WTF Happened in 1971? (2019)

Post by benlivengood » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 6:45 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #210

tomp wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And energy is a massive component in the price of almost everything we consume. Is it really? What would be different if energy was much cheaper? Would we have more advanced rockets or robots or phones? Better CPUs? More and cheaper housing built in dense cities? Cheaper education or medicine? More job security? Even more food? I realize that energy is an important input into some industrial processes, but I don't…

It was only a single point of the OP's that you're targeting but I have to agree (I agree with other OP points though). Would a lower energy cost bring wages up? No reason to believe that would be the case. Would it lower the cost of goods so that at least the working poor could have a better standard of living? Perhaps, but how much of the cost of a good is the energy, how much labor and raw materials? Would we see…

Post by Miner49er » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 6:45 PM UTC

CryptoPunk wrote: post #234

telaelit wrote: post #150

The beginning of the failed neoliberal politics.

Social welfare spending, as a percentage of GDP, has massively increased since 1972. On the regulatoey side, major regulatory agencies, including the OSHA and EPA, were also created in the 1970s. Every broad-based measure of regatory burden shows increasing since 1971. So if anything, post 1971 United States has demonstrated the failure of abandoning economic liberalism in favor of central economic planning.

Post by justinzollars » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 6:47 PM UTC

CarelessExpert wrote: post #258

justinzollars wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you are going down with the ship. Its completely irrational to believe you can print yourself into prosperity. I could just as easily point to Tech stocks, Tesla, gold, silver, bitcoin or any other inflated commodity as a counterpoint.

> Its completely irrational to believe you can print yourself into prosperity. This is clearly a straw man. MMT provides an alternative theoretical basis that might explain the apparent disconnect between money supply and inflation: https://www.investopedia.com/modern-monetary-theory-mmt-4588... > According to MMT, the only limit the government has when it comes to spending is the availability of real resources, like…

Post by nwah1 » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 6:52 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #25

The author obviously wants you to believe that it was the abandonment of the gold standard, but there are several other theories that have more credence with mainstream economists. The early 70's was the start of a horrible period of stagflation: stagnation coupled with inflation. Some do blame the loss of the gold standard, but the leading theory is the OPEC oil crisis. Others blame market regulations, the EPA was p…

Post by AlexandrB » Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 6:53 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #246

bryanlarsen wrote: post #25

The author obviously wants you to believe that it was the abandonment of the gold standard, but there are several other theories that have more credence with mainstream economists. The early 70's was the start of a horrible period of stagflation: stagnation coupled with inflation. Some do blame the loss of the gold standard, but the leading theory is the OPEC oil crisis. Others blame market regulations, the EPA was p…

> The author obviously wants you to believe that it was the abandonment of the gold standard How is that obvious? I see a lot of data, but not many conclusions. And even the data presented doesn't seem to me to present a particularly compelling case that it was the abandonment of the gold standard, among the many, many historically pivotal things that happened in or around 1971, that caused the systemic changes that…