[barnaby33]

Ah techno triumphalism at its finest. The recession will end, someday. California will still be a nice place to live relative to most other places in the US. Will it return to its former burnished glory is the question? I think yes, but only relatively. Other places will just be worse off.

My reasons are fairly simple, resource exhaustion, govt regulation and plain old over population. Californians have used up a prodigious amount of our natural wealth, arable land, oil etc in the last century. As the conservatives here like to point out (meandandale particularly) the govts business unfriendly policies will contribute to lots of companies moving lower wage, lower skill jobs to other states/countries. You can’t have an economy that is successfull only with IT/Biotech at the top and food production at teh bottom, talk about social strife sheesh. Lastly two many people period. Whether its by controlling immigration, incentivizing people to have less children or both, the way for all of us to have a higher standard of living is for there to be less of us. Infinite desire in a finite world is always a recipe for collapse.
Josh

[barnaby33]

Ah techno triumphalism at its finest. The recession will end, someday. California will still be a nice place to live relative to most other places in the US. Will it return to its former burnished glory is the question? I think yes, but only relatively. Other places will just be worse off.

My reasons are fairly simple, resource exhaustion, govt regulation and plain old over population. Californians have used up a prodigious amount of our natural wealth, arable land, oil etc in the last century. As the conservatives here like to point out (meandandale particularly) the govts business unfriendly policies will contribute to lots of companies moving lower wage, lower skill jobs to other states/countries. You can’t have an economy that is successfull only with IT/Biotech at the top and food production at teh bottom, talk about social strife sheesh. Lastly two many people period. Whether its by controlling immigration, incentivizing people to have less children or both, the way for all of us to have a higher standard of living is for there to be less of us. Infinite desire in a finite world is always a recipe for collapse.
Josh

[barnaby33]

Ah techno triumphalism at its finest. The recession will end, someday. California will still be a nice place to live relative to most other places in the US. Will it return to its former burnished glory is the question? I think yes, but only relatively. Other places will just be worse off.

My reasons are fairly simple, resource exhaustion, govt regulation and plain old over population. Californians have used up a prodigious amount of our natural wealth, arable land, oil etc in the last century. As the conservatives here like to point out (meandandale particularly) the govts business unfriendly policies will contribute to lots of companies moving lower wage, lower skill jobs to other states/countries. You can’t have an economy that is successfull only with IT/Biotech at the top and food production at teh bottom, talk about social strife sheesh. Lastly two many people period. Whether its by controlling immigration, incentivizing people to have less children or both, the way for all of us to have a higher standard of living is for there to be less of us. Infinite desire in a finite world is always a recipe for collapse.
Josh

[barnaby33]

develj I’d amend your formula as such: Productive Population Growth + Productivity Growth. Ethiopia had a population explosion in the 80’s, but it wasn’t productive. In fact it dragged Ethiopia down, (as does much of Africa’s population) relative to each countries economic capacity.

Money is merely a yardstick for measuring and helping to distribute wealth. Pick the system you like best. As davelj pointed out each system has its pros and cons. The last 20 years have seen some amazing growth as well as a horrid collapse.

At this point the usefulness of a monetary system should be measured by its ability to help us sort out the pyrrhic growth from the useful. The system we currently have, as its currently constituted, is not well suited to that task.

I’d like to say I have a neat answer but I don’t. The fiscal restraint forced by a gold standard would be a good start, unfortunately we couldn’t fight any wars or fund our social entitlements. There are many out there who in a vacuum think thats a good thing, I’m not so sure.

The best system I can imagine is one in which those who print the money aren’t doing so for political favor and have real regulators watching not just what they do, but who benefits. I suppose that is just a fantasy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

develj I’d amend your formula as such: Productive Population Growth + Productivity Growth. Ethiopia had a population explosion in the 80’s, but it wasn’t productive. In fact it dragged Ethiopia down, (as does much of Africa’s population) relative to each countries economic capacity.

Money is merely a yardstick for measuring and helping to distribute wealth. Pick the system you like best. As davelj pointed out each system has its pros and cons. The last 20 years have seen some amazing growth as well as a horrid collapse.

At this point the usefulness of a monetary system should be measured by its ability to help us sort out the pyrrhic growth from the useful. The system we currently have, as its currently constituted, is not well suited to that task.

