Opinion — the global economic system is based on the creed of cancer: endless growth. It’s impossible to maintain steady growth indefinitely on a finite planet. This isn’t ideology. It’s simple mathematics.
By Maplestime News Desk | Canada | September 19, 2026
Sources: The Dasgupta Review, Mark Carney — Value(s) | Last updated: September 19, 2026
Key Takeaways
- Steady growth is exponential growth with a predictable doubling time: 1% a year doubles in 70 years, 3% in 23 years
- The test-tube parable: at 59 minutes the tube is half full — at 55 minutes it was only 3% full, and nobody saw the crisis coming
- British economist Partha Dasgupta’s 2021 review showed the economy is built on human innovation while ignoring nature’s services entirely
- Mark Carney’s Value(s) notes Amazon the company is valued in the tens of billions while Amazon the rainforest counts for nothing until it’s mined or logged
- The challenge isn’t growing a too-large economy further — it’s shrinking it while sharing its benefits more equitably
The Mathematics of Impossible Growth
Steady growth in anything — the resources we use, the garbage we make, the size of our population, city limits, the economy — is “exponential growth,” with a predictable doubling time. Growth at one per cent a year doubles in 70 years. Two per cent in 35 years. Three per cent in 23 years. Four per cent in 17.5 years.
Now consider a test tube, which stands for the planet, filled with food for bacteria. We add one bacterium — which represents us. That bacterium divides every minute: one cell at time zero, two at one minute, four at two minutes, eight at three. At 60 minutes, the test tube is full of bacteria and there’s no food left. A 60-minute growth cycle.
When is the test tube only half full? At 59 minutes. At 58 minutes, it’s 25 per cent full. At 55 minutes, just three per cent full.
If at 55 minutes one bacterium suggested they had a “population problem,” the others would respond, “What the hell have you been smoking, Jack? Ninety-seven per cent of the test tube is empty and we’ve been around for 55 minutes!”
Suppose at 59 minutes the bacteria realize Jack was right, and in desperation throw money at bacterial scientists who, in less than a minute, quadruple the food supply with three more test tubes. (That would be like finding three more planets just like Earth that we could move to easily.) Saved, right?
At 60 minutes, the first test tube is full. At 61 minutes, the second is full. At 62 minutes, all four are full. By quadrupling the food and space, they bought two extra minutes.
How can we find more air, water, soil, or biodiversity when they’re fixed or declining? The planet is finite, and every scientist in the conversation agrees we’re already past the 59th minute. All the talk about our need for more is accelerating us along a path to oblivion.
What We Call “Progress”
Yet we’ve come to define “progress” as economic growth. Ask any politician or corporate executive how they did last year and they’ll talk about growth — or no growth — in jobs, GDP, market share, or profit. Nobody wants to stop “progress,” so we fail to ask the important questions: What is an economy? What is it for? Are there no limits? How much is enough? Are we happier with all this stuff?
What kind of system enables a handful of individuals to become obscenely wealthy while hundreds of millions barely — or don’t — survive?
The growth obsession is impossible to fulfil in a finite world, and the global economy is already too big to be sustainable. The challenge of an already-too-large global economy is not to grow even bigger but to shrink — while finding more equitable ways to share its benefits within and between nations.
The Economy Ignores Nature Entirely
In The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review 2021, British economist Partha Dasgupta showed that the economy is not anchored in nature — it’s built on human innovation and productivity. Nature’s services that keep the planet habitable are left out entirely: pollination of flowering plants, nitrogen fixation in soil, photosynthesis that removes carbon and adds oxygen to the atmosphere, water filtration, composting of dead plants and animals to create soil, and more.
Without these natural services, the planet would be uninhabitable for animals like us. Yet they’re not even acknowledged in the economy.
As Mark Carney notes in his book Value(s): Building a Better World for All, Jeff Bezos’ giant company Amazon is valued in the economy in the tens of billions — while Amazon the rainforest, the largest, most biodiverse ecosystem on the planet, contributes nothing to the economy until it’s mined, logged, dammed, or converted to grow soybeans, cattle, or cities to serve human interests.
Related: We have changed our mind about corporate welfare
Related: Newfoundland Wind Storm 2026 — Weekend Gusts Knock Out Power Across the Island
We Need New Ways to Measure Progress
The bacteria in the test tube couldn’t see past the 55th minute. We’re the bacteria, and we’re past the 59th.
We need new ways to value and measure “progress” — ones that count the pollinators, the soil, and the rainforest as assets instead of externalities. Until the economy acknowledges what keeps the planet habitable, every growth target is just a faster walk toward a full test tube.
Maplestime will provide updates on the environment, the economy, and sustainability as announcements are made.
Have a tip about the environment in Canada? Email [email protected]
Have a correction? Email [email protected]
If endless growth is mathematically impossible, why is every politician still chasing it — and what should replace GDP? Tell us in the comments. And share this with every Canadian tired of ‘progress’ that costs the planet.
Enjoying Maplestime? Support independent Canadian journalism — no paywall, no corporate owners.
