I agree with much of what you said, but you're still using phrases like "can be completely eliminated." (emphasis mine) Maybe I view scarcity differently than you do. While I agree with the need for sustainability, and I'm very frustrated with how much governments screw up the world (making hemp illegal is a good example), to me, scarcity has to do with human ambition, which is boundless and will never be equal among humans (unless our future looks like Brave New World or 1984). Some may want to vacation on the moon or mars and they are willing to work hard and create value for millions of people in order to earn the right to meet that ambition. Does RBE suggest we should deny them that? Doesn't that sound like authoritarian control? I'm all about protecting the environment, but I think there has to be balance. When things get too expensive (such as oil), other options will arise via market forces. Until then, the pain simply isn't great enough for most people to care.

I think a connected world is part of the solution. If a family with dying, mal-nourished children showed up on our doorstep this afternoon, you better believe we'd offer them some food from the fridge instead of stepping over them to head out to a restaurant. The problem, as I see it, has to do with us being so disconnected as a species. If it happens "over there" then it's out of sight, out of mind.

Again, there are aspects of RBE that really interest me, especially the parts that want to recapture the concept of "economizing" our economy instead of promoting planned obsolescence for profit, etc.