Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 343 posts

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#211

Post by mech1234 »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #200
mech1234 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is a mischaracterization. Notably, the graph provided at the second link covers a time period ending in 2008, the depths of the great recession. Things are numerically a bit better than depicted there. The overall story is the same- the bottom and the top of the worldwide income distribution is where things are growing fastest, but the middle is growing slower. It is certainly growing though. 10% real medi…

That's 10% total --over 40 years-- not 10% annualized. In 1979, the median real weekly earnings was $335. Today, it is $362. The actual calculation, 362-335/335 = 8.05%. Over 40 years, 8.05% is 0.2% annualized growth. Let's compare to the S&P 500 index. From Jan 1979 to Dec 2019, the S&P has returned 746% (2,401% including dividend reinvestment) -- both figures adjusted for inflation (as is the FRED data). Annualized…

Another well-regarded source is the congressional budget office. The data linked below from 2014 is even more optimistic than my previous data because it uses household income instead of individual income. (because the distribution of individual incomes is skewed and growing even more skewed, median household incomes grow faster than individual incomes). The CBO data shows 26.1% growth in the incomes of middle quintile households since 1979. This growth is larger if you look at the lowest quintile, include taxes and transfers, or do both. The data goes up to 2014 and would show larger growth still if it went all the way to 2019.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53597

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#212

Post by luckylion »

ryanmercer wrote: post #166
luckylion wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An example would be to remove the $50b per year water subsidies for the beef industry, and make consumers pay for the approximately 4000 gallons of water required to produce a pound of meat in the grocery store. Isn't that a fancy way of saying "eating meat should be a privilege for the wealthy"? The point of mass production isn't just that it's produced in masses, it's also about being affordable by the masses. Al…

>Isn't that a fancy way of saying "eating meat should be a privilege for the wealthy"? It absolutely should. https://newrepublic.com/article/120915/american-west-drought... - 90% of of Nevada's cropland is used for hay, 90% of Montana's, 60% of Utah's - 50% of California's water usage goes to livestock feed Etc etc. This is unsustainable, period. This is causing groundwater depletion (and has for decades) that will t…

> Meat is a luxury man. A luxury.

Next up "plants are a luxury, the poor can eat processed insect protein, it's fine and contains all the nutrition they need".

I don't have a problem with "let's eat less meat", I just don't like the thinly veiled "fuck the average people, they shouldn't eat meat while I and my buddies will continue to do so thanks to our lavish income".

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#213

Post by BlueTemplar »

bawana wrote: post #193

Prosperity without growth. Only possible if money has a half life. This slow devaluation of money over time would allow stable prices, growth and more granular control of the economy. This kind of money could be electronic and only minted by the fed as FED-COIN. The blockchain would be essential in tracking and controlling each fedcoin. An interesting solution might be for the fed to give fed coin to people as a UBI(…

Bitcoin (and the like) are almost completely perfectly traceable* : everyone perpetually sees the accounts and money movement of everyone else.

*there are the N=>M persons transactions (aka "mixers") that throw a spanner in the works if you want to follow the money...

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#214

Post by thegabriele »

bilekas wrote: post #138
weeksie wrote: post #136

The one fundamental reason why growth is so important is that without growth, the economy becomes a zero sum game. In order for you to get more money you must take it from someone else since there is only a fixed amount. A low growth world is one where we plunder each others' wealth, not one were the incentives are aligned with building new industry. That's why productivity increases are so important. Without them, i…

Does what you're saying imply that growth can be perpetual ?

It should last until we get to strong AI or fusion energy, both i believe will have too much an impact to be again in the hands of the fews (perhaps a global war will be in order before).

Then, the problem will be about literally physical space on earth.

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#215

Post by tryptophan »

bilekas wrote: post #138
weeksie wrote: post #136

The one fundamental reason why growth is so important is that without growth, the economy becomes a zero sum game. In order for you to get more money you must take it from someone else since there is only a fixed amount. A low growth world is one where we plunder each others' wealth, not one were the incentives are aligned with building new industry. That's why productivity increases are so important. Without them, i…

Does what you're saying imply that growth can be perpetual ?

