Like I said, "efficiency" is never defined in the article, and once I realized that I knew there was going to be a problem. I suppose there's probably some ways of defining it that I agree with, or at least that seem relatively okay to me, but on the other hand, it's awfully limiting to think of economics only in terms of efficiency. Or growth for that matter. But then again, what other opinion do you expect from a big bisexual fence-sitter like myself? "Dammit, your definitions are too limiting! Whine whine whine! See some shades of grey already, fuckers!"