3 ms·

Exponential economist meets finite physicist is a fun read. https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/ https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/ec

by taw55 9y ago

Exponential economist meets finite physicist is a fun read. https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/ https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist...

antisthenes 9y ago
It's not a mystery why economics is treated with such disdain, when economists are portrayed as bumbling idiots unable to comprehend anything outside of the narrow mindset of perpetual growth and deregulation. It's a fun read (of a hopefully fictional story), but I would seriously doubt the qualifications of any such "economist" had they replied in the same manner in real life. It should, however, be noted that Economics is a fairly young science, so people trained in the 20th century maybe be stuck in their obsolete growth mindsets forever. Unfortunately there seems to be little hope to change their minds, so we should all do our best to ignore them, since their views no longer represent reality when you consider the newest data.
kbutler 9y ago
I doubt the economist agreed with this - or maybe there'd been a little too much alcohol consumed: "then GDP continues to grow while energy remains at a fixed scale. This means that energy—a physically-constrained resource, mind—must become arbitrarily cheap as GDP continues to grow and leave energy in the dust. Economist: Yes, I think energy plays a diminishing role in the economy and becomes too cheap to worry about." This inaccurately conflates two concepts - decoupling economic growth from energy (we see this in computing, as you carry an 80s supercomputer in your pocket) and the cost of fixed resources in a growing economy. A necessary, fixed resource increases in cost as GDP increases. That is, if there are only 100 works by van Gogh, and the available cash goes for $100 to $100,000,000, people will be willing to pay more $ for the fixed set of van Gogh works. The cost of the fixed resource depends on the economic efficiency of that resource, and may go up or down as a percentage of GDP. Limits to energy efficiency hypothesized in the article would suggest that energy costs would go UP as a percentage of GDP (and inescapable energy demands would thus form the limit of economic growth).

by taw55 9y ago

Exponential economist meets finite physicist is a fun read. https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/ https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist...

antisthenes 9y ago

It's not a mystery why economics is treated with such disdain, when economists are portrayed as bumbling idiots unable to comprehend anything outside of the narrow mindset of perpetual growth and deregulation. It's a fun read (of a hopefully fictional story), but I would seriously doubt the qualifications of any such "economist" had they replied in the same manner in real life. It should, however, be noted that Economics is a fairly young science, so people trained in the 20th century maybe be stuck in their obsolete growth mindsets forever. Unfortunately there seems to be little hope to change their minds, so we should all do our best to ignore them, since their views no longer represent reality when you consider the newest data.

kbutler 9y ago

I doubt the economist agreed with this - or maybe there'd been a little too much alcohol consumed: "then GDP continues to grow while energy remains at a fixed scale. This means that energy—a physically-constrained resource, mind—must become arbitrarily cheap as GDP continues to grow and leave energy in the dust. Economist: Yes, I think energy plays a diminishing role in the economy and becomes too cheap to worry about." This inaccurately conflates two concepts - decoupling economic growth from energy (we see this in computing, as you carry an 80s supercomputer in your pocket) and the cost of fixed resources in a growing economy. A necessary, fixed resource increases in cost as GDP increases. That is, if there are only 100 works by van Gogh, and the available cash goes for $100 to $100,000,000, people will be willing to pay more $ for the fixed set of van Gogh works. The cost of the fixed resource depends on the economic efficiency of that resource, and may go up or down as a percentage of GDP. Limits to energy efficiency hypothesized in the article would suggest that energy costs would go UP as a percentage of GDP (and inescapable energy demands would thus form the limit of economic growth).