16 ms·
Articles like this tend to get lost in our desire to fit the world into our favorite grand philosophyy (philosophical framework, ideology, metanarrative - take
by netcan 13y ago
Articles like this tend to get lost in our desire to fit the world into our favorite grand philosophyy (philosophical framework, ideology, metanarrative - take your pick.) Since these philosophies are so ambitious, they need to deal in very big concepts like imports or automation-technology. The counter points are equally abstract. Each comes with its own vocabulary like labour/capital (being used similarly here to the Marxist workers/means of production).
I don't have a general problem with big abstract theories. They can be useful. They can also be blinding. Worse, they can lodge themselves as a person's political identity. Realistically, they are very imperfect and we should probably use a bunch simultaneously to try an understand a trend like this one.
Here's an alternative vocabulary that IMO is relevant inasmuch as economic growth takes the form of of new technological product (smartphones, internet). Who/how many get to consume the new products. IE, airlines get invented. How many people get to use them? Personal vehicles proliferate. How many people get to own one.
From that perspective, a lot of recent growth is remarkably equitable. Cellular phones penetrated right down the worldwide income ladder. In 10-20 years they outpaced earlier technologies like cars & electricity. Now most of the world gets to use them. PCs, the internet & smartphones are available to most of the lower income people in above medium income countries. I would say that overall, the common person gets more access to new consumer technology than a decade ago.
Another framework I would like to see used would focus on freedom to make choices, specifically lifestyle choices. How many people choose to take a different job, change careers, work less, etc. I'm not sure how one would go about quantifying this.
I'm not saying this should be the primary method of looking at the economy. I am saying is that if using different frameworks leads you to different conclusions, be suspicious of all of them.
- sentenza 13y agoA thought that I am somewhat scared of is this: What does the non-techie person do when their job disappears as a result of an entire industry collapsing? The collapse of an industry used to take decades but now can happen within a five-year timespan. Frank Rieger and Constanze Kurz raised this point recently when they pointed out that self-driving cars will make hundreds of thousands of drivers unemployed within Germany alone[1]. What if, at some point, these people, justifiedly feeling thrown aside by technological progress, take to the proverbial pitchfork? [1] http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FCCC-Sprecher-warnen-vor-naechster-Rationalisierungswelle-1982949.html http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=ht...
- l33tbro 13y agoBlinding irony being the "cool detachment to all theories guy" persona you project here being equally as abstact as those you observe.
- netcan 13y agoThat's a little hostile. What exactly is rubbing you the wrong way about my comment? Here's the jist of what I am trying to say. (1) I don't know if people are better or worse off now than before. (2) I'm don't think we have a very good quantifiable way of deciding that argument. (3) Many arguments of intelligent people are trying to provide an answer to this question smells a lot like intelligent people trying to fit their world into their philosophical framework. (4) The answer to that question (or some aspects of the answer) may be subjective or at least a bad fit for the economic vocabulary we typically use to tackle it. IE, Has the value of a median family car gone up over the last 50 years because its objective quality has improved or has it gone down because the the people buying them grew up expecting to own one whereas their grandparents found themselves able to afford one, exceeding their expectations when growing up. Any specific statement you find objectionable?