Live data from Hacker News

Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

economist.com

61–70 of 297 posts

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#62

I find the S&P500 to be interesting as a demonstration for currency risk. Denoted in US, it went up ~18% or so. For me as an EUR investor, it went up just 4.6% when accounting for the loss of the USD. Comparing that to indicies that usually do not perform that well, Euro Stoxx 50 is up ~22% and MSCI Emerging Markets ~21%.

That logic is flawed. The end value and ROI for S&P500 is the same regardless of the currency used to display it. It's the same as complaining that the temperature increased more in Fahrenheit than in Celsius. EDIT: The total value is the same regardless of the fluctuations of currencies used to represent the value. Those are two independent issues. Currencies fluctuate even if you keep them in checking accounts with…

This analogy is flawed. The conversion formula between Fahrenheit and Celsius is fixed. Not so for currencies.

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#63
post #47
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s not perfect but probably the best we have. People forgot or simply don’t realize how much worse life was just a couple of decades ago (in terms of nutrition, access to knowledge, clean water, material wealth).

The question is where. Couple decades ago rent in Munich was like 3x lower. While salaries were insignificantly lower with overall lower living cost. Couple decades ago Germany had electronics industry. Now it’s gone. More industries are following. Couple decades ago there were rather isolated Yugoslav Wars. Now it’s introduction into WW3 with active war in Ukraine and hybrid attacks everywhere in Europe. It depends…

Obviously it depends on your point of view. That entire region (India, Pakistan and Afghanistan) still has a lot of work to do.

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#64
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely not the best we have though. People have created all kinds of metrics which measured things in better ways more relevant to our human goals. It's an entire genre of publication in economics and some of them are very popular. It's a choice to ignore them. Also, see what djtango said. It's not that simple.

Similarly it’s a choice to ignore all those KPIs that are confounded. Being pedantic about how we measure progress might create the impression that it’s not about the progress but instead about being right.

Well, being right is better than being wrong, which is what happens when you claim that GDP as a measure of progress is valid. It simply doesn't measure what matter to the majority of humans, which has been argued endlessly already.

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That logic is flawed. The end value and ROI for S&P500 is the same regardless of the currency used to display it. It's the same as complaining that the temperature increased more in Fahrenheit than in Celsius. EDIT: The total value is the same regardless of the fluctuations of currencies used to represent the value. Those are two independent issues. Currencies fluctuate even if you keep them in checking accounts with…

It makes sense if you're looking at it from the perspective of a European investor. e.g. You start with 1000 EUR, convert and buy into an S&P500 fund, wait a year, sell and convert back to EUR. Celsius and Fahrenheit doesn't work as an analogy because the rate does not change over time as it does with currencies.

I think it depends on whether you're planning on holding it in currency or using the currency to buy other things. Does the cost of material goods and services mostly stay the same in EUR, or does it somewhat follow the S&P? If more the latter, then converting to EUR is just a very temporary exchange and its nominal amount doesn't exactly matter.

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#66
post #34
post #9

Do not mistake economic indicators such as GDP or "growth" for meaningful measures of economic health.

I think it’s not perfect but probably the best we have. People forgot or simply don’t realize how much worse life was just a couple of decades ago (in terms of nutrition, access to knowledge, clean water, material wealth).

It's utter trash, it was good when we had industry focused economies instead of service focused ones.

Everybody mocked Russia for having the same gdp as Spain. As it turns out your economy is much stronger when it's focused on heavy industries, steel, mining, oil, &c. Than when it is focused on tourism and other services

One produces value, the other generates money, when shits hit the fan you need energy, the drunk brits coming in your strip clubs aren't that useful anymore

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#67
post #34
post #9

Do not mistake economic indicators such as GDP or "growth" for meaningful measures of economic health.

I think it’s not perfect but probably the best we have. People forgot or simply don’t realize how much worse life was just a couple of decades ago (in terms of nutrition, access to knowledge, clean water, material wealth).

Clean water was a one-time thing and more driven by state action than GDP growth. Fittingly, right now the AI bubble is making access to clean water worse for some, fracking did so too. Nutrition? GDP growth made food harder to access for many people before it got better - city laborers had worse food access than farmers. Still today people are living in food deserts. Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" showed what kind of food unfettered GDP growth actually delivers.

And mere decades ago, life was more or less the same, if not arguably better in many ways.

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#68
post #47
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s not perfect but probably the best we have. People forgot or simply don’t realize how much worse life was just a couple of decades ago (in terms of nutrition, access to knowledge, clean water, material wealth).

The question is where. Couple decades ago rent in Munich was like 3x lower. While salaries were insignificantly lower with overall lower living cost. Couple decades ago Germany had electronics industry. Now it’s gone. More industries are following. Couple decades ago there were rather isolated Yugoslav Wars. Now it’s introduction into WW3 with active war in Ukraine and hybrid attacks everywhere in Europe. It depends…

That progress in India comes as an excuse to weaken their democratic institutions. The fallacy is that Modi is to praise - the progress comes mostly because of enormously positive global trends developed in the past decades, the ones that are now being threatened.

> Couple decades ago there were rather isolated Yugoslav Wars.

A bit of nuance, they ended in 1999, however the whole thing is still influencing Europe negatively and is not as isolated as it seems. Not just there are now seven countries instead of one to consider and negotiate with, a couple of them are utterly disfunctional. Further, two biggest chunks are deeply sunk into nationalism. Far too little effort had been made back then to try to reform the place into a functional system.

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#69
post #9

Do not mistake economic indicators such as GDP or "growth" for meaningful measures of economic health.

Agreed. Long term economic health is always tied to long term social health. We should be, ultimately, trying to look at a broader index than some simplistic view of just money. It is a hard problem though to pin down an index for social health. As soon as we name a measure or index it becomes a target and its value drops. I tried to think of a more 'universal' index, one that could be applied to civilizations in the past and present and the best I could come up with is the healthier a civilization the more people can live together, longer, without killing each other. Not rigorous, but in general when I view history it seems to fit reasonably well.

Re: Do not mistake a resilient global economy for populist success

#70

I find the S&P500 to be interesting as a demonstration for currency risk. Denoted in US, it went up ~18% or so. For me as an EUR investor, it went up just 4.6% when accounting for the loss of the USD. Comparing that to indicies that usually do not perform that well, Euro Stoxx 50 is up ~22% and MSCI Emerging Markets ~21%.

That logic is flawed. The end value and ROI for S&P500 is the same regardless of the currency used to display it. It's the same as complaining that the temperature increased more in Fahrenheit than in Celsius. EDIT: The total value is the same regardless of the fluctuations of currencies used to represent the value. Those are two independent issues. Currencies fluctuate even if you keep them in checking accounts with…

The logic isn't flawed. If you are a European investor, then you care about the returns in your currency, and the fact is your pile of money only grew by 4%.

Inversely, as a US investor, if you invested 100€ in the eurostoxx 50, your pile of money would have grown to about $140 (20% index growth, 15% dollar debasement). It absolutely makes a difference, that's $20 more in your pocket compared to the index.

Your comparison with temperatures is wrong. Celsius and Fahrenheit are fixed units, whereas the value of currencies fluctuate.

Post reply on HN