Comment: Peter has many good solutions listed in his book

(See in situ)


Peter has many good solutions listed in his book

But he makes almost as many bad assumptions.

First off, in the technologies he supports, he lists GMOs, cultivated (lab grown) meats, desalination filters and PV as the world's saviors. While these techs do exist and would make a difference, they completely discount either the natural way nature works or they rely on lots of manufacture from scarce materials. Neither is sustainable.

Secondly, he strongly advocates that the will (money) to do the great breakthroughs we need will come from the techno-philanthropists funding X-prize type contests. He fails to realize that genuine breakthroughs lead to a great deal of intellectual property that simply will not risk going public that way.

He also feels that tech-unemployment is a problem to be solved by government handing out to the underprivileged.

Hopefully, he will soon become enlightened by learning that a much better way would be the decentralization of both money and production so that monopolies/oligopolies and the corruption they exude simply cannot exist. After all, if everyone can locally make 99% of what they need and they stopped spending money outside their community, how could banks and their derivative governments and corporations exist?

I hoped that "Abundance" would get to this point in the last third of the book but then I turned a page and he ended it with no explanation. That remaining THIRD OF THE BOOK is filled with graphs and references!