Actually, while I can see how my statement can be seen as a contradiction, it is actually not. I will explain. There are indeed some resources which are somewhat scarce, and other resources which are damaging to the environment. The purpose of the true sustainability, which is the goal of RBE, would be to evaluate which resources are both scarce and damaging to the environment, and then seek out abundant, sustainable, and non-damaging alternatives for that particular resource. In other words--If a particular good or product is currently made with a scarce or damage planetary resource, then RBE would seek to find an alternative which could be used to produce that particular product, instead of the currently used material. So, that would mean that the product does not have to remain scarce...just produced with different materials. There is actually no scarcity of food or shelter, even now. There is said to be almost 6 vacant houses for every homeless person, and almost half of the food produced every year actually ends up in landfills. Water itself, is not scarce either. There is more than enough water. But, because of pollution of the water...CLEAN water has become scarce. This can be solved by technology designed to clean and purify the water, and with the right technology, it does not have to be costly or difficult. Trees are a finite resource, and several industries have been decimating the rain forests. Part of the reason for this, is that trees take so long to mature, and many countries have made hemp illegal. Hemp would be an excellent substitute for trees, in many products, including paper, lumber, and home building materials. It would even make an excellent substitute for cotton, and makes an even better cloth for clothing and other products. These are just a few of the multitude of examples for how scarcity can be completely eliminated, just by using different materials and resources. In RBE, things would also be produce in kind of a modular way. All parts of electronics, for example, would be standardized, and modular, so that if a modular component of a product fails, you would only need to replace that small component, instead of having to replace the entire product. Upgrading of products would work the same way. This would requite manufacturers of goods to cooperate instead of competing for market share. Working together, the computer industry--for example--would join forces to create the very best possible computers, instead of competing against each other. We would end up with much higher quality goods, than we have now--with a great deal less waste of resources.

Also, I should add, that any market based system requires turnover for its continued existence. This means that market system require goods to break down after a certain period of time. Markets also need to make it cheaper to replace products, than to have them repaired. So, this means that all those broken products end up in landfills. Not only is that harmful to the environment, but it is also a tremendous waste of resources. In RBE, things would be made to last as long as we have the technology in any given time, to make them last...so that fewer products need to be made, and fewer resources need to be used. And, we already have the technology to be able to make goods last a really long time. For example--it would be way too expensive to have to replace or repair the satellites orbiting around the earth--very often. So, those satellites HAVE to be made to last a really long time. The reason the same thing is not done in the market system, is because it requires the turnover to continue its existence--as I have already stated above.