2 of 6
2
Financial disaster in Europe
Posted: 18 September 2011 11:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6008
Joined  2006-12-20
jls7227 - 18 September 2011 10:54 AM


2) growth in population: In the last decade, the US population increased by some 28 million, and in spite of all these new customers asking for water, food, energy, health care, education, etc. we had zero growth (as reported by Krugman several months ago). Zero growth, despite all the billions poured to stimulate the economy. The only non-zero growth -as usual- is national debt.

I think the reality, whether dealing with millions of people or 3 people is the same.

Each person, needs to, on average, put in more than they take out of the system, or at least the same, for everything to be hunky dory.

I think economists are nuts.

Stephen

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 September 2011 12:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15358
Joined  2006-02-14
jls7227 - 18 September 2011 10:54 AM

In the last decade, the US population increased by some 28 million, and in spite of all these new customers asking for water, food, energy, health care, education, etc. we had zero growth (as reported by Krugman several months ago). Zero growth, despite all the billions poured to stimulate the economy.

Reason for this is the popping of the housing bubble and its related effects, which took 6% off the US GDP. The stimulus, OTOH, amounted to 1.5% of US GDP, so it was never adequate to fill in for the massive losses for which it was intended. See Krugman HERE.

Re. the increasing population in the US, that’s one of the factors I believe that goes into THIS CBO chart of potential US GDP. Lack of sufficient stimulus has kept us well below potential.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2011 12:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4139
Joined  2010-08-15
dougsmith - 14 September 2011 08:05 PM
citizenschallenge.pm - 14 September 2011 05:49 PM
dougsmith - 12 September 2011 08:49 AM

The longer this recession lasts the more likely it is that the Euro will eventually end ...

Do you have any reason to think this recession will not last?

What is there that can pull us out of the current economic slump?

How have past serious economic quagmires been overcome?

What has been the foundation of economic growth?

Well, the foundation of economic growth as always are (1) greater efficiencies in production, and (2) growth in population.

But I can’t see a quick solution to this slump. The last one had huge deficit spending in WWII. This one, not enough political will.

How interesting…
you say “(1) greater efficiencies in production” and I see “resource consumption”
it’s sort of like looking at the back door of the butcher as opposed to the front door.

“(2) growth in population” well sure, but getting back to the finite planet we inhabit, doesn’t this growth evolve into a cancer upon the planet?
~ ~ ~

I definitely come at all this from the back door. 
My Luddite instincts (and fortunate off sides situation) brings me back to assessing what is needed for me, as in human being, to make it through the days of our/my life…
then I look at this modern society, it seems to have incredibly overextended itself, over supplying our needs to such extremes that we’re now building a society based on trivia, removed from what we as homo sapiens need to survive. 
Or course not to be overlooked is the continuing increasing degradation of our biosphere, our life support system…

And it seems to me that disconnect is going to bite us in the butt something vicious.

[ Edited: 19 September 2011 12:43 AM by citizenschallenge.pm ]
 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2011 12:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4139
Joined  2010-08-15
StephenLawrence - 18 September 2011 11:18 AM

I think the reality, whether dealing with millions of people or 3 people is the same.


Hmmm

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2011 04:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15358
Joined  2006-02-14
citizenschallenge.pm - 19 September 2011 12:30 AM
dougsmith - 14 September 2011 08:05 PM
citizenschallenge.pm - 14 September 2011 05:49 PM
dougsmith - 12 September 2011 08:49 AM

The longer this recession lasts the more likely it is that the Euro will eventually end ...

Do you have any reason to think this recession will not last?

What is there that can pull us out of the current economic slump?

How have past serious economic quagmires been overcome?

What has been the foundation of economic growth?

Well, the foundation of economic growth as always are (1) greater efficiencies in production, and (2) growth in population.

But I can’t see a quick solution to this slump. The last one had huge deficit spending in WWII. This one, not enough political will.

How interesting…
you say “(1) greater efficiencies in production” and I see “resource consumption”
it’s sort of like looking at the back door of the butcher as opposed to the front door.

“(2) growth in population” well sure, but getting back to the finite planet we inhabit, doesn’t this growth evolve into a cancer upon the planet?
~ ~ ~

I definitely come at all this from the back door. 
My Luddite instincts (and fortunate off sides situation) brings me back to assessing what is needed for me, as in human being, to make it through the days of our/my life…
then I look at this modern society, it seems to have incredibly overextended itself, over supplying our needs to such extremes that we’re now building a society based on trivia, removed from what we as homo sapiens need to survive. 
Or course not to be overlooked is the continuing increasing degradation of our biosphere, our life support system…

And it seems to me that disconnect is going to bite us in the butt something vicious.

The question was about the economic slump/quagmire and how to achieve economic growth. The only way to do that over time is to increase production efficiencies, basically through the scientific method: this allows your average person to be able to produce more wealth per unit time, making wealth more generally available. It’s this process that has given us the modern world, with all its incredible advances as well as its problems. But the answer cannot be to turn the clock back to an age where we had to worry about illness and famine (medicine and food production are two of the modern world’s biggest advances). It’s easy to suggest we all go live off the land and make our own energy, but I doubt one person in a hundred thousand would actually be prepared to do it.

