Dear Candidate: What if growth was over?

[JiggsCasey]

Below is a draft of a letter to an imaginary politician up for election later this year:

Dear ______________

You are currently running for office as _____________________ in ____________________. As you know, we are living through economically tough times, and I hear a lot about how the economy can be brought back to stability and prosperity.

However, have you ever considered that economic growth might actually not return? That we might have to build a societal infrastructure based on less?

If so, what would be your plans to mitigate such a situation, to make sure that life can go on for your constituents in a future where "more each year" is no longer possible?

Or alternatively, if you don't have any plans - are you 100 percent certain that growth and prosperity will ever return, and if so, why is it that you see no risk worth looking at?
​

Pretend you're the candidate. How would you answer this question?

The Oil Drum: Campfire | Dear Candidate - What Will You Do if Growth Is Over...?

Follow-up questions:

1. Is there a reason why this kind of letter shouldn't be sent to real people who want our vote?

2a. Would a candidate addressing these issues/questions stand any chance of winning?

2b. If not, might such a candidate, even in a losing effort, influence the election issues and as a result positively impact transition efforts away from growth based economy?

 

[Oddball]

Answer:

How did John Kenneth Galbraith's dire alarmist predictions of such a ridiculous premise, in 1958, work out?

 

[JiggsCasey]

Answer:

How did John Kenneth Galbraith's dire alarmist predictions of such a ridiculous premise, in 1958, work out?

This may be a hard concept for you, but that's not an answer... It's a question.

 

[Oddball]

That's your answer.

From the Revelation, to Malthus, to the Mayan calendar, to Galbraith and Paul Ehrlich, to today's global warming whackos, there's been no shortage of doom-and-gloomery, for those gullible enough to buy into it, in all of human history. Your question is no different.

Can we now get to a relevant question?.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Here is what might be a better letter to that candidate running for a Congressional seat - either an incumbent or a newby:

Dear ________________:

I understand that you are running in the up-coming election as a __________________ from _______________. I am interested in knowing what you intend to do to bring sanity back to the American Congress. Please. No double speak. No side-stepping. No changing the subject to talk about something else. Tell me in 25 words or less what you truthfully intend to do to prove to me that you are honest, sincere, and a person of your word that will represent our district responsibly. My vote depends on your answer.
Best regards -

Joe Blow

Follow-up questions:

(1) Do you believe that any bill passed into law should encompass all American citizens, including those that are serving in Congress?

(2) Because the economy is so bad these days, would you be willing to take a 10% cut in your pay to serve as a member of Congress from ______________?

(3) What are three ways that we can immediately begin to spend less money in this country that you are willing to try and institute into law?

 

[JiggsCasey]

OK, now that those two hijacks - one ignorant, the other irrelevant - have come and gone with a whimper, perhaps a serious response please?

Thanks so much.

Again, why couldn't this question be asked of a potential candidate? Especially considering Bernanke just went on national TV a few weeks ago and admitted that expected GDP growth has slowed to a crawl with no end it sight.

 

[Oddball]

Just because Baghdad Ben can't see an end in sight, doesn't mean that there isn't one.

Like I said, there doesn't seem to be a doom-and-gloom end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario that the gullible and conspiracy theorists won't buy into.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TDqvD34hEA]YouTube - Gloom Despair[/ame]

 

[California Girl]

Here is what might be a better letter to that candidate running for a Congressional seat - either an incumbent or a newby:

Dear ________________:

I understand that you are running in the up-coming election as a __________________ from _______________. I am interested in knowing what you intend to do to bring sanity back to the American Congress. Please. No double speak. No side-stepping. No changing the subject to talk about something else. Tell me in 25 words or less what you truthfully intend to do to prove to me that you are honest, sincere, and a person of your word that will represent our district responsibly. My vote depends on your answer.
Best regards -

Joe Blow

Follow-up questions:

(1) Do you believe that any bill passed into law should encompass all American citizens, including those that are serving in Congress?

(2) Because the economy is so bad these days, would you be willing to take a 10% cut in your pay to serve as a member of Congress from ______________?

(3) What are three ways that we can immediately begin to spend less money in this country that you are willing to try and institute into law?

As always, you take a moronic thread and turn it around.

 

[Richard-H]

All economic booms have been fueled by some technological or otherwise economic revolution, or at least military conquest:

The was the age of exploration followed by the age of colonization.

There was the industrial age, the machine age, the age of electronics, and most recently, the information age.

