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

Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 299 posts

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#201

Post by numpad0 »

mc32 wrote: post #36
eatsyourtacos wrote: post #8

Honestly 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…

I'm not an economist and don't pretend to be... For thousands of years of our existence, progress was very slow and sometimes we went in reverse in some regions. Economic growth plus innovation resulted in progress and pulled the 99% who were not wealthy out of utter subsistence poverty over the last few hundred years. Also, we cannot grow forever (unless we figure out how to colonize other planets). We have to figur…

We can financially grow forever even in a negative population growth, so long that inflation continues and "imaginary" growth counts towards growth. You can add more and more hype to products and let novelty take over "real" price to keep economies bloating, and to keep ahead of competitors as well by circumventing price rigidity. It's a horrible thing that cause wealth concentration because hype is easier to create for resourceful, but the point is, it's reality than possibility.

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#202

Post by [deleted] »

bequanna wrote: post #200
wahnfrieden wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the externalities of resource use are arguably reaching catastrophic tipping points that will hit before depletion is an immediate concern

> catastrophic tipping point This is pretty funny as people have been calling for some kind of human-caused apocalypse since forever. It must be human nature for some to believe such things. To see ourselves as inherently sinful, wicked, separate from nature and deserving of punishment. Climate alarmism has become a religion of sorts for many. Giving them maybe something to believe, maybe some purpose. At least somet…

[deleted]

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#203

Post by danielmarkbruce »

strongpigeon wrote: post #63

What Daly is saying really is more that growth as currently measured (i.e. GDP growth) isn't a good metric and is one that can't go on forever. He's not (in his own word) agains't growth of wealth, but he's rather asking whether GDP growth is the metric to optimize for. Saying we're bound by the laws of thermodynamics is a bit silly in my opinion. It's almost like saying we shouldn't invest in solar panels as the sun…

I'm not sure increases in efficiency result in increased GDP.

To make that as clear as possible - imagine someone created low priced robots tomorrow that could make all your food, entertain you, build you a house etc etc for the one time fee of $100. They were incredibly efficient, consuming $10 worth of energy every year.

GDP would fall off a cliff.

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#204

Post by strongpigeon »

bnralt wrote: post #175
strongpigeon wrote: post #63

What Daly is saying really is more that growth as currently measured (i.e. GDP growth) isn't a good metric and is one that can't go on forever. He's not (in his own word) agains't growth of wealth, but he's rather asking whether GDP growth is the metric to optimize for. Saying we're bound by the laws of thermodynamics is a bit silly in my opinion. It's almost like saying we shouldn't invest in solar panels as the sun…

I don't know, I read the interview and it honestly wasn't clear what he was saying. He never mentions any particular policy that should be enacted (other than tariffs against other countries that don't follow our lead), and the interviewer doesn't seem interested, opting instead to ask questions about cosmology. It's a bizarre interview. His issue seems to be mostly with overconsumption of resources. But instead of c…

I do share your gripes with the interviewer. However, I think that Daly’s questions regarding the ultimate end (meaning purpose) of economic growth are worth pondering. Basically what are we trying to achieve through economic growth? Growth for the purpose of growth is kind of meaningless. But if growth is for improving welfare, why isn’t that the focus, rather than GDP numbers? (And if it isn’t for welfare, what is it for?)

That being said, the interviewer then asking “what’s the meaning of life” was really pointless and unnecessarily edgy. I also agree that not trying to come up with any policy proposal is kind of intellectually lazy and has some strong “I’m just the idea guy” vibes.

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#205

Post by [deleted] »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #169
mongol wrote: post #9

Is not growth inevitable? I hear criticisms of it but is it not what happens automatically when there is competition for resources? I can't really see what the alternative would be. I mean, ideally if you could just agree with everyone in the entire world that no one should strive for something better, we could stay where we are, but reaching such agreement seems impossible. And let's say instead we change direction…

degrowth is a movement currently and a worthy one. Answer this question : How many common things around your house do you use weekly, monthly or maybe a few times per year? How many other houses on the block have the same things? How much waste went into allowing you the comfort of using that when you want. Would it be much less comfortable to have to "check it out" from a neighborhood tool-shed? What about instead o…

[deleted]

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#206

Post by danans »

caramelcustard wrote: post #182
gremlinsinc wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

degrowth is a movement currently and a worthy one. Answer this question : How many common things around your house do you use weekly, monthly or maybe a few times per year? How many other houses on the block have the same things? How much waste went into allowing you the comfort of using that when you want. Would it be much less comfortable to have to "check it out" from a neighborhood tool-shed? What about instead o…

So basically: instead of just having what you need, just, like, hope that your neighbour has what you need. Great plan, i also hope that the neighbours are going to always follow me (just in case i'm going to move elsewhere). "Sure you'd have to logically create 'centers' around town close enough to walk, or have a neighbor maybe deliver if you're elderly or something, but there's convenience in having more options i…

> So basically: instead of just having what you need, just, like, hope that your neighbour has what you need. Great plan, i also hope that the neighbours are going to always follow me (just in case i'm going to move elsewhere).

A lot of new neighbors are nice folks. Invite them over for a bbq, and they probably will let you borrow their belt sander or angle grinder. It's a nice way to build community.

