Great Expectations?

[GGT]

Nearly every developed nation is busy trying to balance recovery with austerity, figuring which ways will jumpstart slow/stagnant economies, reducing unemployment, taxes, debts and deficits, etc. Politicians of every stripe are pushing their agendas and using key words like GROWTH. With an expectation that we'll return to previous growth rates of 4% or more....because that's been the trend for decades.

Perhaps it's that growth (and industrial revolutions) that's been the exception and not the rule, creating expectations that don't match reality? Short of another Sputnik moment in our lifetimes, I'm skeptical of politicians and economists promising/projecting future growth based on the past. There are a few theories out there that are challenging conventional wisdom, but probably won't be given credibility because it seems....pessimistic.

Most people want every next generation to be better, do better, have better, etc. It's practically built into American DNA. One of the reasons people are so freaked out about The Great Recession, globalization and global slowing, income inequality (1%-99%-47%) and social immobility is that we're forced to address if our expectations are based in reality. If our kids or grandkids will be "better off" than we are now, or if there's a need to lower some expectations, and accept a new plateau. What do you think?

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.c...evolutions/?hp

http://faculty-web.at.northwestern.e...wth%20Over.pdf

http://american.com/archive/2012/aug...t-growth-cycle

[Hazir]

Eh, how much did real income in the US grow again since the 1970s? I thought most people could by now have some idea that the post war growth spurt was the exception rather than a solid base for growth in the long term.

[Dreadnaught]

Nearly every developed nation is busy trying to balance recovery with austerity

I disagree. Many countries in Europe are imposing austerity on the private sector, while the public sector gets off relatively lightly.

[Hazir]

I disagree. Many countries in Europe are imposing austerity on the private sector, while the public sector gets off relatively lightly.

Which countries would that be? The Brits for example are on a path to grind down the public sector to levels below those in the USA. In Holland austerity mostly means a shift from tax on income to VAT, a reduction of the deductability of interest paid on mortgages, and raising the retirement age (social security).

[RandBlade]

Has the USA even started down the path to austerity yet?

I don't hear figures of 4% growth being bandied about by anyone either, a return to 2-2.5% growth in the medium term is what is normally said here. Growth will happen for as long as science/technology/human understanding etc improves and business environments etc permit it. I don't see any reason to believe that we are reaching an end to the era of knowledge or that we have tapped all potential for improvements. Much of the world is growing, the USA isn't even in recession unlike most of Europe so I'm not certain what you're talking about.

[Ominous Gamer]

I don't see any reason to believe that we are reaching an end to the era of knowledge

You can find a pretty good argument that we are indeed existing the information era. This doesn't mean that information will suddenly stop being created or discovered, just like it wasn't somehow not created and discovered before entering this era. It simply means the progress (library expansion, storage, transmission, computation) seen during this era can't and won't expand at its current rate. Moore's Law will eventually fail.

[RandBlade]

You can find a pretty good argument that we are indeed existing the information era. This doesn't mean that information will suddenly stop being created or discovered, just like it wasn't somehow not created and discovered before entering this era. It simply means the progress (library expansion, storage, transmission, computation) seen during this era can't and won't be expanding at its current rate. Moore's Law will eventually fail.

Or the opposite and it'll keep improving at an exponential rate.

Storage is reaching a stage where with the digital era its peanuts to store what was once a major project. Take the Kindle for example where I can hold in my hand a device that can hold thousands of books, download more in a second. Any out of copyright great books can be downloaded instantly for free. Get a sudden urge to read Les Miserables or Jane Austen? Done.

Its funny you mention libraries because in 50 years time I doubt there'll be many at all, they're fast becoming obsolete. Yet despite that our access to knowledge and information has never been easier or quicker and we're only just started really delving down the path of this as people try to start putting it to serious functional use. Only 10 years ago when I wanted to research something seriously I went to the library, not the internet. I think we're only just scratching the surface of possibilities and if anything Moore's law (as a general theory as applied, not specifically transistors) may be too conservative.

[Ominous Gamer]

Wrong sense of library. Not that I think libraries will dissappear, I'm certain some will fail to evolve, but given our current push towards the importance of idea ownership (especially as 3D printing comes about) libraries will find their technological footing again.