Longer term the world would get along a lot better with much lower population. But the question is how to achieve that goal. One way is by having an enormous famine, pandemic, world war or some totalitarian regime that killed off the majority of people on Earth. I don’t think anyone here would recommend those options. A more optimistic hope is that with rising female literacy and modernization, families will tend towards the European model where we are no longer replacing the adult population. In that scenario we might over several centuries work the human populace down to a level where it was better supported. (Though that would also necessitate a lack of progress on anti-aging treatments!)

It’s a very difficult issue.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2011 01:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

Nah, I think it will be handled very efficiently by global cilmate change.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2011 11:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4139
Joined  2010-08-15
dougsmith - 19 September 2011 04:26 AM

It’s easy to suggest we all go live off the land and make our own energy, but I doubt one person in a hundred thousand would actually be prepared to do it.

That wasn’t my suggestion.  Nor do I in the least think that is a solution.
~ ~ ~

What I’m thinking about more is ~ what is that’s actually driven human development these past millenium,
What in today’s situation has changed from the historic circumstance,
Can this change be addressed by following the same paradigm that was needed to conquer… tame this planet?

dougsmith - 19 September 2011 04:26 AM

It’s a very difficult issue.

Yes it is, even defining it is tough as nails.
But, do you get my distinction about the consuming v. the production
production can not happen without consuming something,
and this perspective seems much too neglected these days,
specially since coping with this new and growing reality of less supply ~ demands a radical shift in expectations.

Unfortunately, those shifts never happen voluntarily.

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2011 11:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4139
Joined  2010-08-15
Occam. - 19 September 2011 01:51 PM

Nah, I think it will be handled very efficiently by global climate change.

Occam

Ain’t that the truth.

This touches on a genuine dilemma I have.
On the one hand, I’ve watched society squander the seventies and eighties when it was still possible to influence the flow of climatological trends.
Then the new millennium, when it was still possible to seriously mitigate the impact society’s GHG and other insults upon our biosphere were/are happening.
Now we are into the second decade of the new millennium and all political, religious indications are that Willful Ignorance and hostility towards learning is the new order of the masses…  thus realistic solutions don’t exist.

How can one not feel hopeless, even if one can still find the wonder in the world surrounding us and the activities of my day to day.

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2011 04:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15358
Joined  2006-02-14
citizenschallenge.pm - 19 September 2011 11:38 PM
dougsmith - 19 September 2011 04:26 AM

It’s easy to suggest we all go live off the land and make our own energy, but I doubt one person in a hundred thousand would actually be prepared to do it.

That wasn’t my suggestion.  Nor do I in the least think that is a solution.
~ ~ ~

What I’m thinking about more is ~ what is that’s actually driven human development these past millenium,
What in today’s situation has changed from the historic circumstance,
Can this change be addressed by following the same paradigm that was needed to conquer… tame this planet?

Well, I understand the sentiment, but at the same time, what does it mean to change that paradigm? What are the specific recommendations?

citizenschallenge.pm - 19 September 2011 11:38 PM
dougsmith - 19 September 2011 04:26 AM

It’s a very difficult issue.

Yes it is, even defining it is tough as nails.
But, do you get my distinction about the consuming v. the production
production can not happen without consuming something,
and this perspective seems much too neglected these days,
specially since coping with this new and growing reality of less supply ~ demands a radical shift in expectations.

Unfortunately, those shifts never happen voluntarily.

I think when you try to look at things that abstractly they’re going to lead into a dead end. We have to produce and consume to survive; it isn’t like we can give them up. We can consume more responsibly, and produce with less environmental pressure, but that’s different from just saying we should stop consuming, as though that were a desirable or even a possible solution.

The main problem I see is one of population pressure. If we could get population down significantly we could survive on this planet with reasonable consumption and production to make everyone happy ... meanwhile we need more active environmental regulations. But good luck with that while the Tea Party is active ...

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2011 06:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3121
Joined  2008-04-07

FYI, the July 29 2011 Science issue is largely about population (p 539-592). Several excellent articles. Let’s just say, it’s complicated.  smile

 Signature 

Turn off Fox News - Bad News For America
(Atheists are myth understood)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2011 06:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
dougsmith - 20 September 2011 04:22 AM

The main problem I see is one of population pressure. If we could get population down significantly we could survive on this planet with reasonable consumption and production to make everyone happy

Get the population of the unproductive people down and we’ll be just fine.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2011 01:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  74
Joined  2008-04-20

The main problem I see is one of population pressure. If we could get population down significantly we could survive on this planet with reasonable consumption and production to make everyone happy ... meanwhile we need more active environmental regulations. But good luck with that while the Tea Party is active ...


Who knows, maybe it will not take long until our politicians start funding research projects to get that lipoprotein mentioned in Asimov’s story “The winnowing”.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2011 05:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

The problem, George, is who wpi;d decode who is unproductive. 

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2011 05:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
Occam. - 20 September 2011 05:09 PM

The problem, George, is who wpi;d decode who is unproductive. 

Occam

I don’t know. The unproductive themselves?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2011 07:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15358
Joined  2006-02-14

Well if you mean biologically unproductive it won’t work ...

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 6
2