24 ms·
Historians in 500 years will stare in wonder at the stunning evidence we did not, in fact, build ALL the infrastructure, physical and otherwise, during the last
by flkiwi 4y ago
Historians in 500 years will stare in wonder at the stunning evidence we did not, in fact, build ALL the infrastructure, physical and otherwise, during the last ~25 years of absurdly cheap money.
- red-iron-pine 4y agoThere will be no wonder -- as long as they have a list of F500 companies it will not be hard to understand. Much like we have records of Chinese warlords or Byzantine princes engaging in rent seeking and breaking the system to cater to their needs, so to is their plain evidence of what and why things played out they way they did.
- actionfromafar 4y agoThe Historians will Honk the Toots in Urbit, praise artificial scarcity, amen.
- marcosdumay 4y agoWell, maybe in 500 years people will have an explanation for why people don't create fundamental things in low-interest times. Lasting investment seems to be very strongly and positively correlated with rates.
- pclmulqdq 4y agoHere's a theory for you: the increased cost of capital doesn't cause people to stop seeking or loaning out capital, it just directs that capital toward shorter-term projects. A bridge or a skyscraper pays off a lot faster than a startup.
- red-iron-pine 4y agoHow long do you think it takes to build a skyscraper? Cuz it ain't short. Just he zoning, funding, and pre-project tasks can take years.
- pclmulqdq 4y agoWell, that's why basically nobody builds them in places like New York or SF. Even so, I think you're underestimating how long it takes to make it to a net profit as a startup. Even in one of these cities, the planning-to-profit timeline is under 5 years. Even 432 Park Avenue, the new huge luxury tower in NYC, took 3 years. A random startup takes a lot longer to get to the money.
- nerdponx 4y agoIsn't it more about returns on lending being really low, so investors are forced to put their money elsewhere, like tech stocks and VC funds?
- pclmulqdq 4y agoThat too, but the same effect applies to equity investors who want to buy equities for diversification.
- throwawaylinux 4y agoHow do you define "fundamental thing"? Are we talking primary production here? Or do you mean a stretch of asphalt road for automobiles? Or a steam turbine for thermal electricity generation? a 3nm silicon chip; the factory that makes 3nm silicon chips; the factories that make those factories; a rocket engine; a mRNA vaccine; an office building; a mathematical proof; an astronomical observation; a tank; a nuclear warhead; a computer algorithm; a song; a child?
- marcosdumay 4y ago> How do you define "fundamental thing"? Some investment just keep adding to society's wealth, while others have a return and then go away. The first kind is really important because it enables new investment on things that depend on it, the second one doesn't. Well, good luck trying to attribute an specific value for a child. But for your other examples the classification is mostly straightforward.
- throwawaylinux 4y agoWhat fundamental things do you think should have been invested in during low interest times that were not?
- bluGill 4y agoOnly those who are not aware of construction costs. Counting those costs rates were more like 700% in their US.
- newaccount2021 4y ago[dead]
- umeshunni 4y agoMost of the world's infrastructure was, indeed, built in the last 25 years. It's just that it wasn't in the West.
- flkiwi 4y agoTouché.
- readthenotes1 4y agoThe low interest rate environment was certainly responsible for the fracking boom in the US. Because one cannot talk about the recent low interest rate environment without also talking about the quantitative easing environment which pumped trillions of dollars into Banks who figured they had should do something with some of it