3 ms·

I disagree 100% on this. Growth is what happens when there is technological change. In certain circles there's this idea that technological growth requires mo

I disagree 100% on this. Growth is what happens when there is technological change. In certain circles there's this idea that technological growth requires more damage to people and the environment, but that's exactly wrong, and the past decades have shown it to be a competent fallacious assumption. We need dramatic, massive growth of new technologies to supplant the damaging ones. Confusingly, some people refer to this as "degrowth", but that's why growth/degrowth is a barren framework for analyzing the world. Because growth is not one thing, it's a high-dimensional direction of many many different attributes.

mc32 4y ago
What’s growth to a subway/underground railway company, or even, a cargo rail company?
- seibelj 4y ago
  It's not about growth, it's about productivity. All tech innovations increase productivity. Growth to a railway is better logistics so things are directed more accurately, more energy efficiency, more efficient use of labor, etc. They can also increase their sales, but I think your comment was implying those are stagnant industries. All technology is ultimately making improved outcomes at lower cost. That is what technological advancement is.
  - Larrikin 4y ago
    You made up a railway logistics company instead of addressing the point about a commuter subway. There is no need for growth in a subway unless they are adding lines or stations. If there is constant growth outside of that then it's just hurting consumers.
    - selectodude 4y ago
      Until the growth of population slows down, a commuter subway that isn't iterating and improving capacity will get worse too. Just look at New York pre-covid. The subway was literally and figuratively collapsing under the growth in passengers.
    - seibelj 4y ago
      If there is the profit test then the subway operator will always strive to continue maximizing revenue while minimizing cost. That could be automated trains without drivers, making the trains more reliable to encourage more ridership, marketing events like free weekend riding, and all sorts of things. It is the government-run subways that are stagnant, smelly, late, broken down because no one in the entire org has any incentive to do anything other than the bare minimum to avoid getting fired.
      - Larrikin 4y ago
        Except government run subways work well in nearly all countries except the United States. It's not always a red versus blue issue, but other countries don't have to constantly fight against one party that gets into government to prove government doesn't work by making government worse.
- renewiltord 4y ago
  Total number of people-rides delivered within x% of scheduled time with y% loss rate. Total number of TEU delivered within x% of scheduled time with y% loss rate. If the company is doing a job well, these should go up over time. Sure, you can add on more conditions (i.e. with z max pax/sq.m., with p max wait to board) but ultimately, if the thing is doing its job right, there should be growth. It should be getting more people to places. Every successful subway system shows growth. Taiwan Metro and TfL are both well renowned and both show continuous growth. Growth is Good.
unethical_ban 4y ago
You're using the term "growth" in an entirely different manner than the person to whom you are responding, which is funny because you note the word has multiple dimensions yourself. They are talking about market growth and the raw obsession with profit. $40 billion dollars in ONE QUARTER with a single product line. You are discussing technological development and advancement, which should be talked about separately from financials. Endless drive for profit and economic expansion seems to be an end to itself, whereas technological advancement for lower pollution and greenhouse emissions are necessary.
heisenzombie 4y ago
I think in the context of these discussions, growth is one thing: "The increase in the inflation-adjusted market value of goods and services produced over time." (e.g. EBITDA of a company or GDP of a country). I don't think anyone is arguing against the word growth in a general sense... Clearly we can "grow" our knowledge, or undertake "personal growth", or whatever. The people who argue against "growth" are, in a way, agreeing with you: They're saying "GDP is a terrible metric to optimize and we should find a way to stop optimizing for it. It creates perverse incentives. Digging oil out of the ground and burning it to make a ski-slope in the desert increases GDP. Selling houses to each other for ever-increasing prices increases GDP. Those things suck. They're saying that perhaps we could make the world better by changing the metrics we optimize for... Perhaps that's population happiness, quality-adjusted life years per person, projected climate change impact, world biodiversity, etc etc. And they're saying that maybe if we optimize on those things, GDP is going to have to drop. And that should be OK. But with the system we have built, it's not OK. So we're in a bind.
- taurath 4y ago
  I wish we could just do it for minimum levels of food and shelter at least. Lack of the most basic security creates fault lines throughout all of society.
  - creakingstairs 4y ago
    That plus carbon emission. The result won’t be the perfect indicator but we really need a simple numerical indicator for people to care, sadly.

