Originally Posted by
Energizeric
Yes, thread derailment indeed. I'll make one big comment on this, and then back to the fantasy world of Arlor.
I've attempted to lecture older folks on what the real problems in the economy are, and nobody really wants to listen although I think they know this to be correct, so here it goes.....
The economic problems that we face are not local to the United States, so blaming it on fiscal policy of one single country that makes up 4% of the world's population is not a sound theory. The problem with the world economy is actually a book-keeping problem and not an actual problem. The issue is that our economy is so tied to "paper" and "records" that nobody bothers to notice reality. Here are some examples of what I mean:
1) "productivity" is defined in $$$. So if I pay someone $100 to dig a ditch and then fill it up, then the economists would say that person contributed $100 of productivity to our economy. Did he?
2) If I buy a computer for my company which is able to allow one person to do the job that 3 previously were needed to do, and as a result I can downsize my staff by 2 people, is that a good thing for productivity? Economists would say that because the total wages I paid out was smaller that we were less productive. I would argue otherwise.
3) If in your home you were able to buy some sort of machine/computer/robot which was able to do make doing the chores take only half the time it previously took, and now people could spend half the time they used to spend doing chores (more time for leisure!) then most people would consider this a great thing. But in industry this is considered a bad thing since it means workers have their hours cut. Why the inconsistency?
4) We live in a world where we pay farmers NOT to produce corn (farm subsidies) so that we can keep the price of corn high. Yet we have people all around the world who are starving and we say there is a food shortage.
Technology is the "evil" here. Not because technology is a bad thing, but because our economic philosophy is based upon an old model that counts productivity by the amount of time we spend and not by the results produced. As technology has been able to handle more and more of the workload, wages have been cut in order to "keep order" and keep most of the population employed. Adjusted for inflation, today 2 members of the family must work to make the same livable wage that one person used to make 30 years ago. But now even at the reduced wages there is no need for much of the workforce. So large companies are closing factories, laying off workers, etc. -- and those jobs are never coming back.
Ever watch Star Trek? What happens when the food replicator is invented? Does the entire food industry get laid off? What happens when the transporter is invented? Does the entire travel industry get laid off? Would such inventions be a good thing for mankind?
The reality is that it is not necessary for much of the population to work in order for everything to get done. And as time goes on, less and less of the population will be needed. Eventually technology will be able to do everything for us. So either we are going to allow for this and let everyone be the beneficiary of such progress, or 99% of the population is going to starve while the elites enjoy the benefits of a futuristic world. It is up to us which path we choose....
That's all I'm going to say. Carry on....
Bookmarks