The simple fact is that in a free market system, unless there is some new economic revolution, investors tighten up - that in turn causes a recession and/or depression.

In fact all things being equal, free market capitalism will always lead to a total economic disaster.

In all of the above economic revolutions, governments have been at the leading edge of funding each one in it's infancy. Government contractors are the first to benefit, then as the economic revolution is privatized the private investors take over and the entire population benefits.

Right now, the 'Clean Energy' initiatiave is our best hope for a new economic revolution - or at least the best minor revolution to hold us over until the next 'great idea' comes along.

Of course the Conservatives are doing everything they can to squash 'Clean Energy'. Fuckin' morons!

Of course that gets back to the original question:

What if there is no great innovation to leadus into the next economic boom? We're screwed.

SOCIALIZE!

 

[Big Black Dog]

OK, now that those two hijacks - one ignorant, the other irrelevant - have come and gone with a whimper, perhaps a serious response please?

Thanks so much.

Again, why couldn't this question be asked of a potential candidate? Especially considering Bernanke just went on national TV a few weeks ago and admitted that expected GDP growth has slowed to a crawl with no end it sight.

If my mother was still alive, she would be greatly disappointed about you thinking I was irrelevant. She might not argue the ignorant part but irrelevant would not make her very happy...

 

[Richard-H]

Here is what might be a better letter to that candidate running for a Congressional seat - either an incumbent or a newby:

Dear ________________:

I understand that you are running in the up-coming election as a __________________ from _______________. I am interested in knowing what you intend to do to bring sanity back to the American Congress. Please. No double speak. No side-stepping. No changing the subject to talk about something else. Tell me in 25 words or less what you truthfully intend to do to prove to me that you are honest, sincere, and a person of your word that will represent our district responsibly. My vote depends on your answer.
Best regards -

Joe Blow

Follow-up questions:

(1) Do you believe that any bill passed into law should encompass all American citizens, including those that are serving in Congress?

(2) Because the economy is so bad these days, would you be willing to take a 10% cut in your pay to serve as a member of Congress from ______________?

(3) What are three ways that we can immediately begin to spend less money in this country that you are willing to try and institute into law?

As always, you take a moronic thread and turn it around.

"(1) Do you believe that any bill passed into law should encompass all American citizens, including those that are serving in Congress?"

There are a few special cases where members of congress must be exempt from particular laws - mostly due to national security reasons. But for the most part, yes, all American citizens should be subject to the same law.

"(2) Because the economy is so bad these days, would you be willing to take a 10% cut in your pay to serve as a member of Congress from ______________?"

Yes, but only if the public guaranteed to stay the hell out of my personal life, especially my sex life. I'm elected to serve the people and to do a job, not to be a demigog for a bunch of whining religious nutcases. Otherwise, my loss of privacy alone makes it reasonable to expect fair compensation.

"(3) What are three ways that we can immediately begin to spend less money in this country that you are willing to try and institute into law?"

Fuck cutting spending. I'll lobby the President to:

1. Issue 5 trillion dollars in new currency and pay off all U.S. Governement debts immediately.

2. Write a law that indexes everyones salary against the rate of inflation on a weekly basis.

Think that sounds nuts? Isreal did just that in the 1970s and it worked like a charm.

Any other dumb questions?

 

[8537]

Answer:

How did John Kenneth Galbraith's dire alarmist predictions of such a ridiculous premise, in 1958, work out?

Tell us about those predictions, Oddball.

 

[JiggsCasey]

As always, you take a moronic thread and turn it around.

Still pissed about getting faced on the Beck fraud Media thread you bailed from, I see? Awww.

Passive-aggressive much?

 

[JiggsCasey]

Just because Baghdad Ben can't see an end in sight, doesn't mean that there isn't one.

OK, genius. Well, why don't you man up and answer the questions in the original post rather than turn everything into a personal pissing match? Would that ever be possible for you, or are you just a perpetual dick?

Like I said, there doesn't seem to be a doom-and-gloom end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario that the gullible and conspiracy theorists won't buy into.

You like to hear yourself talk. It's a classic con trait.

Problem is, you've offered nothing of any substance. Just a whole lot of "no, you're wrong because I say so." Tool.

I'll rely on evidence, you stick with baseless arrogance. Suits you.

Anyhow, here's more... The Fed must just be duping us. They're artificially holding back growth, obviously, because a black socialist is in our White House. Get ur gunz!!!!

