Look at software, most of it all uses the same commodity hardware to run but it gets more powerful and complex every year. But by rearranging the same bits of hardware we can get a basic calculator or matlab. The productivity difference between the two is massive and becomes more so every year. Can't we always have new circuits, new software, new FPGAs, new rocket designs, new and better algorithms or even hardcoded solutions calculated once and distributed, that don't use more resources but by being more complex increase productivity?
Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
71–80 of 299 posts
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#72Decent Ultimate End would be: defense spending world wide=0
If growth becomes a zero sum game as “Economists” like this one would like, you better hope you live in country with a defense budget>0
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#73Consider the Soviet Union. During its early development the working day was progressively shortened, reaching seven hours by 1929 [1]. Certainly, many people would consider "working less" a nice alternative to endlessly pursuing growth. But then something funny happens. Adolf Hitler comes to power in Germany and the Soviet workday gets longer [2].
The reason that we pursue growth so doggedly is not because we have a collective wish to do so. It's because we are afraid that $Enemy is going to grow faster than we are, for various values of $Enemy. The solution cannot be merely political; it must be geopolitical.
1: https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1929-2/churches-closed/churche...
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_industry_in_World_War_I...
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#74Honestly I think this is obvious to anyone who is not financially motivated to think otherwise. The biggest problem is the rich have created a system in which people's future (retirement) is basically linked to "the market" growing over their lifetime. And the hopes that if they get lucky enough with the market they can retire early (or at all). This system of course is built 100% on governments/employers not wanting…
The system is totally unsustainable... unless we're willing to have a society of debtors, noone is going to buy homes from the boomers. The majority of retirement the average middle class has is their home.
If history repeats itself, real estate valuations should revert to a long term mean which would make homes somewhat more affordable. There are some early indications that this is happening.
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Frankly the only other currently implemented alternative is state funded pensions, which instead of the market rely on an ever expanding population of workers paying their taxes to fund it and is not exactly better. In countries where population growth levelled off it seems to have recently resulted in raising of the retirement age ever higher. It's basically a state run ponzi scheme. I frankly wish we had a tax free…
isn’t that a 401k? I wish they raised the limits.. it’s woefully inadequate after years of inflation.
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
recent graeber/wengrow research shows your understanding of human progress is way out of date
Care to elaborate?
When Hobbes said life would be 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short' he was referring to life outside of the outcast's society.
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#77Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#78The pandemic made it clear that elites are ok with mass death and debilitation. It may not be a conspiracy, but people in power simply don’t care. So the logical conclusion is that a lot of the most vulnerable people are going to perish, the hardier ones will hobble by in filthy conditions like what you see in old age homes today (but there will be a gun around if they wanna quickly end their misery). Structural chan…
Severe pandemics are actually really bad for elites, since large scale death increases the value of employees. See e.g. "The Great Leveler" by Scheidel.
The lockdowns and staying home clearly affected the labor market, but deaths within the labor demographics were not that high.
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#79Honestly I think this is obvious to anyone who is not financially motivated to think otherwise. The biggest problem is the rich have created a system in which people's future (retirement) is basically linked to "the market" growing over their lifetime. And the hopes that if they get lucky enough with the market they can retire early (or at all). This system of course is built 100% on governments/employers not wanting…
One can argue for a well-fare state that provides all guarantees one wants.
But you're flipping the issue here. First, you have a risk of not aging. But most people are inevitably going to age and retire. This risk is inherent to the individual. Now we can offload that risk to the government (please, it's not the other way around), but it's going to have costs. And I think offloading it to the government is even riskier, because governments make stupid decisions and are subject to massive corruption.
Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
recent graeber/wengrow research shows your understanding of human progress is way out of date
Care to elaborate?