2 ms·

How had growth ever been possible in the era before the last 20 years or so?

maxsilver 8y ago
I'm no economist. But I think it has something to do with how we used to grow in ways that didn't monopolize people's needs. (better equipment, better networks, new consumer products, holiday travel, toys, fashion, etc). But now our growth is mostly in ways that do monopolize people's needs (healthcare, housing, childcare, education, transportation). If you evaluate the last 30 years using, for example, TV's or telephones as a benchmark, it looks like we've been amazing at everything, and capitalism is awesome. But if you evaluate the last 30 years using, for example, housing or healthcare as a benchmark, we look like a country that's on the brink of total collapse -- Part of being a free country, is the freedom to abstain completely. The freedom to walk away. Television sets or movie theatres, for instance, can never get too corrupt, or too expensive, because you can always just walk away. There's a limit to how exploitative a transaction can get on many products, because eventually people can just throw up their hands and say "fuck it, I'm out, I'm done with this whole mess". But you can't walk away from healthcare. You can't opt-out of the housing market. As we transition to exploiting needs instead of wants, people can't opt out, so the potential for exploitation in those particular fields is almost limitless -- limited only by total income.
- nerfhammer 8y ago
  Well, I have a degree in economics. IMO housing is expensive because of an explosion of land use restrictions in recent decades, which as far as I can tell is a cultural development. Housing had always been market based prior to that.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- lobotryas 8y ago
  No one has a right to keep living somewhere if they are being priced out. The only exception I can think of are unconscionable rent increases and that's largely beside the point. Just because the previous population can no longer afford to live in SF or many parts of the Bay does not mean we have a problem or someone's rights are being violated.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

I'm no economist. But I think it has something to do with how we used to grow in ways that didn't monopolize people's needs. (better equipment, better networks, new consumer products, holiday travel, toys, fashion, etc). But now our growth is mostly in ways that do monopolize people's needs (healthcare, housing, childcare, education, transportation). If you evaluate the last 30 years using, for example, TV's or telephones as a benchmark, it looks like we've been amazing at everything, and capitalism is awesome. But if you evaluate the last 30 years using, for example, housing or healthcare as a benchmark, we look like a country that's on the brink of total collapse -- Part of being a free country, is the freedom to abstain completely. The freedom to walk away. Television sets or movie theatres, for instance, can never get too corrupt, or too expensive, because you can always just walk away. There's a limit to how exploitative a transaction can get on many products, because eventually people can just throw up their hands and say "fuck it, I'm out, I'm done with this whole mess". But you can't walk away from healthcare. You can't opt-out of the housing market. As we transition to exploiting needs instead of wants, people can't opt out, so the potential for exploitation in those particular fields is almost limitless -- limited only by total income.

nerfhammer 8y ago
Well, I have a degree in economics. IMO housing is expensive because of an explosion of land use restrictions in recent decades, which as far as I can tell is a cultural development. Housing had always been market based prior to that.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
lobotryas 8y ago
No one has a right to keep living somewhere if they are being priced out. The only exception I can think of are unconscionable rent increases and that's largely beside the point. Just because the previous population can no longer afford to live in SF or many parts of the Bay does not mean we have a problem or someone's rights are being violated.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]