Given a fixed amount of resources, this isn't a choice but a matter of fact. You cannot do one without causing the other. This then becomes deciding what the lowest level you're comfortable having your fellow countryperson living at with the requisite cost to those with the means.
People don't consume resources, they consume goods and services. The IPhone is valued at a much higher price than the sum of raw resource components it contains.
Economic growth is what allows us to increase the amount of goods and services people can consume from a given set of resources. Economic growth is why a single farmer with modern equipment can produce more food than a hundred subsistence farmers could a few centuries ago. Economic growth is why we can have real-time high-definition video conversation with somebody anywhere in the world.
The more obstacles we put in the way of growth, the slower we improve our productivity, the slower we grow the amount of value we can extract from the resources we have.
I would counter that it isn't economic growth that enables the technology of today, but technical innovation that drives economic growth that enables either larger populations or a more wealthy population. Given unequal societies, economic growth is only beneficial for those who are already benefiting from the system and serve to increase inequality, but given an equal society benefits all. Therefore instead of worrying about economic growth, I propose that we invest in technical innovation that will drive economic growth as a byproduct and legislate for a more equal society to benefit the most amount of people.
that's not true. Especially if you view it from the angle of absolute poverty.
I wouldn't care that Bezos has another bazillion dollars due to economic growth - because with said growth comes more economic opportunities for the poor. Where once they had no economic value, there could be from being an amazon deliverer.
Where once there was no economic value as a subsistence farmer, the outsourcing of labour has generated economic value for underdeveloped nations. SO much so that China is now threatening the hegemony of the USA!
Economic growth lifts all.
Economic growth does lift all, but in an unequal society disproportionately lifts those who are already well invested in it. It will barely improve the lives those at the bottom with no equity in the market, perhaps with slightly better consumer-grade technology, but nothing in terms of income, social safety, or health that comes with climbing out of poverty.
Lastly, some pies are not growing.
All technology is a science, i think you are trying to draw is the distinction between fundamental science that discovers laws of nature, and indutrial kind that figures out the best process for manufacturing stainless steel.
>> "Often times technology precedes the science," This can happen by freak accident, but generally science has to find and researched some law of nature before you can take advantage of it to develop some product or manufacturing process.
People are not equal in many ways - I don't see why we always focus on wealth. What about influence, what about looks, what about education, what about family life quality, etc...
I completely disagree - increasing total wealth allows new things and is more important than how people judge their wealth relative to others.
You just restated your opinion without providing any new arguments.
> People are not equal in many ways - I don't see why we always focus on wealth. What about influence, what about looks, what about education, what about family life quality, etc...
Most of these things can't be redistributed.