3 ms·

You're aware that your response here is atypical, and the exact kind of problem that is addressed by behavioural economics, yes? While what you're describing (u

You're aware that your response here is atypical, and the exact kind of problem that is addressed by behavioural economics, yes? While what you're describing (using new found free time to engage in free leisure activities) is what you see as desirable, it is emphatically not what humans as a population do. When discussing macro things like GDP, the homo-economicus minimax behavior of the few is inconsequential and has no place in a discussion of what would happen. However much we might not wish it so.

eropple 9y ago
OK. So let's keep going. You are correct, what I'm describing is atypical. Why is it atypical? Is it because they need more stuff? Or is it because their brains are under near-constant assault from a barrage of advertising that melts their willpower and creates a link between having a free moment to themselves and consumption, a desperate instillation to keep up with the Joneses? I would contend, and I'd fight about it, that the answer is the latter and that it is an overwhelming, brain-breaking external imposition. And it's in the service of making that particular number that's the topic of that article just a little bigger. We need to stop fucking ourselves up as people and as communities and measures that do not take that into account are bad measures that should not be fetishized. (And they are fetishized. They are drooled over. And yet nobody dies taking pride in how they made GDP bigger.)
- usaar333 9y ago
  > Is it because they need more stuff? Or is it because their brains are under near-constant assault from a barrage of advertising that melts their willpower and creates a link between having a free moment to themselves and consumption, a desperate instillation to keep up with the Joneses? Generally, increasing incomes in developed countries lead to increased service consumption or at most indirect manufacturing. While some of this is "keeping up with the Joneses", I think a lot of it is just rational time valuing. e.g. I've found that as my income has gone up considerably in the last half-decade (several hundred percent), I am spending more - but not on buying more goods. Generally it is bucketed under: Spending more to save more time (increased value of time): * online grocery shopping * spending more to live close to work * use of more expensive cab-services (lyft/uber) rather than public transit or biking * flying direct rather than multi-stop. * Spending more on childcare to maximize time spent on more intellectually stimulating endeavors (including work) or at times traveling Higher quality: * higher end food and restaurants * more expensive travel options (distance/exotic) * larger housing units to feel less cramped that also offer time-saving amenities (in-unit laundry, gym/pool, 24/7 package delivery) I'm getting more leisure -- and directing a lot into the GDP numbe.

eropple 9y ago

OK. So let's keep going. You are correct, what I'm describing is atypical. Why is it atypical? Is it because they need more stuff? Or is it because their brains are under near-constant assault from a barrage of advertising that melts their willpower and creates a link between having a free moment to themselves and consumption, a desperate instillation to keep up with the Joneses? I would contend, and I'd fight about it, that the answer is the latter and that it is an overwhelming, brain-breaking external imposition. And it's in the service of making that particular number that's the topic of that article just a little bigger. We need to stop fucking ourselves up as people and as communities and measures that do not take that into account are bad measures that should not be fetishized. (And they are fetishized. They are drooled over. And yet nobody dies taking pride in how they made GDP bigger.)

usaar333 9y ago
> Is it because they need more stuff? Or is it because their brains are under near-constant assault from a barrage of advertising that melts their willpower and creates a link between having a free moment to themselves and consumption, a desperate instillation to keep up with the Joneses? Generally, increasing incomes in developed countries lead to increased service consumption or at most indirect manufacturing. While some of this is "keeping up with the Joneses", I think a lot of it is just rational time valuing. e.g. I've found that as my income has gone up considerably in the last half-decade (several hundred percent), I am spending more - but not on buying more goods. Generally it is bucketed under: Spending more to save more time (increased value of time): * online grocery shopping * spending more to live close to work * use of more expensive cab-services (lyft/uber) rather than public transit or biking * flying direct rather than multi-stop. * Spending more on childcare to maximize time spent on more intellectually stimulating endeavors (including work) or at times traveling Higher quality: * higher end food and restaurants * more expensive travel options (distance/exotic) * larger housing units to feel less cramped that also offer time-saving amenities (in-unit laundry, gym/pool, 24/7 package delivery) I'm getting more leisure -- and directing a lot into the GDP numbe.