Fed: 'Widespread signs' economy is slowing

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The economy grew at a sluggish pace through the summer months, and there are now "widespread signs" that activity is slowing, the Federal Reserve said Wednesday in its latest snapshot of regional economic conditions.

The mixed picture is in line with government data released last month that showed U.S. gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic activity, was much weaker in the second quarter than previously estimated.

The nation's GDP was revised sharply lower to an annual growth rate of 1.6% in the three months ending in June. The initial reading had been for a 2.4% growth rate in the period.

Fed chairman Ben Bernanke acknowledged in a speech late last month that the U.S. economic recovery has lost considerable steam. But he said the central bank is prepared to use "unconventional measures" to boost the economy if the outlook were to "deteriorate significantly."

In its Aug. 10 policy statement, the Fed announced plans last month to begin reinvesting proceeds from securities in its $2 trillion portfolio in to U.S. Treasurys. The central bank had bought billions worth of government debt two years ago to keep interest rates low on home and other consumer loans. But minuets from the August meeting subsequently showed that Fed officials were unusually divided over the policy.​

Right, you deny the era of growth is over and all these entities are lying, but somehow I'M the conspiracy theorist. Classic irony.

Yeah, I'd say it's a VERY legitimate question to ask of ANY candidate. But not people like you. That's why you're not just part of the problem, you ARE the problem. Ridiculing the idea that the question need even be asked? LOL

I'll let you get back to burying your head in the sand, ostrich.

You:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSjK2Oqrgic[/ame]

 

[Oddball]

Just because Baghdad Ben can't see an end in sight, doesn't mean that there isn't one.

OK, genius. Well, why don't you man up and answer the questions in the original post rather than turn everything into a personal pissing match? Would that ever be possible for you, or are you just a perpetual dick?

Because the question is stupid beyond repair, schmuck.

There will always be growth because there will always be people desiring to improve their lot in life.

Like I said, there doesn't seem to be a doom-and-gloom end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario that the gullible and conspiracy theorists won't buy into.

You like to hear yourself talk. It's a classic con trait.

Problem is, you've offered nothing of any substance. Just a whole lot of "no, you're wrong because I say so." Tool.

I'll rely on evidence, you stick with baseless arrogance. Suits you.

Anyhow, here's more... must all just be a "conspiracy" that even the Fed wants us to believe. They're artificially holding back growth, obviously, because a black socialist is in our White House.

Fed: 'Widespread signs' economy is slowing

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The economy grew at a sluggish pace through the summer months, and there are now "widespread signs" that activity is slowing, the Federal Reserve said Wednesday in its latest snapshot of regional economic conditions.

The mixed picture is in line with government data released last month that showed U.S. gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic activity, was much weaker in the second quarter than previously estimated.

The nation's GDP was revised sharply lower to an annual growth rate of 1.6% in the three months ending in June. The initial reading had been for a 2.4% growth rate in the period.

Fed chairman Ben Bernanke acknowledged in a speech late last month that the U.S. economic recovery has lost considerable steam. But he said the central bank is prepared to use "unconventional measures" to boost the economy if the outlook were to "deteriorate significantly."

In its Aug. 10 policy statement, the Fed announced plans last month to begin reinvesting proceeds from securities in its $2 trillion portfolio in to U.S. Treasurys. The central bank had bought billions worth of government debt two years ago to keep interest rates low on home and other consumer loans. But minuets from the August meeting subsequently showed that Fed officials were unusually divided over the policy.​

Right, you deny the era of growth is over, but I'M the conspiracy theorist. Classic irony.

If it's anyone who likes to hear themselves talk (or more correctly whine), it's dopey pessimistic twits, who always see themselves on the effect end of the world.

Maybe if sniveling, despondent little misanthropes like you would quit looking for the cat 5 hurricane behind a silver lining here and there, guys like me wouldn't mock you to death.

In other words.....

 

[JiggsCasey]

Because the question is stupid beyond repair, schmuck.

Translation: "I don't know how to answer the question".... Noted.

There will always be growth because there will always be people desiring to improve their lot in life.

At this point, it became painfully obvious that you have no idea what constitutes or drives growth, and I'm officially arguing with a retard.

If it's anyone who likes to hear themselves talk (or more correctly whine), it's dopey pessimistic twits, who always see themselves on the effect end of the world.

More of you keeping the focus on me, and off your utter inability to address the subject material beyond "it's dumb." God, do you ever suck at this.

Maybe if sniveling, despondent little misanthropes like you would quit looking for the cat 5 hurricane behind a silver lining here and there, guys like me wouldn't mock you to death.

