Tearakan t1_j5xiekk wrote on January 26, 2023 at 6:08 AM

Reply to comment by econ101user in IBM Cuts 3,900 Jobs In Latest Tech Layoffs by itsonlyeva

Constant economic growth does not mean constant progress. Unlesd of course you are counting billionaires wealth growth and inequality being the worst its ever been.

Oh and this little thing called climate change which we keep ignoring in favor of more economic growth.

So about 500 years of progress leading us to utter ruin. Not a great run for an economic system compared to the rest of human civilization's history.

econ101user t1_j6137ch wrote on January 26, 2023 at 11:27 PM

> Constant economic growth does not mean constant progress.

Just a coincidence I guess then that higher GDP correlates with higher quality of life.

> inequality being the worst its ever been

Not even close.

> Oh and this little thing called climate change which we keep ignoring in favor of more economic growth.

Economic growth doesn't have to stop to address combat change.

>So about 500 years of progress leading us to utter ruin

Utter ruin? You need to read a history book and touch grass.

>Not a great run for an economic system compared to the rest of human civilization's history.

What a shame this world is wasted on you. Somewhere in time there's a peasant in medieval Europe that deserves to swap time with you

Tearakan t1_j61ab4c wrote on January 27, 2023 at 12:17 AM

No it doesn't. Our GDP is the best on the planet in the US. Life expectancy has dropped for the past several years. This includes before the pandemic.

There are many countries with much less GDP per capita that do markedly better on Healthcare for the majority of their citizens. As just one example of better lives.

Sure it's gotten better for the 1 percent and Americans and up. But again not better for the majority.

Wage growth for the majority of Americans has not beat inflation.

Yeah maybe look up climate change. It's a civilization ender. Especially if we can't farm because of wildly swinging temperatures and weather.

econ101user t1_j61bvlq wrote on January 27, 2023 at 12:28 AM

> Our GDP is the best on the planet in the US.

Did you even bother to do a 10 second google before opening your mouth hole? The US is not the number one https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

But even your incorrect cherry picking isn't a valid counterpoint to a correlation.

That's like saying "no height doesn't matter for success in basketball. My uncle is 6'6" and sucks at hoops".

> As just one example of better lives.

Cool bro. Guess what we're not just picking single examples like US and healthcare.

Look at this data plot and stop talking https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-development-index-vs-gdp-per-capita

> Wage growth for the majority of Americans has not beat inflation

What does that have to do with anything? You think because eggs are more expensive that economic growth isn't linked to quality of life? Are you just shouting out random grievances?

> Yeah maybe look up climate change. It's a civilization ender. Especially if we can't farm because of wildly swinging temperatures and weather.

Okay what's your point? You think our choices are: grow the economy or solve climate change? That's a talking point created by fossil fuel industry interests to scare people into supporting measures to address it, staging a shift from carbon emitting activity as damaging to the economy. It's been refuted very well yet here we have not only right wing idiots believing it but left wing ones too. That's hilarious.

Tearakan t1_j61g14l wrote on January 27, 2023 at 12:58 AM

By overall GDP we are. I only went into GDP per capita when discussing actual effects on the population.

My argument about climate change is we can't keep global capitalism which is defined by endless economic growth. That's incompatible with actually surviving climate change.

Endless economic growth requires either energy increasing endlessly or increasing efficiency.

We literally cannot get to 100 percent efficiency thanks to thermodynamics.

And endlessly demanding more energy will just lead us back to climate change and resource depletion on this planet.

Finally, healthcare and life expectancy are two very important parts of a good human life. You can't just throw them away from the whole "people are getting better due to increasing GDP" argument.

econ101user t1_j61ixnx wrote on January 27, 2023 at 1:20 AM

> By overall GDP we are.

Why on gods green earth would you think that mattered?

> My argument about climate change is we can't keep global capitalism which is defined by endless economic growth.

So this is just all blather. Capitalism isn't defined by endless growth. Go find a book that defines it as such. Seriously stop talking and go find a book, open it and read it.

>That's incompatible with actually surviving climate change

Why?

> Endless economic growth requires either energy increasing endlessly or increasing efficiency. We literally cannot get to 100 percent efficiency thanks to thermodynamics.

Hahahahahahahahaha.

So let me get this straight. Your argument is that based on your made up definition that capitalism requires infinite growth, that will require infinite energy which violates the laws of thermodynamics ergo capitalism is causing climate change.

Be honest with me: are you a teenager? You need to stop. You're just saying dumber and dumber shit.

> Finally, healthcare and life expectancy are two very important parts of a good human life. You can't just throw them away from the whole "people are getting better due to increasing GDP" argument.

I didn't throw them away. Theyre in the HDI. I just didn't cherry pick like you did.

I'm going to make this straight for you: economic growth is not a bad thing. It's strongly correlated with human living conditions. A growing economy is not one that is incompatible with policies that mitigate the growth and impacts of climate change. Or in crayon: more money in the system is better for everyone, you should try to make it more fair but overall it's a good thing. You can make money off non-carbon producing activities. The technology exists today to meet the overwhelm majority of energy needs currently provided by fossil fuels. It is a policy problem, not an economic one.