10 ms·

There simply has to be limits to this though, because if there were not, the materials would eventually become (relatively) free. Think of it this way, if the

by swid 5y ago

There simply has to be limits to this though, because if there were not, the materials would eventually become (relatively) free. Think of it this way, if the value of output grows too many magnitudes over the inputs, then essentially the input becomes free, which violates intuition, because those resources are scarce. If the resources are free to me, I will buy them all and raise the price. Arguing otherwise to me is an indication that you think either the material in question is not actually scarce, or else you realize there is actually a limit to how much value the economy can derive from those resources, but fail to reach the logical conclusion that there is a limit to economic growth.

bko 5y ago
> Arguing otherwise to me is an indication that you think either the material in question is not actually scarce The material in question is ingenuity and creativity. That is the real driver of economic growth, not some material I don't think the input has to be free or even go down in price. Just create more value. For instance, consider cars. They haven't gotten cheaper despite creating a lot more value. They're just better. More efficient, safer, more reliable, faster, etc. Creating value doesn't necessarily mean pushing prices down.
- TrispusAttucks 5y ago
  Yes but as a consequence there are more cars in operation so total energy consumption increases. https://wolfstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/US-auto-sales-annual-vehicles-in-operation-2019.png https://wolfstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/US-auto-sa...
- swid 5y ago
  I’m not suggesting you can’t add value, but that it grows asymptoticly towards a limit. Human ingenuity is scarce and even if it wasn’t, I’m allowing for some things to be not scarce in practice, like information and maybe energy someday. But concrete / metals / something physical will be scarce, and as long as it is, the rest of the economy cannot tend towards infinity. Otherwise, in the far enough future, this scarce thing would be essentially free.

by swid 5y ago

bko 5y ago

> Arguing otherwise to me is an indication that you think either the material in question is not actually scarce The material in question is ingenuity and creativity. That is the real driver of economic growth, not some material I don't think the input has to be free or even go down in price. Just create more value. For instance, consider cars. They haven't gotten cheaper despite creating a lot more value. They're just better. More efficient, safer, more reliable, faster, etc. Creating value doesn't necessarily mean pushing prices down.

TrispusAttucks 5y ago
Yes but as a consequence there are more cars in operation so total energy consumption increases. https://wolfstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/US-auto-sales-annual-vehicles-in-operation-2019.png https://wolfstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/US-auto-sa...
swid 5y ago
I’m not suggesting you can’t add value, but that it grows asymptoticly towards a limit. Human ingenuity is scarce and even if it wasn’t, I’m allowing for some things to be not scarce in practice, like information and maybe energy someday. But concrete / metals / something physical will be scarce, and as long as it is, the rest of the economy cannot tend towards infinity. Otherwise, in the far enough future, this scarce thing would be essentially free.