Americans are really forced to be greedy, which is important to understand. First world controls center on sprinkling fairy dust (money) and consume the population in preparing people to gather it. People will sacrifice their health, identity, compassion and freedom for the hierarchical sense of safety in abstract social distinction.

This isn't greed, gluttony or what people want, it's leadership training. We can't afford air-conditioners, children need more time with parents, we need to put on sweaters, there are no clear sidewalks and there aren't good bicycle paths to work. People need time, opportunity and the resources to be healthy. It could start with public places, making our public places conform to the behaviors we would like people to follow at home. Our teachers, doctors and medical professionals should be demonstrating they know how to be healthy. This is true leadership.

People living in remote areas that don't have abundant access to resource need to be an example of what we can achieve and not who we feel sorry for. We need to quit believing there is an energy efficient city we can box people in to make them manageable. The problem with the Walmart solution is it's boring and teaches consumption. People enjoy and take better care of the things that they make. We need the time-consuming advantages of do-it-yourself struggle and social interdependence.

We are nowhere near an age of global affluence leave alone glut. True, on the average, there is surplus savings in emerging markets and outrageous overconsumption in the West, but this is combined with large patches of dire poverty in the developing world. Thge imbalances have enabled America to continue living beyond its means, and a dramatic downward adjustment in ITS consumption path (not that of the world) is required. The current mess in financial markets prove that the West will not perform this downward adjustment on its own. It will have to be forced on the West. And the IMF, the World Bank, UNCTAD, OECD, BIS, WEF etc are in no position to force it (The WEST), by moral suasion or otherwise, to do the paibful adjustments.

The first step to doing that is to brutally put an end to the dollars' artificial position as the world's only reserve currency. Asia, in particular, has been too complacent in allowing 'non-regionals' at the Asian Development Bank to slow its agenda of macroeconomic convergence and the emergence of a common Asian currency that would be a store of value of choice for global reserves. Asia (inclduing West Asia) has also too long allowed its hard-earned reverves to be invested in US Treasuries whose underpinning real assets had been mortgaged overly heavily to finance the American over-consumption and waste, with the result that about US$900 billion of Asia's hard-earned US$3 trillion of reserves has been wiped out through the depreciation of the US dollar during the past two years alone.

The consuption path of the US has to be adjusted downwards dramatically, but, in addition, the COMPOSITION of that consumption has to be reconfigured even more dramatically. The gap between rich and poor and their consumption patterns has widened in a horrendous manner during the past decade. Consumption of luxury goods and services (palatial homes, crazily exotic dishes at hyper-sized glamour parties, fancy cars, dream cruises, etc.) by a small percentage of the population comprising the hyper-rich has grown tremendously, while the basic necessities of hard-working family heads struck with natural catastrophes (as exemplified by the Katrina hurricane case) have taken years to reconstitute. This adjustment in the composition of the consumption aggregate in America will cause severe social strains; add to that the downward shift in the consumption path, and one sees why America resists a change in the pattern of development.

The economic and financial leaders of the world must take a lead in forcing a change in this pattern. For example, the crazy purchase of weapons, reportedly US$ 20 billion by Arab Gulf Cooperation Council member states, during Bush's recent trip is such a treacherous blow to the poorly-paid slave-labour wealth creators of that region, who have migrated from Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Philippines, while the profit goes to feed the gluttonous in America and it is unclear whether the enemy that the purchasers of these weapons have nightmares of using them against are not precisely those poor wealth creators.

While Jason is right that this article does contain several demonstrably false claims it is still worth commenting on the basic assumption of it. Is environmental growth antithetical to environmental sustainability. The answer is no. As countries becomes more proserous they are more willing to sacrifice their income for higher environmental standards. There are several exceptions to this rule, most notably global warming. But over the last 30 years environmental indicators have shown vast improvements in first world countries.

Mr. Gerson wrote "the crisis of prosperity is growing -- but it is still better than the alternative." He is aware that the prosperity of today could rapidly become poverty tomorrow - but he doesn't seem to be warning us to do something. He mainly wants to point out that global capitalism creates wealth, and that critics of capitalism need to admit that they have gotten it wrong. If global warming and resource depletion continue at the current rate, the "golden age" of global capitalism will be a very short period with a tragic end.

Dr. Ali Ettefagh has gotten it right - education is the key. We need to develop new models of development and consumerism and move ourselves off the present self-destructive path.

"However, a society that insists on spending more on war than on health and education cannot be considered sensible."

19% of fy 2007 budget was spent on defense
20% spent on social security
14% on medicare
13% on welfare
10% on medicaid
3% on education (keeping in mind education systems are run almost entirely by states)

Add up only health and edcuation expenditures and you get $760.8B spent health and education vs. $548B spent on defense.

Add in the money spent on poverty programs/wealth transfer and you get $1.7 TRILLION vs $548B for defense.

If you're going to be published by a supposedly credible newspaper, the least you oculd do is 5 minutes or so of research and not spout complete untruths. As far as I am concerend you have zero credibility now, and there is no reason your opinion should be valued over any of the other kooks who post in this paper or post on these boards. To you and them, facts (and the truth) just get in the way of your arguments.

with the wealth that UAE such as dubai,abudhabi,qatar etc could lift the poor neighbouring arab countries first and then the rest.what are they doing with that money-golf course for the westerners.I was their in 60s and it was all desert. now using desalination sea water for extravagant project.where is the muslim brotherhood?Allah gave wealth to these small sheikhdom to squander?

It is always better to nuke some one in the morning, not the afternoon....this way, you can get more CNN coverage!!! Afternoon nukes ruin a good lunch.

Otherwise, it is a nice article!