Trotsky's Ghost
17th December 2007, 06:01
This is an aspect of Marxist theory I always took for granted, but a debate with a friend earlier tonight led me to checking out some numbers and assuming I've interpreted them right, some interesting/depressing results. That's assuming I'm interpreting them right, which would be foolish to assume because I'm mathematically challenged and don't happen to speak the esoteric tongue of economics exceedingly well. So I'm appealling to all you smart people on these forums to help me make sense of this stuff. Don't laugh if my questions are stupid. I am stupid. When it comes to this stuff that is.
Per capita GWP also increased in 2006, to $9,975.17 This is a growth of 2.7 percentless than total GWP growth because world population increased by 77 million people.18 Yet GWP per capita does not reflect the vast disparity in GDP per personeven when these figures are in purchasing power parity terms. In the United States GDP is $43,356 per person and in Japan it is $31,924, for example, while in China the figure is $8,005 and in India it is $3,546.19
Does this mean that under socialism I'll be making $9,975.17 a year?
Clearly, economic priorities must change, as over 60 percent of ecosystem services are being degraded or used unsustainably.22 The ecological footprint of global societya measurement that calculates the amount of land and sea area needed to produce resources, absorb wastes, and provide space for infrastructure, such as roads and buildingsis also increasing each year, with a jump of 2.5 percent in 2003.23 (See Figure 3.)
This most recent measurement shows that humans currently use the resources of 1.25 Earths and are thus depleting the ecological capital on which future populations will depend.24 As economic growth accelerates in both highincome and low-income countries, so does the depletion of ecological capital. Indeed, at the current consumption levels of high-income countries, the world could only sustainably support 1.75 billion people, not the 6.5 billion living on Earth today.
That doesn't sound good at all...Does this mean that even if I am making $9,975.17 a year Earth is still royally fucked?
The full article can be found here: http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5456
Per capita GWP also increased in 2006, to $9,975.17 This is a growth of 2.7 percentless than total GWP growth because world population increased by 77 million people.18 Yet GWP per capita does not reflect the vast disparity in GDP per personeven when these figures are in purchasing power parity terms. In the United States GDP is $43,356 per person and in Japan it is $31,924, for example, while in China the figure is $8,005 and in India it is $3,546.19
Does this mean that under socialism I'll be making $9,975.17 a year?
Clearly, economic priorities must change, as over 60 percent of ecosystem services are being degraded or used unsustainably.22 The ecological footprint of global societya measurement that calculates the amount of land and sea area needed to produce resources, absorb wastes, and provide space for infrastructure, such as roads and buildingsis also increasing each year, with a jump of 2.5 percent in 2003.23 (See Figure 3.)
This most recent measurement shows that humans currently use the resources of 1.25 Earths and are thus depleting the ecological capital on which future populations will depend.24 As economic growth accelerates in both highincome and low-income countries, so does the depletion of ecological capital. Indeed, at the current consumption levels of high-income countries, the world could only sustainably support 1.75 billion people, not the 6.5 billion living on Earth today.
That doesn't sound good at all...Does this mean that even if I am making $9,975.17 a year Earth is still royally fucked?
The full article can be found here: http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5456