I’d like to say I have a neat answer but I don’t. The fiscal restraint forced by a gold standard would be a good start, unfortunately we couldn’t fight any wars or fund our social entitlements. There are many out there who in a vacuum think thats a good thing, I’m not so sure.

The best system I can imagine is one in which those who print the money aren’t doing so for political favor and have real regulators watching not just what they do, but who benefits. I suppose that is just a fantasy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

develj I’d amend your formula as such: Productive Population Growth + Productivity Growth. Ethiopia had a population explosion in the 80’s, but it wasn’t productive. In fact it dragged Ethiopia down, (as does much of Africa’s population) relative to each countries economic capacity.

Money is merely a yardstick for measuring and helping to distribute wealth. Pick the system you like best. As davelj pointed out each system has its pros and cons. The last 20 years have seen some amazing growth as well as a horrid collapse.

At this point the usefulness of a monetary system should be measured by its ability to help us sort out the pyrrhic growth from the useful. The system we currently have, as its currently constituted, is not well suited to that task.

I’d like to say I have a neat answer but I don’t. The fiscal restraint forced by a gold standard would be a good start, unfortunately we couldn’t fight any wars or fund our social entitlements. There are many out there who in a vacuum think thats a good thing, I’m not so sure.

The best system I can imagine is one in which those who print the money aren’t doing so for political favor and have real regulators watching not just what they do, but who benefits. I suppose that is just a fantasy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

develj I’d amend your formula as such: Productive Population Growth + Productivity Growth. Ethiopia had a population explosion in the 80’s, but it wasn’t productive. In fact it dragged Ethiopia down, (as does much of Africa’s population) relative to each countries economic capacity.

Money is merely a yardstick for measuring and helping to distribute wealth. Pick the system you like best. As davelj pointed out each system has its pros and cons. The last 20 years have seen some amazing growth as well as a horrid collapse.

At this point the usefulness of a monetary system should be measured by its ability to help us sort out the pyrrhic growth from the useful. The system we currently have, as its currently constituted, is not well suited to that task.

I’d like to say I have a neat answer but I don’t. The fiscal restraint forced by a gold standard would be a good start, unfortunately we couldn’t fight any wars or fund our social entitlements. There are many out there who in a vacuum think thats a good thing, I’m not so sure.

The best system I can imagine is one in which those who print the money aren’t doing so for political favor and have real regulators watching not just what they do, but who benefits. I suppose that is just a fantasy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

develj I’d amend your formula as such: Productive Population Growth + Productivity Growth. Ethiopia had a population explosion in the 80’s, but it wasn’t productive. In fact it dragged Ethiopia down, (as does much of Africa’s population) relative to each countries economic capacity.

Money is merely a yardstick for measuring and helping to distribute wealth. Pick the system you like best. As davelj pointed out each system has its pros and cons. The last 20 years have seen some amazing growth as well as a horrid collapse.

At this point the usefulness of a monetary system should be measured by its ability to help us sort out the pyrrhic growth from the useful. The system we currently have, as its currently constituted, is not well suited to that task.

I’d like to say I have a neat answer but I don’t. The fiscal restraint forced by a gold standard would be a good start, unfortunately we couldn’t fight any wars or fund our social entitlements. There are many out there who in a vacuum think thats a good thing, I’m not so sure.

The best system I can imagine is one in which those who print the money aren’t doing so for political favor and have real regulators watching not just what they do, but who benefits. I suppose that is just a fantasy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

The Fed’s exit strategy was borrowed from Mr Pine Box over at the SDCIA. A short summary of Mr Pine Box, I wonder how he’s doing these days.
Josh

[barnaby33]

The Fed’s exit strategy was borrowed from Mr Pine Box over at the SDCIA. A short summary of Mr Pine Box, I wonder how he’s doing these days.
Josh

[barnaby33]

The Fed’s exit strategy was borrowed from Mr Pine Box over at the SDCIA. A short summary of Mr Pine Box, I wonder how he’s doing these days.
Josh

[barnaby33]

The Fed’s exit strategy was borrowed from Mr Pine Box over at the SDCIA. A short summary of Mr Pine Box, I wonder how he’s doing these days.
Josh

[barnaby33]

The Fed’s exit strategy was borrowed from Mr Pine Box over at the SDCIA. A short summary of Mr Pine Box, I wonder how he’s doing these days.
Josh

[barnaby33]

duplicate

[barnaby33]

duplicate

[Author]

Posts