state control of anything – it’s in the name (from French commune). True communism is about local communities providing for themselves and the betterment of all within that community. The modern world dictates that you must do everything in your power to have more, or be better, than your neighbour – even if it is to their detriment (and if you think I’m exagerating just take a look at the Irish health service where we have removed cancer care for over 500,000 people in the last couple of years – i.e. no cancer care unless you’re willing to go without seeing loved ones and travel thousands of kilometres every year for all the people of Donegal, Leitrim, Sligo, Roscommon, Cavan, Monaghan, Longford, Westmeath, Louth, Mayo, and all that simply to give a select few even more money for them to further dictate how we can live our lives).

      Reply
  • Lots of info and good pod casts on this and other subjects related to this article, go to

    http://www.criticalmassfilm.com/

    Much more sensible and upbeat than my doom and gloom

    Reply
  • Most of the things discussed in this article will probably come about, when it is forced on people by circumstance, I don’t see a critical mass taking it up any time soon, but of course there are those who might be suspicious about the priesthood heralding it in advance, right minded clairvoyants or latent commissars?

    Reply
  • Logically speaking, economic growth can never be sustainable on a finite world. However turning the tide against this fallacy is quite another thing. Its not about changing a single policy, however radical, It’s is about how we redefine the whole world in the face of an opposition that has been practising against just such an event for the best part of a thousand years.

    Motivating people by dangling shiny things in front of them only works effectively by first creating the conditions. Create a system of hierarchy, by fear and force and create the conditions for inequality. Inequality creates the conditions for the acceptance and promotion of indifference to human need and enthuses the selfishness of psychopathy amongst the people. So well trained are we that we even become complicit in, and the agents of our own oppression, incarceration, metering out violence upon one another, targeting the unemployed and believing that we are responsible for not only our own debts but also the debts of the private banks.

    The enforced changes in our economic structure over the last 3 decades has not led to economic nirvana, it has led to economic ruin. We now know that no economy can survive simply by expanding the money supply without the corresponding increases in production. But we also know that we live in a world oversupplied by other players. We now understand that folly of economic expansionist policy but are too scared or lack the imagination to do otherwise.

    Some people may still think that by scrimping, saving, selling every essential and non essential asset to the highest bidder that we can beat this depression, but not so. That’s not how neoliberall policy is designed to work. We are in our creditors control and now they can make their moves. This debt is not a transitory condition or a mistake, it is a permanent structural device of neoliberal policy, end of story.

    At some point the majority will understand that this has not been some terrible mistake and that instead things went according to plan, but then it will be too late. Always in the back of our mind we will hope that things are as they are presented to us. We will push the reality out of our minds but it will make little difference. This is New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, This is disaster capitalism at work.

    Reply
  • I have enough

    Reply

Add New Comment