211–220 of 767 posts
As a European I have sometimes feeling that we are skanzen of the world. Don't get me wrong. It's much better than to be battleground like before.
Highly relevant: "The Evitable Conflct" https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/24zvhe/the_world_di...> by Isaac Asimov
All “growth” in gdp seems to go to rich people. Normal people have seen stagnant wages and increased costs from the owners. Why should I care if gdp isn’t increasing when I don’t see any gains whether it does or not?
Does all growth go to the same rich people, or do more people become rich?
Also does this comparison factor in uk’s departure?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"- Your access to crazy advanced cancer treatments that are making progress at almost miraculous paces" If things were improving "exponentially" like you claim, our lifespan would be accelerating and these "miraculous" treatments would allow us to live 100s of years. What's actually happening is our lifespan is not increasing, and in some years has been decreasing. >>maybe you're depressed But if these "miraculous" "…
It's plausible that the world is demonstrably better in pretty much every way, but there is an overwhelming amount of propaganda telling us to believe otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s true, but as cold hearted as it is, they didn’t have to let them in. Poland sure decided to pick and choose. The Greeks are not having it either. One day there will be a massive wave of climate refugees rushing out of the uninhabitable zone and there will be US soldiers in the border guard towers with flamethrowers. The US will welcome immigrants when it suits them and roast them when it doesn’t. As I am in Berl…
> One day there will be a massive wave of climate refugees rushing out of the uninhabitable zone Are you talking about Canada?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PPP cannot be used to measure growth at all on any level. https://www.oecd.org/sdd/prices-ppp/purchasingpowerparities-... Also GDP, GDP PPP and every other economic benchmark is calculated using CID - constant US dollar; specifically to avoid skewing results due to fluctuating exchange rates.
*Real GDP, chart is nominal...
> This swing is the main driver of this whole thing and means that yes, PPP is superior for looking at growth.
It is technically incorrect on every level. As GDP PPP fundamentally is unsuitable for calculating growth.
The GDP of Greece pre crash was $355B today it’s $219B, it’s GDP PPP pre-crash was $341B today it’s $389B if you think the Greek economy grew over that period or that today it’s a better place to live in with 11% unemployment and youth unemployment approaching 40% with the entire population having its wealth cut by nearly half than pre-2008 Greece then I have an island in the Aegean to sell you…
Note this chart shows nominal dollars, not PPP-adjusted. The EU has certainly kept up with the US when looking at PPP GDP from 2008 to 2022: US grew from $14.8T to $25.5T EU grew from $14.3T to $24.3T What that means is that the prices of goods are inflated in the US compared to similar goods in the EU. That's all. Want something interesting? Look at China who grew from $10.0T to $30.3T over the same period (!) Sourc…
EUR/USD in 2000: $0.92
EUR/USD in 2022: $1.072
US GDP in 2000: $10.25T, 2022: $23.31T, growth of 227%
EU GDP in 2000: 7.86€ T, 2022: 15.81€ T(27 countries, excluding UK), converted to USD:
EU GDP in 2000: $7.23T, 2022: $16.94T, growth of 234%
Growth in the EU from 2000-2008 has probably (didnt crunch the numbers on this) been higher than in the US and then lower since around 2010. Also take into account that while growth has been slow (or even non-existent) in France, Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain those countries make up less than half of the population of the EU. Eastern european countries on the other hand have grown very strongly thanks to starting from a very low base.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
" GDP PPP can increase whilst your economy contracts. " Still, if PPP GDP increases, with all else being equal (eg. stable population) it would imply the standard of living is increasing. That is why PPP GDP captures a more accurate measure of the real world. Said another way, what truly matters isn't "GDP growth", but changes in purchasing power/quality of life.
>> it would imply the standard of living is increasing. In USA, GDP includes the explosion of numbers of hospital admin staffers, energy prices doubled, and production of munitions which are given to Europe. That GDP does not increase my quality of life.
I agree. As I said in my first post: "prices of goods [eg. healthcare] are inflated in the US compared to similar goods in the EU". So concretely, if healthcare prices increase in the US, but remain constant in the EU, this would increase the PPP GDP of the EU.
What I meant to write is: if the PPP GDP increases in the EU faster than in the US, with all else being equal (eg. stable population) it would imply the standard of living is increasing faster in the EU than in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The evidence is math. Even if you have a flat rate and everyone in the population is equally benefitted with social services, there are 50% of people who are contributing less than they take and 50% who are contributing more than they take. That looks even worse when we relax the flax rate assumption (most countries have progressive taxation) and the amount of social benefits a given segment receives (poor people ten…
> 50% of people who are contributing less than they take Do you have a citation for that broad brush number for what they take?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most of your entry-level jobs were supposed to be for highschool and college kids working part time. This is some soft language hiding some bad assumptions. "supposed to be" - what does this mean? because it's a lot more interesting...low skilled jobs, are probably what we're going to be talking about. However, it's not the 1950s anymore. eg Staffing a movie theater is not a part-time job (which you would know if y…
> If you have a fulltime job, the minimum wage is intended to allow you to survive This is the issue - the idea that minimum wage is supposed to be "livable" is a modern notion. Unskilled labor probably shouldn't be livable. If someone can be trained to replace you in a few minutes (i.e. unskilled labor), then the truth is your labor is not worth a lot. We need more people moving up into skilled labor. It's really ha…
The only way for that to work is to have a slave population, because why should a living and breathing human being waste their time and their life with work that doesn't even sustain them? The concept of "unskilled labour" is a lie. Otherwise you could hire dead people from the graveyard.
> Highschool and College kids don't need a living wage.
Do you have any good arguments as to why you should be allowed to have a living wage?