The End of Economic Growth? Unintended Consequences of a Declining Population [pdf]

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Feb 02, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

LatteLazy wrote: post #53

johnchristopher wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I know I'll be selling 20% less widgets in 5 years as population falls, I wont upgrade my widget making machines. Suddenly the people making widget making machines are all unemployed. Isn't it time to switch to plugin making machines then ? Setup a market opportunities study to try and see how to recycle skills, know-hows and professional network?

Maybe at a local level. But not at a national one. If you lose your job, you improve you're lot by finding another one. If you're town has 100 workers but only 80 jobs, no amount of job fairs and networking will change the fact 20 people will be unemployed. That's sort of the issue here: too many people, not enough jobs. And an economic/political system that assumes getting a job is possible for everyone.

Post by redahs » Sun, Feb 02, 2020, 4:46 PM UTC

travisoneill1 wrote: post #24

The important part of economic growth is GDP/capita, not total GDP. And if we are to keep growing GDP/capita without destroying the environment, a population decline is absolutely necessary. Increasing population is only economically beneficial in the most short term sense.

Post by dx87 » Sun, Feb 02, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

mark_l_watson wrote: post #64

I am in a minority, but I would welcome the economic decline that would come with growth reduction if it were accompanied by using less manufactured goods (like cars), more locally grown food, more craft and art locally produced, more travel done in VR (with addition that local guides would be there to talk with you), etc., etc.

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Feb 02, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

redahs wrote: post #63

travisoneill1 wrote: post #24

The important part of economic growth is GDP/capita, not total GDP. And if we are to keep growing GDP/capita without destroying the environment, a population decline is absolutely necessary. Increasing population is only economically beneficial in the most short term sense.

A population decline is certainly not necessary to continue growing GDP/capita. What kind of neo-Malthusian nonsense is that? The economy is operating nowhere near peak performance... at least 1/3 of GDP is lost annually due to private capture of economic rent.

Post by mark_l_watson » Sun, Feb 02, 2020, 5:21 PM UTC

arbitrarylimit wrote: post #68

mark_l_watson wrote: post #64

I am in a minority, but I would welcome the economic decline that would come with growth reduction if it were accompanied by using less manufactured goods (like cars), more locally grown food, more craft and art locally produced, more travel done in VR (with addition that local guides would be there to talk with you), etc., etc.

Why?