Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~I'-'I <br />-----, RESOURCES <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />J <br /> <br /> <br />Some findings and conjectures from recent researctRECEIVrn <br />into rc!'.ource development and use <br /> <br />Who! is not good lor 'he swarm is not good Jor 'he b...e.-Marcus Aurelius: <br />Meditariom. VI, c. 170 <br /> <br />At a two-day forum conductel/ by Resources for the <br />Future in /971, papers wert' presented as the hllsi.t for <br />public discussion of the apparl'rrt con!fic( emerging be- <br />lween two societal objecth'es: providing energy to meet <br />the needs of future economic growth mul prul/;'cting the <br />quality of ,he natural envirollnumt. The e.lcn."ts j1l this <br />issue are take" from four of the eight papers, all 01 <br />which are being puhlished for RFF nt'." month by The <br />Johns llopki1l5 Unil'ersity PreS!>' ;11 Cl hook edited by <br />Sam H. Schurr, entitled Energy, Economic Growth. ami <br />the Environment. <br /> <br />EVEN WITH TI-lE AID of a rise of 55 percenl in <br />GNP and 34 percent in real per capita personal <br />income from 195910 1969. we have found in the United <br />States thaI our inroads on social problems have not <br />kept pace with our rising expectations and aspirations. <br />Imagine the tensions between rich and poor. between <br />black and white. between blue-collar and while-collar <br />workers. between old and young. if we had been forC"Cd <br />to finance c\'en the minimal demanJs of the di!o.aJ. <br />\'antaged out of a no--growlh nalional income instead <br />of a one-third increase in that income. <br />A specific example may be instructi\'e. B..:tween 1959 <br />and 1969 the number of per~ns below the poverty <br />line fell from 39 million to 24 million. from 22.-i per- <br />cent to 12.2 percent of a rising population. The im- <br />prO\'emcnl came from a 3 percent increase in pnxluc. <br />ti\'il)' per )'ear, a drop in unemployment from 6 percent <br />to -l percent. shifts of the poor from lower to high..:r <br /> <br />OCT 1 81972 <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />cow. '.... f[R <br />lroHSERVM10N &.r:/,RQ. <br /> <br />NUMBER 42 RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE, IN ..~.., :'SEPTEMBER 1972 <br /> <br />GROWTH AND PRESERVATION <br /> <br />income occupations and regions. and an extraordinary <br />growth in government cash transfers. from $26 billion <br />in 196010 o\'er $50 billion in 1970. Everyone of lhese <br />faClors was in some way the direct outgrowth of. or was <br />associated with or facilitated by. per capita ecnnomic <br />growth. Given their huge stake in gro.....th as a source <br />of the .....herewithal and much of lhe will to improve <br />rh~'ir 101. Ihe poor could be pardoned for saying, "Damn <br />lhe e:(t~rnalities. full speed ahead." <br />Looking ahead. Ihe Council of Economic Advisers <br />projected a rise in real GNP (in 1969 dollars) of <br />roughly 5325 billion, or 35 percent. from 1970 to 1976. <br />In lhe face of claims on these increases rhal .arc already <br />staked out \)r clearly in the making--claims thaI leave <br /> <br />---~~.:: ' <br />\ ~_:- <br />"'-~~-: <br />, f ~ <br />" <br /> <br />-'~-e... <br />-,~. -" <br />.,. 1 ~ <br /> <br /> <br />/'" <br /># <br /> <br />2701 <br />