4 ms·
The problem is that most people would need to look in the mirror. Do you have a 401k? Do you plan on having a retirement? Then infinite growth needs to be a th
by oceanplexian 7y ago
The problem is that most people would need to look in the mirror.
Do you have a 401k? Do you plan on having a retirement? Then infinite growth needs to be a thing, otherwise that 7-9% a year that people think they are "guaranteed" from index funds would evaporate. If people couldn't make money off of passive investments it would turn the entire economy upside down.
- kome 7y agoto be fair, pension indexed to market rates are such a stupid idea; i'm glad most of europe didn't buy the idea - and they kept using the old model.
- _bxg1 7y agoYou'd still get dividends. This is the point of confusion: media often presents growth as == profit. But growth is growth in profit. The derivative of profit; expanding profits, over time. A company that doesn't grow at all continues to output just as much profit, just not more profit.
- 0xffff2 7y agoYes, but dividends aren't going to provide you with a 7% return, and most people that can afford to plan for retirement on the basis of 7% returns can't afford to do so on the basis of ~3-4% you might expect from dividends.
- _bxg1 7y agoSure. It wouldn't be a quick-fix; other parts of the system would have to adjust. But it isn't fundamentally infeasible: there's still a positive flow.