9 ms·

This aging topic is very important. Re: stock markets, economies need to shift from eternal $ growth to share holder wallets, to providing equitable outcomes fo

by ssss11 3y ago

This aging topic is very important. Re: stock markets, economies need to shift from eternal $ growth to share holder wallets, to providing equitable outcomes for all people and the planet - that will be very interesting to watch, i can’t see it going well.

bequanna 3y ago
> to providing equitable outcomes for all people and the planet The top 10% who hold essentially all the wealth in the world have very little interest in that goal.
- ssss11 3y ago
  Yep 100% agree. Unfortunately
  - candiodari 3y ago
    Problem is, if you're being fair, the 90% bottom that will actually have to do the work, also don't want to care for elderly. A decent fraction would need to become nurses, and frankly, with less pay/worse conditions than they currently get. A small fraction will need to study a lot more so more treatments can be provided, which requires doctors and researchers. And we'll all have to do with less (much less) because this will cost a lot even disregarding wages.
dools 3y ago
You might be interested in the work of Steven Hail and Gabrielle Bond. There's an online course they run through Torrens University that covers a lot of this stuff: https://www.torrens.edu.au/courses/business/economics https://www.torrens.edu.au/courses/business/economics
tomp 3y ago
[flagged]
- alexvoda 3y ago
  While communism does have it's flaws, i would argue it has in fact never been tried.
  - megalord 3y ago
    Communism has never been tried? Could you explain a little bit more? I don't know if you are joking or lacking knowledge. Or maybe I lack some knowledge you know about
    - lobf 3y ago
      It’s a “no true Scotsman” fallacy that communists trot out to defend their failed ideology.
      - alexvoda 3y ago
        I did not argue that communist regimes didn't fail. I even think that was inevitable. And I even think that it was inevitable that the communist ideal would be immediately abandoned by every single regime once they gain power. That doesn't change that none of the well known historical regimes under the communist brand ever came close to the communist ideals. The betrayal of their original ideals was decried by communists themselves very early on. My argument is actually that there are good reasons that humanity as it was 100 years ago and as it is now is incapable of achieving the communist ideal and therefore we need better philosophical theory on how to get closer to that ideal. I think the idea that revolution can bring about the communist ideal was naive. There are comments here about smaller scale communist social systems claimed to have worked I did not know about and about which I will read.
        lobf 3y ago
        The important bit is that every communist country tried to implement communism and every single time it led to one-party authoritarian nightmares where actual thoughtcrime was illegal and brutally enforced. That indicates a fundamental problem with the ideology to me, and one that isn’t ever worth trying again.
defrost 3y ago
Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered is a collection of essays published in 1973 by German-born British economist E. F. Schumacher. The title *Small Is Beautiful* came from a principle espoused by Schumacher's teacher Leopold Kohr (1909–1994) advancing small, appropriate technologies, policies, and polities as a superior alternative to the mainstream ethos of "bigger is better". Overlapping environmental, social, and economic forces such as the 1973 energy crisis and popularisation of the concept of globalisation helped bring Schumacher's *Small Is Beautiful* critiques of mainstream economics to a wider audience during the 1970s. In 1995 The Times Literary Supplement ranked *Small Is Beautiful* among the 100 most influential books published since World War II. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Is_Beautiful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Is_Beautiful
- nine_k 3y ago
  This seems somehow unrelated. It's not about scale, it's about balance. You can run a small an beautiful country with zero economy growth and zero decline, all in a perfect balance, and 70% of population younger than 65. Everything works out. But when 50% of the population is older than 60, the picture changes a lot; the percentage of economically productive population is much lower, and the need to care for people who can't sustain themselves any more grows. Take a look at how Japan fares today.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    We'll we're going to have to learn how to deal with it. At the start of the 1900s the world was set for a population boom and overshoot. We went from families having 6-12 children to 2ish children in a few generations. This is going to lead to those 'boom' generations having a far older population and there is not really anything that can be done about this unless you want your population to continue growing forever.
  - defrost 3y ago
    Fair point, in hindsight it seems I may have thrown this book recommendation in under the wrong comment. It's relavant to this Ask HN question at large as we very much need to move away from blind pursuit of unlimited growth in population, resource consumption, waste byproducts, etc. and address the question of how to live well within our means. Aging population demographics is a challenge, but one that we must address and then move beyond to a move persistent and sustainable low term distribution. As for the current situation, I am 60, my father was born in 1935 and lives here in the same town as I do. He takes meals on wheels to the older folks who aren't all that mobile (yes, he's almost 88, walks 10km per day, and maintains a 15 km long section of a 1,000 km long walking trail) which is indicative of the entire community which has the highest median age in this country. There is scope to employ able older people to look after less able older people which gives provides purpose, companionship, and reduces the demand for younger pople in care roles, etc. This is not a full solution but it is a partial path forward.
atoav 3y ago
Given limited resources exponential growth will always hit saturation. It is time we structure out economic systems in a way that aknowledge this reality.

