5 ms·

“Humankind,” Suzman writes, is apparently “not yet ready to claim its collective pension.” So why haven’t we traded rising incomes for more free time? Good que

“Humankind,” Suzman writes, is apparently “not yet ready to claim its collective pension.” So why haven’t we traded rising incomes for more free time? Good question. This is part of the reason I'm in process of switching to a part-time schedule as a software engineer and parent of 3 young children. "...economists assure us that, in any case, the only long-term solution to global poverty is more economic growth." While not a cure-all, I do remember reading that the primary reason why most of China has escaped extreme poverty in the last 100 years has been economic growth. I'm curious for the counter-perspective there.

Chris2048 5y ago
Is "rising income(s)" relative to inflation/cost-of-goods? As pay goes up, so does competition over (limited) resources. You can't tell from incomes alone how much better off humanity is in terms of actual resources. There are also complex arrangements such as ownership, and carbon debt that further complicate things. "...economists assure us that, in any case, the only long-term solution to global poverty is more economic growth." Economists are so often employed as Marketeers working on behalf of the ruling class..
wayoutthere 5y ago
The counter perspective is that some amount of degrowth will happen eventually. And in the west, decades of austerity have led to oppressive working conditions to the point people aren’t having children. We’re already seeing this effect on the workforce; my hypothesis is that much of the worker shortage is due to older workers dying from Covid or simply retiring and there aren’t enough millennials and Gen Z to fill the jobs at the bottom of the hierarchy after everyone shifts up. We cannot continue increasing productivity exponentially forever, and likely not for a whole lot longer. We’re already seeing the system collapsing in on itself — the supply chain woes we’re seeing right now are IMO the result of over-optimization over the last 3 decades. Infinite growth assumes there’s an ample workforce. When birth rates are below replacement levels, that’s not a good assumption. We need to take a mindset of “what is the most productive way to optimize the limited and shrinking resources we have” rather than “how do we keep productivity growing forever”. Otherwise unrest will grow, and it’s a lot easier to smash a broken system than it is to maintain one.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
  Yes, but at the point 'degrowth' surviving companies will likely be the most productive companies bar government bailouts. I don't really disagree with you for the most part. I just really see negative birth rates as inherently bad things.
  - wayoutthere 5y ago
    Well either one of two things are going to happen in a “shrinking pool” global economic environment: governments will go hard populist left (likely to communism, which actually makes sense in a world where long-term degrowth or stagflation is likely), or a handful of mega corporations become the de-facto world government which allows them to continue productivity growth at all costs (read: the death of billions of poor people from lack of water / food). Either way, the second half of this century is going to be bleak. That’s the other reason young people aren’t having kids: why bring them into a world that’s likely to be pretty awful?
- the_greyd 5y ago
  Anyone interested in declining birth rates, just take a look at the statistics in South Korea. 42% of the women in their 30s are unmarried (https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/pxotg9/over_42_of_south_koreans_in_their_30s_unmarried/ https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/pxotg9/over_42_o...). That's almost half! Our infinite growth systems will collapse, unless countries make it easier for women to raise a family.
  - janandonly 5y ago
    At 27 my grandad had 0 qualifications, a house, a wife, and 3 kids supported on a sergeant's salary. At 27 I just finished postgrad professional qualifications and share a 2 bed flat with 2 friends. I lose 65% of my income to taxes and rent and have 10sqft personal space. Avg house prices are 9x salary vs 4.5x in the 70s, so it takes a long time to save up to get started. Let's talk solutions. 1) Govt needs to stop propping up housing market 2) Govt needs to relax planning and allow more houses to get built 3) NIMBYs must be stopped 4) Workers deserve fairer wages 5) To do that, boomers need to pay more of their costs 6) More social housing source: https://nitter.net/TypeForVictory/status/1443850540614668299#m https://nitter.net/TypeForVictory/status/1443850540614668299...

Chris2048 5y ago

Is "rising income(s)" relative to inflation/cost-of-goods? As pay goes up, so does competition over (limited) resources. You can't tell from incomes alone how much better off humanity is in terms of actual resources. There are also complex arrangements such as ownership, and carbon debt that further complicate things. "...economists assure us that, in any case, the only long-term solution to global poverty is more economic growth." Economists are so often employed as Marketeers working on behalf of the ruling class..

wayoutthere 5y ago

The counter perspective is that some amount of degrowth will happen eventually. And in the west, decades of austerity have led to oppressive working conditions to the point people aren’t having children. We’re already seeing this effect on the workforce; my hypothesis is that much of the worker shortage is due to older workers dying from Covid or simply retiring and there aren’t enough millennials and Gen Z to fill the jobs at the bottom of the hierarchy after everyone shifts up. We cannot continue increasing productivity exponentially forever, and likely not for a whole lot longer. We’re already seeing the system collapsing in on itself — the supply chain woes we’re seeing right now are IMO the result of over-optimization over the last 3 decades. Infinite growth assumes there’s an ample workforce. When birth rates are below replacement levels, that’s not a good assumption. We need to take a mindset of “what is the most productive way to optimize the limited and shrinking resources we have” rather than “how do we keep productivity growing forever”. Otherwise unrest will grow, and it’s a lot easier to smash a broken system than it is to maintain one.

A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
Yes, but at the point 'degrowth' surviving companies will likely be the most productive companies bar government bailouts. I don't really disagree with you for the most part. I just really see negative birth rates as inherently bad things.
- wayoutthere 5y ago
  Well either one of two things are going to happen in a “shrinking pool” global economic environment: governments will go hard populist left (likely to communism, which actually makes sense in a world where long-term degrowth or stagflation is likely), or a handful of mega corporations become the de-facto world government which allows them to continue productivity growth at all costs (read: the death of billions of poor people from lack of water / food). Either way, the second half of this century is going to be bleak. That’s the other reason young people aren’t having kids: why bring them into a world that’s likely to be pretty awful?
the_greyd 5y ago
Anyone interested in declining birth rates, just take a look at the statistics in South Korea. 42% of the women in their 30s are unmarried (https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/pxotg9/over_42_of_south_koreans_in_their_30s_unmarried/ https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/pxotg9/over_42_o...). That's almost half! Our infinite growth systems will collapse, unless countries make it easier for women to raise a family.
- janandonly 5y ago
  At 27 my grandad had 0 qualifications, a house, a wife, and 3 kids supported on a sergeant's salary. At 27 I just finished postgrad professional qualifications and share a 2 bed flat with 2 friends. I lose 65% of my income to taxes and rent and have 10sqft personal space. Avg house prices are 9x salary vs 4.5x in the 70s, so it takes a long time to save up to get started. Let's talk solutions. 1) Govt needs to stop propping up housing market 2) Govt needs to relax planning and allow more houses to get built 3) NIMBYs must be stopped 4) Workers deserve fairer wages 5) To do that, boomers need to pay more of their costs 6) More social housing source: https://nitter.net/TypeForVictory/status/1443850540614668299#m https://nitter.net/TypeForVictory/status/1443850540614668299...