TED Conversations

Arthanari Chandrasekaran

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

In a tightly coupled, highly critical ecosystem like our earth, which one is more important? Stabilize or Growth.

There are people in this world and there is money in this world. But still there are lot of problems and disconnects through out the world. The major reason for this is see is the people who have or are in control of majority of money are contributing vast amount of the available resources only for growth and very little fraction of it for the stability of this earth.

I see in one point in the Earth people are not receiving basic needs like food, cloth and shelter and on the other point of earth is a place whether people spend millions of dollars in creating genetically altered silkworms which produce brightly colored cocoons for luminescent silk thread.

I understand that growth is extremely important but not at the cost of less stability.

What i suggest is just for one single year if we make a list of all the investments and only choose those that support stability of this world and make the entire population of the earth enjoy the basic needs that they are struggling to achieve and once we are all with our basic needs then focus on the growth it would be an awesome world to leave for our kids. Can we do this painful process for our kids to have a happy life.

Topics: basic needs government growth people stability
+2
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb

    Debra Smith 200+

    • 0
    Jul 25 2012: I guess I believe that you have to stabilize to grow so stability is first to me. And this is quite telling because those strokes destroyed my balance and I feel like I will not truly grow until I have gained it back.
  • thumb

    Arthanari Chandrasekaran

    • 0
    Jul 2 2012: What disadvantage do you think the world is going to face if we just reduce the investment made to outer space projects by 10% and spend it for the enhancement of the earth in first place?
    • thumb

      griffin tucker 10+

      • 0
      Jul 2 2012: some experiments/projects in space are for the very cause of saving humanity, for instance seeds, plants, and other organic material species could/can/are/will be stored in space in order to prevent the loss of certain species necessary to survive for in case of things like the 2023/2040 asteroid designated to possibly hit earth.

      other methods of saving humanity's poor are accomplished via defence forces or humanitarian aid charities. while humanitarian aid charities in theory should not be needed at all, i firmly believe this is due to lack of education.

      education. education. education.

      give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a life-time.
  • thumb

    Stewart Gault 30+

    • +1
    Jun 26 2012: I fully agree with the concept but maybe not the methods. Yes I want to help fix LEDCs economies but I also want a space manned space mission to Mars.
    Something Neil Tyson brought up on a talk show, the amount of money isn't the problem in the world, it's how it's being distributed. In America there was a bank bailout of $850 billion dollars. Now that's more than NASAs entire budget over the past fifty years.
    Now imagine if we could just solve all this economic chaos in the MEDCs and then start investing in the advancement of our species. Reducing poverty, ending hunger, providing clean water, good accommodation. Whilst also going to Mars, curing X,Y and Z and inventing all sorts of crazy technology.
    • thumb

      Arthanari Chandrasekaran

      • 0
      Jul 2 2012: So how do you think we can make the government understand this concept and what kind of methods would we adopt to take this forward.
Showing all 5 comments