Ken Barrows
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Why should Greece “grow?” Why should any country? If industrial society is a losing proposition, why adopt its language? Unfortunately, neither Greece nor any other country has the fortitude to shift direction. Guess Greeks think industrial society can save them. Good luck.
MMT believes, I think, that debt can grow faster than output in perpetuity. I am skeptical about that assumption, but MMT proponents may be right (no, they won’t).
Whether tax cuts pay for themselves is debatable? Industrial society doesn’t pay for itself anymore, so it follows that tax cuts don’t, either.
Nassim will be convinced of global warming once all spots over the Earth warm uniformly like a pie in the oven. I am interested, though, in the idea that CO2 in the atmosphere can increase forever without an increase in temperature. Assuming for a moment that temperature has not increased for decades despite the added CO2, why is that something that will always remain true? And, still, the oceans continue to acidify, except in a few choice spots, I am sure.
Patricia,
Not all infrastructure investment is good investment. I support the argument that industrial society really doesn’t pay for itself. Stimulus for permaculture might be a good idea, for cars not so much. Stimulus to prevent people from starving is also a good idea. Austerity may be preached but government budgets suggest a lot of interests are reaping a windfall.Well, creation of money is in theory infinite, but it seems Mr. Mitchell is placing his bets that debt can perpetually increase faster than output. For now, austerity can (and maybe should) be postponed. Forever? I don’t think so.
Our betters just don’t understand. Debt is not a bug; it’s a feature. Until more realize this fact, we’re pissing into a headwind.
Nassim,
OK, we both think the other is full of **it. But let me know what I look at. First, I don’t scan the globe for favorable datapoints. This global warming thing is going to take a long time to resolve itself. I’ll keep looking at global annual temperatures, acidification of the oceans, and what percentage of global CO2 emissions have been emitted since 1990 (about 50% now and, of course, climbing)It would be interesting to see you debunk skepticalscience.com, but I am not holding my breath. Happy to hear sea level falling in the GBR, but the disappearing islands in the nearby Solomon Islands tells a different story. (Note: I was an American Peace Corps volunteer there from 1990-92.
Nassim,
Very interesting on the sea level there. I look forward to your hard hitting link that shows sea level is falling everywhere, especially Miami, FLA.Let me get this straight. Banks are now reluctant to loan to new businesses but are salivating to loan money to automobile purchasers with low incomes. Makes sense.
Outrageous? Yep. Bloated? Yes. But health care is 1/6 of GDP in the USA. Get rid of a good chunk of it and is the American economy in chronic “recession?” Who are the wealth creators who will fill the vacuum?
Dr. D,
So what data can everyone agree is important in the climate debate? Answer: none. Gee, we’ve had a really warm winter in Denver, so there must be global warming, right? But it was really cold in NYC earlier this month, so global warming cancelled.More snow and warmer temps aren’t necessarily incompatible. Here’s a temperature record (fake news to those who don’t like it):
https://www.climatecentral.org/news/tiny-maps-climate-change-20652Nassim, ice moves. You used to state Antarctic ice volume was high, but that doesn’t work for the moment, so on to the next carefully chosen datapoint.
I take it you don’t want governments to place limits on carbon emissions. So, after you convince us all warming is a hoax, you’ll have to start finding tidbits that show the ocean isn’t acidifying, either.
“The president known as Old Hickory outlawed chattel slavery. Not necessarily because he so loved his African constituents, who were politically considered to be two-thirds of a person, but in hopes they would do what they could to hinder the Confederate war effort.”
Maybe I am missing something, but I thought Andrew Jackson was Old Hickory. He died around 1845. Also, the Constitution found slaves to be 3/5 of a person in determining U.S. House representation.
With my nitpicking done, I have to say it was a thought-provoking article. It’s all about net energy. Slaves gave antebellum “civilization” some of that. The cornucopians think electricity will give modern society a whole lot more of it. I am skeptical.
Aren’t youth taught that there are no limits? You’d have to be quite the contrarian to think about what is really wealth before you’re an old fart with a lifetime’s worth of experiences.