by ssss11 3y ago

bequanna 3y ago

> to providing equitable outcomes for all people and the planet The top 10% who hold essentially all the wealth in the world have very little interest in that goal.

ssss11 3y ago
Yep 100% agree. Unfortunately
- candiodari 3y ago
  Problem is, if you're being fair, the 90% bottom that will actually have to do the work, also don't want to care for elderly. A decent fraction would need to become nurses, and frankly, with less pay/worse conditions than they currently get. A small fraction will need to study a lot more so more treatments can be provided, which requires doctors and researchers. And we'll all have to do with less (much less) because this will cost a lot even disregarding wages.

dools 3y ago

You might be interested in the work of Steven Hail and Gabrielle Bond. There's an online course they run through Torrens University that covers a lot of this stuff: https://www.torrens.edu.au/courses/business/economics https://www.torrens.edu.au/courses/business/economics

tomp 3y ago

[flagged]

alexvoda 3y ago
While communism does have it's flaws, i would argue it has in fact never been tried.
- megalord 3y ago
  Communism has never been tried? Could you explain a little bit more? I don't know if you are joking or lacking knowledge. Or maybe I lack some knowledge you know about
  - lobf 3y ago
    It’s a “no true Scotsman” fallacy that communists trot out to defend their failed ideology.
    - alexvoda 3y ago
      I did not argue that communist regimes didn't fail. I even think that was inevitable. And I even think that it was inevitable that the communist ideal would be immediately abandoned by every single regime once they gain power. That doesn't change that none of the well known historical regimes under the communist brand ever came close to the communist ideals. The betrayal of their original ideals was decried by communists themselves very early on. My argument is actually that there are good reasons that humanity as it was 100 years ago and as it is now is incapable of achieving the communist ideal and therefore we need better philosophical theory on how to get closer to that ideal. I think the idea that revolution can bring about the communist ideal was naive. There are comments here about smaller scale communist social systems claimed to have worked I did not know about and about which I will read.
      - lobf 3y ago
        The important bit is that every communist country tried to implement communism and every single time it led to one-party authoritarian nightmares where actual thoughtcrime was illegal and brutally enforced. That indicates a fundamental problem with the ideology to me, and one that isn’t ever worth trying again.

defrost 3y ago

Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As If People Mattered is a collection of essays published in 1973 by German-born British economist E. F. Schumacher. The title *Small Is Beautiful* came from a principle espoused by Schumacher's teacher Leopold Kohr (1909–1994) advancing small, appropriate technologies, policies, and polities as a superior alternative to the mainstream ethos of "bigger is better". Overlapping environmental, social, and economic forces such as the 1973 energy crisis and popularisation of the concept of globalisation helped bring Schumacher's *Small Is Beautiful* critiques of mainstream economics to a wider audience during the 1970s. In 1995 The Times Literary Supplement ranked *Small Is Beautiful* among the 100 most influential books published since World War II. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Is_Beautiful https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Is_Beautiful

nine_k 3y ago
This seems somehow unrelated. It's not about scale, it's about balance. You can run a small an beautiful country with zero economy growth and zero decline, all in a perfect balance, and 70% of population younger than 65. Everything works out. But when 50% of the population is older than 60, the picture changes a lot; the percentage of economically productive population is much lower, and the need to care for people who can't sustain themselves any more grows. Take a look at how Japan fares today.
- pixl97 3y ago
  We'll we're going to have to learn how to deal with it. At the start of the 1900s the world was set for a population boom and overshoot. We went from families having 6-12 children to 2ish children in a few generations. This is going to lead to those 'boom' generations having a far older population and there is not really anything that can be done about this unless you want your population to continue growing forever.
- defrost 3y ago
  Fair point, in hindsight it seems I may have thrown this book recommendation in under the wrong comment. It's relavant to this Ask HN question at large as we very much need to move away from blind pursuit of unlimited growth in population, resource consumption, waste byproducts, etc. and address the question of how to live well within our means. Aging population demographics is a challenge, but one that we must address and then move beyond to a move persistent and sustainable low term distribution. As for the current situation, I am 60, my father was born in 1935 and lives here in the same town as I do. He takes meals on wheels to the older folks who aren't all that mobile (yes, he's almost 88, walks 10km per day, and maintains a 15 km long section of a 1,000 km long walking trail) which is indicative of the entire community which has the highest median age in this country. There is scope to employ able older people to look after less able older people which gives provides purpose, companionship, and reduces the demand for younger pople in care roles, etc. This is not a full solution but it is a partial path forward.

atoav 3y ago

Given limited resources exponential growth will always hit saturation. It is time we structure out economic systems in a way that aknowledge this reality.