There are infinite ways of arranging this planet and its resources.

No, a finite set of atoms has a finite combination of arrangements.

If you meant that there is a very large number of combinations, I would like to point of that many of these does not support human life or indeed life at all.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

"Synthesised?"

Synthesised.

The premises are simple enough:

1. The notion that the marginal utility of consumption does not decrease as consumption increases is broadly repugnant to common sense.

   It is also theoretically incompatible with standard utility theory:¹ If the marginal utility of individual goods decreases with increased accumulation, then obviously the marginal utility of the last good you purchase is less than the marginal utility of the first good you purchase. Eventually this marginal utility, ceteris paribus, goes to zero.

2. But all else is not equal: As the marginal utility of consumption decreases, producers will ramp up the propaganda effort in favour of the goods they produce - their identity as producers depends on the urgency of the desire for their products.
3. Massive propaganda works.

If you do not believe this, try watching commercial-free TV or no TV at all for a month or three, then sit down in a comfortable chair and watch a whole night's worth of programming on some commercial station. Any minimum of introspection during the following day or two will permit you to identify synthesised desires, as you pass through your ordinary grocery shopping.

Individuals can, of course, opt out of these synthesised desires (whether by not watching ads or by training themselves to deconstruct them).² But this does not negate the point that desires can be (and are) synthesised, and that the majority of the population does not, in fact, opt out of these synthesised desires.

There are infinite ways of arranging this planet and its resources.

So God finally got around to repealing the laws of thermodynamics? I must've missed that memo.

- Jake

¹Utility theory may or may not be applicable to a reality-based theory of economics, but the credible alternative models of consumer behaviour I've seen admit even more readily to synthesis of desires.

²Although given the volume of advertisement that is permitted to pollute our streets, opting out of advertisement completely is not the easiest thing in the world.

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

I believe there is 12 step programmes for those afflictions.

Now for the serious point Jake was making. Have you never heard the phrase "I never knew I needed <consumer product>"? See, for instance, Things you didn't know you needed published in the  - "Gadgets" section of the NZ Herald this year...

The prize was a celebration of the "stupendous creativity of the people tasked with inventing constantly inflated new wants for us to want," says Naish. "It's a monument to perverse imagination and needless consumption."

In his book, Enough: Breaking free from the world of more, Naish suggests strategies for avoiding the mental pressure to acquire more needless consumer goods. "We're beset with messages that tell us that the stuff we've got now isn't good enough - that we need more stuff, that we need stuff that's somehow improved, with ever more extras and options.

"It's all got to be new, too, rather than, ugh, so last year. We've got fixated on producing and consuming stuff that has no future. It's only there to take our money on its brief trip from factory to landfill."

The only downside with all this: that motorised icecream cone appears to have completely sold out.

Ooo shiny!

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

Schau in mich, Harno

Make it as simple as possible but not simpler (Albert Einstein)

Political debate is, always and everywhere, about frames...

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

But these are rather philosophical questions. I prefer to start with more down to earth problems.

E.g.:

Fine, but these are very, very short-run strategies--or tactics, really.  They matter provided you have mid-term and long-term strategies you can implement if you succeed short-term.  

But everything you are doing is not actually sustainable.  The paradigm--system--you are working in will end (crash) soon.  You do not have centuries here--more like decades or years.  Indeed, economic crisis will worsen significantly--and you will feel the repercussions in Germany--in just a few months.  

The Fates are kind.