4 ms·
The 1950s growth may have nothing to do with equality. A big boost from the end of WW2 likely helped: by setting a lower base during WW2; by pent up demand; by
by ptero 10y ago
The 1950s growth may have nothing to do with equality. A big boost from the end of WW2 likely helped: by setting a lower base during WW2; by pent up demand; by Europe rebuilding needs, etc.
- eli_gottlieb 10y agoFunny, then, how economists at the end of World War II thought they were headed for a very deep recession as the war machine spun down and rebuilding began.
- mason240 10y agoSo? They were clearly wrong, as they didn't have the opportunity to see the future.
- creshal 10y agoAnd there was much more government intervention in the 1950s than now: GI bill in the US, similar programs in Europe, much stricter stock market regulations, heavy government subsidies to all economies (e.g. Marshall plan), financed by much higher taxes …
- crdoconnor 10y agoThe larger consumer demand was largely due to higher levels of disposable income which was in turn largely due to higher levels of income equality. By most measures we are much richer in aggregate these days but since the wealth trickled up and the working/middle classes struggle to fund the basics (housing, education, food, etc.), discretionary spending is much lower. Yet still the neoclassical myth that there's a trade off between inequality and wealth creation persists.