mc32 4y ago

What’s growth to a subway/underground railway company, or even, a cargo rail company?

seibelj 4y ago
It's not about growth, it's about productivity. All tech innovations increase productivity. Growth to a railway is better logistics so things are directed more accurately, more energy efficiency, more efficient use of labor, etc. They can also increase their sales, but I think your comment was implying those are stagnant industries. All technology is ultimately making improved outcomes at lower cost. That is what technological advancement is.
- Larrikin 4y ago
  You made up a railway logistics company instead of addressing the point about a commuter subway. There is no need for growth in a subway unless they are adding lines or stations. If there is constant growth outside of that then it's just hurting consumers.
  - selectodude 4y ago
    Until the growth of population slows down, a commuter subway that isn't iterating and improving capacity will get worse too. Just look at New York pre-covid. The subway was literally and figuratively collapsing under the growth in passengers.
  - seibelj 4y ago
    If there is the profit test then the subway operator will always strive to continue maximizing revenue while minimizing cost. That could be automated trains without drivers, making the trains more reliable to encourage more ridership, marketing events like free weekend riding, and all sorts of things. It is the government-run subways that are stagnant, smelly, late, broken down because no one in the entire org has any incentive to do anything other than the bare minimum to avoid getting fired.
    - Larrikin 4y ago
      Except government run subways work well in nearly all countries except the United States. It's not always a red versus blue issue, but other countries don't have to constantly fight against one party that gets into government to prove government doesn't work by making government worse.
renewiltord 4y ago
Total number of people-rides delivered within x% of scheduled time with y% loss rate. Total number of TEU delivered within x% of scheduled time with y% loss rate. If the company is doing a job well, these should go up over time. Sure, you can add on more conditions (i.e. with z max pax/sq.m., with p max wait to board) but ultimately, if the thing is doing its job right, there should be growth. It should be getting more people to places. Every successful subway system shows growth. Taiwan Metro and TfL are both well renowned and both show continuous growth. Growth is Good.

unethical_ban 4y ago

You're using the term "growth" in an entirely different manner than the person to whom you are responding, which is funny because you note the word has multiple dimensions yourself. They are talking about market growth and the raw obsession with profit. $40 billion dollars in ONE QUARTER with a single product line. You are discussing technological development and advancement, which should be talked about separately from financials. Endless drive for profit and economic expansion seems to be an end to itself, whereas technological advancement for lower pollution and greenhouse emissions are necessary.

heisenzombie 4y ago

I think in the context of these discussions, growth is one thing: "The increase in the inflation-adjusted market value of goods and services produced over time." (e.g. EBITDA of a company or GDP of a country). I don't think anyone is arguing against the word growth in a general sense... Clearly we can "grow" our knowledge, or undertake "personal growth", or whatever. The people who argue against "growth" are, in a way, agreeing with you: They're saying "GDP is a terrible metric to optimize and we should find a way to stop optimizing for it. It creates perverse incentives. Digging oil out of the ground and burning it to make a ski-slope in the desert increases GDP. Selling houses to each other for ever-increasing prices increases GDP. Those things suck. They're saying that perhaps we could make the world better by changing the metrics we optimize for... Perhaps that's population happiness, quality-adjusted life years per person, projected climate change impact, world biodiversity, etc etc. And they're saying that maybe if we optimize on those things, GDP is going to have to drop. And that should be OK. But with the system we have built, it's not OK. So we're in a bind.

taurath 4y ago
I wish we could just do it for minimum levels of food and shelter at least. Lack of the most basic security creates fault lines throughout all of society.
- creakingstairs 4y ago
  That plus carbon emission. The result won’t be the perfect indicator but we really need a simple numerical indicator for people to care, sadly.