RE: Agenda Be very carefull of what you say easymoney. You are way out of target here. Have you read the 70's "Limits to growth" from the MIT? You should, there is nothing in there that supports what so ever, a conspiracy, or that even suggests that human development is not sustainable. They used system dynamics to model possible outcomes of the human socio-economic system given different hypothesis. They do conclued that, in the buiseness as usual scenario, the actual economic model is not sustainable; that there might be a collapse of this model if changes where not implemented. Again, it's not about human development but about an economic model we are talking about. This is just another way at appreciating the Malthusien (natural ressources) problem, as did Ricardo, Keynes, Georgescu-Rogen and numbers of great economists. Which, btw, have all acknoledged that there is a problem with the "perpetual growth models" in a finite world, and as of today, I fail to see anything considering the ressource regeneration cycle in our economic models.
On a second point, it is quite obvious to me that human development is not equal to material development, at least when the basic essential needs are covered. So zero growth (in terms of GPD), is absolutely not a synonym of zero progress! It just means the financial institutions might have a problem getting the interest paiment on the virtual money they previously created (diluting our savings in the process!).
Just my 2 cents...but really, read a bit before you fall in the extreme scenarios, easily "understood" by the masses but built on falacious statements and/or associations of so called "information".
Micr1