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

GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

ourworldindata.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 47 posts

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#11

Post by jdimov10 »

kfk wrote: post #6

And if you ask a person in the 18th century if we could grow GDP 30+ folds while increasing various folds also the world population he would say... you are going to finish all the Earth resources and die before you even get to a tenth of that! It's just to say: 1. productivity is always very misunderstood by people (hence Malthus); 2. poverty is better fought with growth, not re-distribution of wealth

3. Learned people are consistently and dramatically underestimating the capacity of Earth's "limited" resources to support a growing population.

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#12

Post by Retric »

kfk wrote: post #6

And if you ask a person in the 18th century if we could grow GDP 30+ folds while increasing various folds also the world population he would say... you are going to finish all the Earth resources and die before you even get to a tenth of that! It's just to say: 1. productivity is always very misunderstood by people (hence Malthus); 2. poverty is better fought with growth, not re-distribution of wealth

BS. Per person GDP did not grow 30+ fold.

A hunter gather lifestyle from 10,000 years ago takes ~0.5-5$/day in food assuming everything else [ed: produced 10,000 years ago] has zero value. US Per capita GDP = ~125$ / day. Actual growth per year is on the order of 0.04% / year

PS: Remember meat more than 1$/lb. For much of human history per capita GDP by todays measurements was actually dropping.

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#13

Post by JamesBarney »

kfk wrote: post #6

And if you ask a person in the 18th century if we could grow GDP 30+ folds while increasing various folds also the world population he would say... you are going to finish all the Earth resources and die before you even get to a tenth of that! It's just to say: 1. productivity is always very misunderstood by people (hence Malthus); 2. poverty is better fought with growth, not re-distribution of wealth

Redistribution has very little effect on growth except at extreme levels.[0]

Over the last 20 years the U.S. economy has grown 25% but the income for the bottom quintile has stagnated.[1][2]

I would agree growth is probably the best medicine for the third world but the IMF shows it's not at odds with redistribution.

I would strongly disagree that we can solve poverty in the 1st world using growth. We have two options for replacing the $7,000 the bottom quintile missed out on in the last 20 years because of rising inequality. We could redistribute $7,000 to the bottom quintile or grow by 25%. Redistributing $7,000 is doable. I don't know of any policies, or even any set of policies that would increase the size of the economy by 25%. This is even more insurmountable given that in recent history the gains from growth have not been distributed equitably. We would need to see an order of magnitude more growth, an increase in the economy of 250%-500% before the poor would be substantially better off.

[0] - https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdf [1] - https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/A939RX0Q048SBEA [2] - https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/famil...

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#15

Post by jp555 »

Retric wrote: post #12
kfk wrote: post #6

And if you ask a person in the 18th century if we could grow GDP 30+ folds while increasing various folds also the world population he would say... you are going to finish all the Earth resources and die before you even get to a tenth of that! It's just to say: 1. productivity is always very misunderstood by people (hence Malthus); 2. poverty is better fought with growth, not re-distribution of wealth

BS. Per person GDP did not grow 30+ fold. A hunter gather lifestyle from 10,000 years ago takes ~0.5-5$/day in food assuming everything else [ed: produced 10,000 years ago] has zero value. US Per capita GDP = ~125$ / day. Actual growth per year is on the order of 0.04% / year PS: Remember meat more than 1$/lb. For much of human history per capita GDP by todays measurements was actually dropping.

> assuming everything else has zero value

Ah, so if you ignore almost everything, you have a point. Like, for example 99% of the people on the planet. Because there is no way a hunter-gatherer system could support our population.

Not to mention I for one think not dying of the common cold has quite a lot of value.

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#16

Post by kfk »

JamesBarney wrote: post #13
kfk wrote: post #6

And if you ask a person in the 18th century if we could grow GDP 30+ folds while increasing various folds also the world population he would say... you are going to finish all the Earth resources and die before you even get to a tenth of that! It's just to say: 1. productivity is always very misunderstood by people (hence Malthus); 2. poverty is better fought with growth, not re-distribution of wealth

Redistribution has very little effect on growth except at extreme levels.[0] Over the last 20 years the U.S. economy has grown 25% but the income for the bottom quintile has stagnated.[1][2] I would agree growth is probably the best medicine for the third world but the IMF shows it's not at odds with redistribution. I would strongly disagree that we can solve poverty in the 1st world using growth. We have two options…

If you want to look at things from a humanitarian perspective, then sure, let's talk re-distribution. But it should be in form of education and competitive markets (free milk quotas, anyone?). I struggle with the idea of making war to make peace (aka "democratization"). I also struggle with domestic re-distribution through "citizen income", because it makes life worst for all that pay taxes and those that are not "citizen" (foreigners, immigrants, etc.).

If we want to help the "poor", then we should make things more competitive, starting with relaxing immigration policies as much as possible...

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#17

Post by Retric »

jp555 wrote: post #15
Retric wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BS. Per person GDP did not grow 30+ fold. A hunter gather lifestyle from 10,000 years ago takes ~0.5-5$/day in food assuming everything else [ed: produced 10,000 years ago] has zero value. US Per capita GDP = ~125$ / day. Actual growth per year is on the order of 0.04% / year PS: Remember meat more than 1$/lb. For much of human history per capita GDP by todays measurements was actually dropping.

> assuming everything else has zero value Ah, so if you ignore almost everything, you have a point. Like, for example 99% of the people on the planet. Because there is no way a hunter-gatherer system could support our population. Not to mention I for one think not dying of the common cold has quite a lot of value.

No, I am dramatically understating the value of the average person from 10,000 years ago not the other way around.

Child care for example has actual value which is part of current US GDP. A bow, tent, or clothing constructed using methods from 10,000 years ago has real world value today. But, I am calling all that 0 and just looking at food.

Also, this is per capita GDP, having more people does not mean peoples standards of living automatically increases.

PS: The common cold was not an issue back then as the population was to low to spread it around. In fact a large chunk of diseases only showed up as population density increased.

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#18

Post by littletimmy »

How much of this comes at a cost of people being unhappier?

Back in the time of hunter gatherers, humans "worked" for a few hours a day. The rest of the time was spent socializing and in leisure. It is fair to say they were happier compared to, let's say, an African American debt-laden minimum wage worker in the US today.

Do we really need economic growth?

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#19

Post by tantalor »

Isamu wrote: post #5

Good summary. For readability I recommend a logarithmic graph, it helps to bring out the structure of the graph more. Not as dramatic maybe for people who are not used to reading graphs, but I hate to see a graph that is just a thin line stuck to the bottom followed by a sudden upward rocket. Not very readable to my eyes.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jTlkr4KqnYBaqxzg5Rte...

Re: GDP growth of humanity over the very long run

#20

Post by adamc »

littletimmy wrote: post #18

How much of this comes at a cost of people being unhappier? Back in the time of hunter gatherers, humans "worked" for a few hours a day. The rest of the time was spent socializing and in leisure. It is fair to say they were happier compared to, let's say, an African American debt-laden minimum wage worker in the US today. Do we really need economic growth?

Well, except that people got sick and had very limited medical treatments, and their lifespans were shorter. How do you weight that?

Also, how do you weight the absence of toys and creature comforts?

Post reply on HN