Dr. D,
That’s it. I haven’t seen anything contrary to the proposition that total debt in the economy is supposed to increase faster than total output forever or until the levee breaks.
Don’t rely on rich people to say what’s good for society. Their personal interests get in the way of sound judgment.
Trump’s immigration order is, of course, nonsensical. But I think all sides of the debate miss a larger immigration issue. The USA issues about 1M green cards per year. Many of the new holders will adopt higher consumption and higher debt lifestyles. Liberals can be pro current policy or pro environmental, but not both. If you want the USA to continue to issue the same number of green cards per year for 20-30 years, you’re really saying I don’t give a f**k about the environment. Choices, choices.
Nice scale on the graph! Should have done it in increments of 100, then it would be a flat line.
Here’s some other information:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/06/arctic-antarctic-ice-melt-november-recordIlargi,
As an American, I can tell you that American politics, Democrat or Republican, is all about more cars. Even the enviros want a nation of a couple of hundred million electric vehicles. Battery production apparently has no environmental impact.One should never focus on extreme warmth or cold unless it suits one’s purposes. Otherwise, if this data is accurate, it was a slightly warmer than normal day on Planet Earth (compared to recent daily anomalies):
https://cci-reanalyzer.org/wx/DailySummary/#T2_anomNassim,
Easily explained. The daily temperature of the Earth is only .39 C over the 1979-2000 average:
https://cci-reanalyzer.org/wx/DailySummary/#T2_anomThe problem is cultural: Anglo-American, European, Japanese, Chinese. Maybe it’s human but most of the world’s inhabitants haven’t had the opportunity to eat the seed corn, so they should be excused.
If you accept this graph as accurate, I don’t see the conclusion as in doubt. It’s all in the data, in the final analysis:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/lo-hem/201603.gifPeace on Earth, including your adversaries:
https://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.phpNassim,
You always look at a very convenient time period for your argument–classic cherry picking. Try this:
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=lhzK1-woaiQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA407&dq=correlation+co2+and+temperature&ots=Ol7JRjkV-k&sig=T-Zpu29aNMZXMZm_dU8jSIMYTzA#v=onepage&q=correlation%20co2%20and%20temperature&f=falseNassim,
You try so hard. I think climate change is a very complex issue, of course, but in the long run only three points matter: (1) is CO2 a greenhouse gas, (2) is CO2 increasing in the atmosphere–Mauna Loa, and (3) the paleoclimate correlation between temperature and CO2. That’s it, my friend. You must truly disagree with one of these three points.Sorry to be difficult, but here’s another article that doesn’t mention private debt. No one ever seems to address the question of whether total debt can perpetually rise faster than total income. There are many that fervently believe all good things will come once total debt is reduced, but I think there’s ample evidence that such a nirvana will not happen.
For me, how are governments going to satisfy the desire for more cars and bigger houses without more total debt? I say they won’t. The choice is between a continuation of the trend of gains in debt exceeding gains in income or a much simpler society. It’s nothing more than that.
E Swanson,
Not only do we get by on the exploitation cheap fossil fuels (getting less cheap to produce, notwithstanding the current low price for consumers), but we now need debt to rise faster than income. We need both of these phenomena to continue if we want to avoid considering a different future.China shouldn’t repeat the mistakes of the West? Probably not, but what’s the alternative? If a country wants to “boom,” how can it do that without more and more debt? I am sure someone has a detailed analysis on how to grow ad infinitum without more debt, but I haven’t seen it. If there is such an analysis, I suspect it makes a lot of pie in the sky assumptions, e.g. Julian Simon and changing nickel into copper or uranium from seawater.
Do we really want more consumer spending? Or can we not imagine a prosperous society without constantly increasing spending and debt?
If Trump were running for the President of the United States of White America, he’d win easily. But he’s not and he won’t win. It’s a problem any GOP nominee would face.
I find it amusing that economists never put growth in context, e.g. output/income versus debt. The economist can add but not subtract.
Maybe this link is more comprehensive:
Nassim,
You haven’t given us an update on Antarctic Sea Ice. You were very gung ho on it a couple of years back:
https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Just go to slide 4. What a difference two years makes.
