Slashdot Mirror

Glad you thought so, if you want to read more about "business cycle macro-economics" from a similar perspective I recommend searching for information on "Modern Monetary Theory" and "Monetary Realism."

Robert Brenner's paper What's Good for Goldman Sachs is Good for America is also a must-read (or at least, must-skim) item. He covers the global macro-economy during the second half of the 20th century and up to the 2008 financial crisis; even if one disagrees with some of his conclusions the graphs and exposition are indispensable towards developing your own "realist" view of the present situation.

They are sitting on significant (even record breaking) reserves, but these were only acquired by relying on the ultra-cheap credit coming out of the advanced economies' central banks. There are a lot of reasons not to reinvest those reserves. One is the preference of some shareholders for dividends, but also severe overcapacity in manufacturing has caused a big decrease in the return on investment.

Cash reserves / liquidity and absolute profits aside, the rate of profit has been in decline for about 40 years. Basically over ~1973 - present we have have seen (1) collapse of the profit rate, leading to (2) suppression of labor as an attempt to recover lost margins, all accompanied by (3) continued productivity growth. Why the rate of profit fell is of course debated, but chronic overcapacity is a very likely candidate. That position is argued here by UCLA economist Robert Brenner. Everyone should read that paper (at least to skim and check out the graphs). Even if you disagree with his diagnosis for the financial crisis (and actually he offers no prescriptions), the analysis of the historical economic data and global economic actors during 1973 - present is outstanding.

I initially thought along the same lines as the GP's question: what happens as the proportion of the population needed for essential labor becomes smaller and smaller?

Ultimately, a system where the only way to obtain goods is via remuneration for "essential" labor must give way to one where all human occupations are remunerated, from child-rearing to all of the arts and sciences. This process is already underway, as a higher and higher proportion of demand shifts to the service and creative sectors, and as scientific research comes to be seen as an end in itself (perhaps due to its beneficial side effects). Eventually currently undervalued labor, such as raising children, the production of art and pursuing personal happiness might supported as well. What we consider a hand-out today could be seen as payment due for helping maintain the fabric of civilization.

If labor productivity continues to grow and thus induce systemic overcapacity, it seems inevitable that that excess capacity eventually employed by society. In science fiction the solution has been the destruction of wealth or the imposition of permanent war, but in real life less drastic responses such as shortening the work week or institution of a basic income seem more likely.

I was also heavily influenced by Vonnegut's Player Piano, which got me thinking about the (supposed) paradox of detrimental progress, as well as Economics of Global Turbulence by Robert Brenner, which taught me the impact of that paradox functions in the global economy. In this paper (free PDF) Brenner succinctly restates the book and extends its analysis up to the recent economic crisis. The data and astute analysis of economic actors over the past 50 years are enlightening, even if one disagrees with his diagnosis (severe and chronic overcapacity in manufacturing). Everyone should understand at least how the global economy has actually behaved since the end of post-Depression / post-War growth in the late 1960's (systematic collapse of the corporate rate of profit even in the face of supply-side economics, labor suppression and continued productivity growth).

You should call it the Kennedy / Johnson / Nixon / Ford / Carter / Reagan / Bush / Clinton / Bush / Obama economy. Seriously, the basic economic policy in the US has not changed at all, only the delivery mechanisms (jobs programs vs. interest rate vs. tax cuts).

I highly recommend you read this paper. Even if you disagree with Brenner's conclusions, the historical data should be enlightening.

Bullshit. It doesn't take much reading to get a feeling for what's really going on.

Wall street supports such moves by increasing your stock price.

Wall Street does so at its own peril. Look at corporate profits over that same period (1970 - present). All the labor suppression in the world couldn't save the corporate rate of profit.

Obviously the righthand lane has far more traffic then since it feeds two roads. While it's understandable it would be slower, it is far worse than it ought to be and the reason: the selfish pricks who assume they have more reason for haste than anybody else - who drive in the left hand lane until the very last possible moment and then try to push into the right to jump the qeue, thus slowing everybody down far more than they otherwise would.
The more it slows down, the more pricks push past the qeue the worse it gets.

Such patterns are common all over the world - selfish drivers generally make traffic problems much worse, not to mention the worst daily problems are usually caused by accidents - which you could (at least almost) entirely avoid with a system of driver-less cars

1) Please get off your high horse. If you're merging early, you're making the problem worse.
2) Studies have shown that the ideal merge pattern is for everyone to merge as late as possible, in a "zipper" fashion where the lane is ending. When you merge early, you are actually creating multiple merge spots. Multiple merge spots = more slow down. More congestion.

If you merge early, you are a part of the problem.

Here is one source: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/744926sv#page-2

Here's an interesting article on patent continuation abuse, hot off a google. No idea how accurate it is, but worth reading.

Results: Adolescents with AUD [Alcohol Use Disorder] showed greater brain response to the spatial working memory task in bilateral parietal cortices, and diminished response in other regions including the left precentral gyrus and bilateral cerebellar areas (clusters >= 943 ul, p < .05), although groups did not differ on behavioral measures of task performance. The degree of abnormality was greater for teens who reported experiencing more withdrawl or hangover symptoms, and who consumed more alcohol.

As you can see, the single human study can be used to conclude...basically nothing. There may be a permanent link between alcohol use and brain structure...but that link might very well be causal in the other direction. This study won't give you much reason to lean in either direction. They didn't even find testable behavioral effects to go along with their fMRI statistical voodoo; it isn't really convincing evidence that a link exists in either direction. In the previous section of the report ("Personality Traits, Mental Disorders, and Adolescent Alcohol Use"), however, a much greater profusion of studies suggest that alcohol abuse is caused by mental disorders.

In that vein, other studies have shown that people with unmedicated ADHD are more likely to abuse alcohol and other drugs. Alcohol and other drugs, conversely, have not been shown to give people ADD.

If you're a neo-prohibitionist, though, you don't really give a shit about the science. You already have the solution, and just need to find a problem.

This doesn't surprise me too much. The SCINI Project has been finding neat stuff for some time now, even while they were just testing their equipment.

Microbes have even been found living in the ice of the polar plateau (at constant temperatures around -50C).

And check out Anoxycalyx Joubini (Volcano Sponge), some specimens of which are thought to be 15,000 years old and still living. These are animals that make those Sequoia look like juveniles.