I do a fair bit of DIY work, and am a big user of my local public library's tool lending center, where I can borrow everything from a giant table clamp to a wet table saw. It's amazing. Public tool lending libraries have a history going back to the 1940s, and the first was thought to have started in Grosse Pointe, MI [1]

For more expensive stuff (i.e generators, bobcats), there are local tool rental shops.

I still own everyday tools (drills, circular saws, hand tools), but I don't need to maintain/store anything too large.

Or have all your own tools - that has big advantages too, especially if you are constantly using them as part of a hobby or job.

1. https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=14...

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#207

Post by bnralt »

strongpigeon wrote: post #204
bnralt wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I read the interview and it honestly wasn't clear what he was saying. He never mentions any particular policy that should be enacted (other than tariffs against other countries that don't follow our lead), and the interviewer doesn't seem interested, opting instead to ask questions about cosmology. It's a bizarre interview. His issue seems to be mostly with overconsumption of resources. But instead of c…

I do share your gripes with the interviewer. However, I think that Daly’s questions regarding the ultimate end (meaning purpose) of economic growth are worth pondering. Basically what are we trying to achieve through economic growth? Growth for the purpose of growth is kind of meaningless. But if growth is for improving welfare, why isn’t that the focus, rather than GDP numbers? (And if it isn’t for welfare, what is…

I definitely agree that it's worth thinking about things like scarcity, our ultimate goals, what kind of societies we're creating, etc., and that an over focus on GDP growth or personal wealth is a problem. I've often talked about how much of our GDP is wasted on things that have a net negative value for society (but a positive value for GDP).

The issues I have with Daly's approach, though, is in placing the blame on growth and acting as if a steady-state economy is the answer. Even if we froze the economy today, we'd still be emitting too much CO2 and we'd still be wasting tons of time and resources on things that have a net negative value on society. Being simply opposed to growth doesn't solve the real issues. It just unnecessarily alienates people who would otherwise be willing to address the actual problems, and also places you in opposition to good forms of growth that don't cause these problems (and may help solve them).

And while I think it's important to think about the big questions, I don't think it should the focus of economists. The role of economists isn't to decide what our values and goals are, it's to give us an insight into how we can best pursue them after we decide those values and goals ourselves.

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#208

Post by xyzzy123 »

gremlinsinc wrote: post #169
mongol wrote: post #9

Is not growth inevitable? I hear criticisms of it but is it not what happens automatically when there is competition for resources? I can't really see what the alternative would be. I mean, ideally if you could just agree with everyone in the entire world that no one should strive for something better, we could stay where we are, but reaching such agreement seems impossible. And let's say instead we change direction…

degrowth is a movement currently and a worthy one. Answer this question : How many common things around your house do you use weekly, monthly or maybe a few times per year? How many other houses on the block have the same things? How much waste went into allowing you the comfort of using that when you want. Would it be much less comfortable to have to "check it out" from a neighborhood tool-shed? What about instead o…

This is the TechShop business model, and they went out of business :/

I think fundamentally the problem is that we have been operating for a long time in an economic environment where "stuff" is relatively cheap, but land and labour close to population centres are relatively expensive.

Very often the cost of the "co-ordination labour" required for sharing exceeds the "use value" of the item to the user. Ensuring the equipment is checked in and out, isn't stolen, people aren't lasering PVC in shared space, doing inventory, answering questions etc all take time.

If you have situations where people are interacting with each other (e.g. forums or same physical space) you will also have community maintenance to deal with (codes of conduct, dealing with problem behaviour and interpersonal conflict etc).

There are also issues around transfer of liability, you need an organisation that is responsible for testing and tagging, ensuring the equipment is in a safe operating condition, that users understand safety procedures - plus the policy/governance to make sure this stuff is happening and the audit tracking to prove it.

These sorts of things all sound like "paper cuts" but together they can easily kill what seems like an obviously good idea.

I am involved in 2 co-operatives (a school and a neighbourhood community centre) and there is a LOT of effort required to stand up and maintain shared capabilities. The legal / admin / compliance burden also only keeps growing.

It's not that it can't be done, but the details matter and it's a lot gnarlier than it looks.

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#209

Post by fleddr »

ekkeke wrote: post #71

Can someone explain to me why we can't keep growing until the death of the sun? Growth doesn't mean more materials or natural resources necessarily, a microprocessor uses some of the cheapest and most abundant materials and uses less of them now than before. Why might we not continue to find new designs and discoveries that allow us to make ever more efficient and complex objexts, that in turn are worth continually m…

Your exact example is explained in the article, might try reading it. A computer getting faster is development, not growth.

Re: Pioneering economist says our obsession with growth must end

#210

Post by Red_Leaves_Flyy »

seoaeu wrote: post #126
gryn wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sure the end result (microprocessor) don't use too much resources, but the process that produces it does. you can keep improving but a point you reach physical and economist limit that you just can't outrun. the second thing economist usually talk about a growth in profit, and that can't always go up.

“There exists a limit to growth” and “we are remotely close to hitting the limit” are vastly different claims.

There are infinite limits on growth. The death of almost all plankton is one such limit. Look up.
Post reply on HN