You mock yourself with your redundant idiocy. Misanthropes loathe all of humanity. I only loathe "nothing to see here" 28 percenters like yourself. Huge difference. But, whatever you need to tell yourself, limited poster.

And I ENJOY putting your complete lack of geopolitical awareness on display, so I'm hardly "despondent" about it. Use an online dictionary, as it might help you with big words you routinely misuse.

It is telling that you can't acknowledge, let alone counter, the CNN money story provided above. That's because it's beyond your pay grade. Nor can you deny the irony of accusing ME of conspiracy theory, when your entire premise here relies on conspiracy theory. There is no conspiracy regarding the meltdown of the global economy, cool guy. Just geology, arrogance, and stupidity by free market zealots like yourself.

Stick to emotional, red-meat threads like Quran burning and Pelosi bashing. Zzzz.

 

[8537]

There will always be growth because there will always be people desiring to improve their lot in life.

It's basic physics that the economy can not grow forever. Every marginal increase in output requires a marginal increase in inputs, and inputs are not infinite. No strength of desire can create something from nothing.

Scientists learned this fact over a century ago. Most economists are still blissfully ignorant of said fact.

 

[Oddball]

Because the question is stupid beyond repair, schmuck.

Translation: "I don't know how to answer the question".... Noted.

There will always be growth because there will always be people desiring to improve their lot in life.

At this point, it became painfully obvious that you have no idea what constitutes or drives growth, and I'm officially arguing with a retard.

If it's anyone who likes to hear themselves talk (or more correctly whine), it's dopey pessimistic twits, who always see themselves on the effect end of the world.

More of you keeping the focus on me, and off your utter inability to address the subject material beyond "it's dumb." God, do you ever suck at this.

Maybe if sniveling, despondent little misanthropes like you would quit looking for the cat 5 hurricane behind a silver lining here and there, guys like me wouldn't mock you to death.

You mock yourself with your redundant idiocy. Misanthropes loathe all of humanity. I only loathe "nothing to see here" 28 percenters like yourself. Huge difference. But, whatever you need to tell yourself, limited poster.

And I ENJOY putting your complete lack of geopolitical awareness on display, so I'm hardly "despondent" about it. Use an online dictionary, as it might help you with big words you routinely misuse.

It is telling that you can't acknowledge, let alone counter, the CNN money story provided above. That's because it's beyond your pay grade. Nor can you deny the irony of accusing ME of conspiracy theory, when your entire premise here relies on conspiracy theory. There is no conspiracy regarding the meltdown of the global economy, cool guy. Just geology, arrogance, and stupidity by free market zealots like yourself.

Stick to emotional, red-meat threads like Quran burning and Pelosi bashing. Zzzz.

The subject is dumb, to the point of moronic.

If anything is going to kill economic growth, it's the likes of the overbearing, technocratic, do-gooder blowhard congressweasel, to whom you're addressing your stupid question in this mythical scenario.

If any question in this area is pertinent, maybe it would be "when are you overbearing, technocratic, do-gooder blowhards get the hell out of the way and let growth take place"?

But unfortunately, you seem to believe that it's overbearing, technocratic, do-gooder blowhards who are the be-all-end-all creators of economic growth...That's your problem.

Oh...BTW...I'm not a "conservative" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean anymore), Reverend Malthus.

 

[Oddball]

There will always be growth because there will always be people desiring to improve their lot in life.

It's basic physics that the economy can not grow forever. Every marginal increase in output requires a marginal increase in inputs, and inputs are not infinite. No strength of desire can create something from nothing.

Scientists figured learned this fact over a century ago. Most economists are still blissfully ignorant of said fact.

"Smart people" also told us that heavier-than-air flight was impossible, the sound barrier was impenetrable, the Earth is flat, the universe is fixed, etcetera.

Consider, if for only a moment, that all we know now isn't all there is to know and/or worth knowing.

 

[JiggsCasey]

There will always be growth because there will always be people desiring to improve their lot in life.

It's basic physics that the economy can not grow forever. Every marginal increase in output requires a marginal increase in inputs, and inputs are not infinite. No strength of desire can create something from nothing.

Scientists learned this fact over a century ago. Most economists are still blissfully ignorant of said fact.

As are most "nothing to see here" posters like Oddball.

But, you're speaking way above the learning curve of guys like him, as he's proven with his empty, miss-the-point rhetoric right in this thread. Afterall, the exponential function? That's that science crap, ain't it?