Tech can only go so small (and fast) before we reach the limits of its ability. Doesn't matter if we're talking about transitors at the atomic level (Intel has predicted that end coming by 2018), quantum or DNA computing. They each have theoretical limits. The best you could hope for is a technological singularity (true end of libraries). Which again would put us outside the Information Era.

[RandBlade]

Just because A technology has its limits (and I agree on that) does not mean that ALL technology does or will be met within this century. While nano-processes may become more common, that technology is a tool and only part of the bigger picture. There are far more technologies out there that we still have a long way to improve on yet. Plus information includes how we use and apply it as well, not just how we create it.

[Ominous Gamer]

Plus information includes how we use and apply it as well, not just how we create it.

This is information, not the information era. Yes formulas and calculations will continue to improve. Hell, we're still working on the perfect wheel and gear. It does not mean they will continue to improve at their current or previous rate.

[RandBlade]

This is information, not the information era. Yes formulas and calculations will continue to improve. Hell, we're still working on the perfect wheel and gear. It does not mean they will continue to improve at their current or previous rate.

You're right, but they may just as equally improve more.

I see no evidence of a slowing down in improvements actually happening, can you point to it? People have been saying such will happen for centuries but instead we exponentially improve further.

[GGT]

I see no evidence of a slowing down in improvements actually happening, can you point to it? People have been saying such will happen for centuries but instead we exponentially improve further.

It's noted in the links, Gordon's research paper in particular goes back centuries and covers the main Industrial Revolutions (3). The links in the OP are the meat of the discussion, not the intro I wrote.

edit--you can't eat an iPad.


Hazir's correct about 'income growth' since the 70s. That era had only one IR (technology/information), and was the beginning of higher income inequality, shedding jobs, restructuring labor, etc. Other theories assume the financial engineering, monetizing mortgage debt, and the housing bubbles were reactions to globalization and slow domestic growth. More short term 'profits' in asset switching, than real sustainable growth, with a growing middle class. That's part of the Big Picture, too.

As for policy....'austerity' that strips funding from education, health, or infrastructure aren't recipes for growth. It's hard to pin down Romney's proposals (because he flips around so much, and doesn't give specifics) but I'm pretty sure Ryan's budget assumes 4% growth in GDP in his math. That's part of the theory that tax cuts create jobs and grow an economy, and Trickle Down. Well, the last decade or two rather busts that theory. The wealthy have recovered and corporate profits are high, but their trillions in cash aren't putting folks to work. And the middle class is still stuck in the doldrums.

[RandBlade]

It's noted in the links, Gordon's research paper in particular goes back centuries and covers the main Industrial Revolutions (3). The links in the OP are the meat of the discussion, not the intro I wrote.

edit--you can't eat an iPad.

You don't need to eat an iPad. Never heard of Maslow? We've satisfied the need for food a long time ago

[Lewkowski]

It's noted in the links, Gordon's research paper in particular goes back centuries and covers the main Industrial Revolutions (3). The links in the OP are the meat of the discussion, not the intro I wrote.

edit--you can't eat an iPad.


Hazir's correct about 'income growth' since the 70s. That era had only one IR (technology/information), and was the beginning of higher income inequality, shedding jobs, restructuring labor, etc. Other theories assume the financial engineering, monetizing mortgage debt, and the housing bubbles were reactions to globalization and slow domestic growth. More short term 'profits' in asset switching, than real sustainable growth, with a growing middle class. That's part of the Big Picture, too.

As for policy....'austerity' that strips funding from education, health, or infrastructure aren't recipes for growth. It's hard to pin down Romney's proposals (because he flips around so much, and doesn't give specifics) but I'm pretty sure Ryan's budget assumes 4% growth in GDP in his math. That's part of the theory that tax cuts create jobs and grow an economy, and Trickle Down. Well, the last decade or two rather busts that theory. The wealthy have recovered and corporate profits are high, but their trillions in cash aren't putting folks to work. And the middle class is still stuck in the doldrums.

Strangely enough people with food stamps can somehow afford a smart phone with a data plan. I guess you can't eat iPads but it appears that if you can afford one you shouldn't be worried about starving..

[RandBlade]

Agreed.