3 ms·
> he spends paragraphs talking about how there is a growing pool of able-bodied, middle-aged citizenry yet he advocates bringing in even more people to maintain
by gozur88 10y ago
> he spends paragraphs talking about how there is a growing pool of able-bodied, middle-aged citizenry yet he advocates bringing in even more people to maintain GDP.
This makes no sense to me. The US economy exists to serve the people of the US, and GDP isn't an end to itself.
- remarkEon 10y ago>The US economy exists to serve the people of the US, and GDP isn't an end to itself. Those two points, really, have become increasingly hard to argue with my friends the last couple years.
- thehardsphere 10y agoThat is correct, but if GDP remains stagnant or falls, that becomes harder to do. GDP per capita is one of the ways that the wealth of a nation's citizenry is measured, so if that is declining due to low productivity and continued population growth, that's trouble. Basically means that the economy isn't going to be able to serve people.
- gozur88 10y agoI understand what you're saying, but I don't think looking at GDP to the exclusion of other factors is a very useful exercise. If GDP per capita is the way you're measuring wealth, you're not doing yourself any favor by adding more people to the denominator. Also, having a higher GDP doesn't help if it means everyone is burdened by the additional strain of providing for all the people who are out of work as a result of whatever policy you used to goose GDP.
- thehardsphere 10y agoRight. It's basically an unresolved empirical question as to whether or not bringing all of those new people here will result in the release of a magical growth fairy that will paper over any of the problems. If it does, glossing over the whole question isn't too bad. If it doesn't, then you're right.