It only needs to hold up for the next 100-500 years. No need to talk about perpetuity.

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#216

Post by BlueTemplar »

mech1234 wrote: post #55

Lots of people underestimate the degree to which economic growth fuels good life outcomes for wide swaths of people. -Even though many people live paycheck to paycheck at many different income levels, enough income growth can get you out of a paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle and enable you to have real financial autonomy. -One thing that has stuck in my mind over the last few years is that one of the worst outcomes of…

> one of the worst outcomes of unemployment is when people feel useless as a person- leading to psychological problems and behavioral problems

This is more the outcome of de-socialisation, which unemployment tends to cause. (Compare with retirement.)

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#217

Post by throwawayhhakdl »

bawana wrote: post #193

Prosperity without growth. Only possible if money has a half life. This slow devaluation of money over time would allow stable prices, growth and more granular control of the economy. This kind of money could be electronic and only minted by the fed as FED-COIN. The blockchain would be essential in tracking and controlling each fedcoin. An interesting solution might be for the fed to give fed coin to people as a UBI(…

That’s only really a hard problem because of physical cash. If we’re already going electronic only, one could simply use negative interest rates to solve it.

When cash is physical people can choose to put it under their mattress instead of a negative interest rate bank.

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#218

Post by _2d30 »

raducu wrote: post #147
andersonvieira wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You probably live a comfortable life and is mostly satisfied with what you have so you see no need for more growth. Now imagine someone had the means to implement this same idea 200 years ago. We probably wouldn't have water and sewage treatment, fast transportation, modern medicine, electric light and all the appliances that come with it, internet, etc. I find it disingenuous to dismiss all these as trinkets. This w…

I think you are being disingenuousby saying 200 years. Except medical advances and science, I'd be all willing to trade ALL the economic "growth" in the first world of the last 20 years if we could also revert wars, climate change and destruction of habbitat for the last 20 years. Oh, and by "growth" I mean the insane asset price inflation and concentration wealth, strengthening of the military-industrial complex, mo…

> Oh, and by "growth" I mean the insane asset price inflation and concentration wealth, strengthening of the military-industrial complex, monopolisation by corporations, too big to fail banks and financial institutions.

Well if we are just totally changing what growth means...

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#219

Post by BlueTemplar »

airstrike wrote: post #156
mark_l_watson wrote: post #133

I talk about the effects of limiting GDP-style growth on our lifestyle with my wife. We burn a lot of carbon and use a lot of resources traveling, but on the other hand in our day to day life we tend to buy food in bulk at health food stores, try very hard to avoid using plastic, share one fuel efficient car, etc. Our take is that, for the sake of our grandchildren's generation and generations beyond that, that we wo…

This view ignores the insurmountable truth that humans want more, and if that means their neighbors get less, so be it. I'm not saying it should our shouldn't be like this, just that it is. You're thinking collectively while your neighbor defects and thinks about themselves first.

"One-upping the neighbors" mindset is certainly a problem - but it maybe can be socially minimized ?

Re: Can We Have Prosperity Without Growth?

#220

Post by BlueTemplar »

ryanmercer wrote: post #164
vonmoltke wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An example would be to remove the $50b per year water subsidies for the beef industry Do you have a source for that? Every one I have been able to find indicates that total meat and dairy subsidies are less than that, let alone just water subsidies for the beef industry.

I doubt it's a remotely accurate figure. However, cattle consume a LOT of water. 20~ gallons per head per day is a fairly accurate figure and the US has something like 95 million cows. So with farming and animal husbandry water rights are a big thing. Often water rights will go to farmers/ranchers long before they go to people. So you've got cows, with a conservative estimate, using 500 billion gallons of water a yea…

And who knows if that water even comes from renewable sources...
Post reply on HN