5 ms·

> Productivity has stalled mostly because people have already filled their needs, so it makes little sense to buy more. Basically everyone have the clothes they

> Productivity has stalled mostly because people have already filled their needs, so it makes little sense to buy more. Basically everyone have the clothes they need, the food they need, the car they need, the computer they need, already. Screen entertainment and information is basically free nowadays. So no matter how much you increase productivity these sectors will remain mostly constant. I know you are not being literal with your claims, but I just wanted to provide some data, so that others who read it will have some grounded context. Across several categories, there is a stubborn (and maybe surprisingly or not-so-surprisingly consistent) 10-15% of Americans who don't have many of those needs filled that you mentioned: - The official national poverty rate hovers around 10%, but there has always been much controversy about defining what that means and what the threshold should be: https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-270.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-27... - 32 million uninsured under 65 (the default age threshold for Medicare): https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/health-insurance.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/health-insurance.htm - 42+ million Americans face food insecurity: https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america - It should come as no surprise that many poor people cannot afford cars and hence rely on public transit more, but that public transit systems are woefully underfunded (or funded but misappropriated/delayed/etc.) in America. Because economic disparity is interwoven with racial inequality, this is not just an economic problem; suffice it to say that, no, not everyone in America has the car they need: https://www.urban.org/features/unequal-commute https://www.urban.org/features/unequal-commute - The FCC reports large gains in the past 5 years for broadband and mobile broadband access, but this is baselined against a paltry and outdated 25/3 and 10/3 Mbps standard definition for "broadband speed" (trying living in a 25/3 Mbps household while remote-working, video conferencing, streaming Netflix, etc.): https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-21-18A1.pdf https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-21-18A1.pdf

Jensson 5y ago
Those 15% lacks those goods not because we can't provide them but due to how the country is run. If policies were changed so that those 15% got what they need then that would be a small one time bump in GDP and then lead to the same effect I described. Or possibly it would even reduce GDP, since now people would no longer have to fight over the 85% of spots that provides what they need to live a good life. For example, if regulations around healthcare was changed to make it much easier to become a doctor and start clinics greatly increasing the supply of healthcare providers, then the extra competition might even reduce the overall costs of healthcare to similar levels as other countries reducing total GDP even though value delivered to consumers was increased. Anyway, the point is that USA intentionally keeps 15% in a bad state in order to motivate people to not be a part of that group. There is no need to do that, many other countries doesn't. But keeping people poor doesn't seem to hurt GDP, rather it seems like keeping a part of your people lacking like that increases GDP, making it an even worse measure.
machiaweliczny 5y ago
This seems like pure lack of will, not resources to me. I feel that big productivity gains will be made once government software will be required to be open source. Also if some form of better organization/decision making emerges that blockchain space folks are working on. I feel currently economy is too much supply driven and if more people could securely "invest" into what they really want build it would really make a drastic difference (you can see that kickstarter or crowdfunding as an example but it's too prone to scammers)

Jensson 5y ago

Those 15% lacks those goods not because we can't provide them but due to how the country is run. If policies were changed so that those 15% got what they need then that would be a small one time bump in GDP and then lead to the same effect I described. Or possibly it would even reduce GDP, since now people would no longer have to fight over the 85% of spots that provides what they need to live a good life. For example, if regulations around healthcare was changed to make it much easier to become a doctor and start clinics greatly increasing the supply of healthcare providers, then the extra competition might even reduce the overall costs of healthcare to similar levels as other countries reducing total GDP even though value delivered to consumers was increased. Anyway, the point is that USA intentionally keeps 15% in a bad state in order to motivate people to not be a part of that group. There is no need to do that, many other countries doesn't. But keeping people poor doesn't seem to hurt GDP, rather it seems like keeping a part of your people lacking like that increases GDP, making it an even worse measure.

machiaweliczny 5y ago

This seems like pure lack of will, not resources to me. I feel that big productivity gains will be made once government software will be required to be open source. Also if some form of better organization/decision making emerges that blockchain space folks are working on. I feel currently economy is too much supply driven and if more people could securely "invest" into what they really want build it would really make a drastic difference (you can see that kickstarter or crowdfunding as an example but it's too prone to scammers)