The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Austrian Economics vs. Australian Economics in Theory and Practice
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I’m not sure where this is from.

 
Hide 49 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I have no idea, either, but the Australian looks like Emily Youcis’s work.

  2. Anonymous[160] • Disclaimer says:

    Need a few translations of the Aussie lingo.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    I think it was just making fun and is fake Stry-in lingo, ya dingo.

    BTW, I don't feel bad saying that I wouldn't take advise on how to tie my shoelaces, much less economic policy, from a people who eat condiments that taste like asphalt ... nay, not just a piece of the road, but a piece of the road marinated in roadkill for a week out in the outback.
    , @Alan D
    This may help:

    Non-bludging = hard-working (in this context)
    Cobber = friend, who must be another male. A very old-fashioned word, rarely used now.
    Fair shake of the sauce bottle = fair deal
    Slab of VB = six-pack of VB, a type of beer
    Durry = cigarette
    Yakka = work (physical work, not office work)
    Smoko = morning or afternoon break from work
    Telly = television
    Bloke = man. Equivalent to "guy", except that "you blokes" always refers to men.
    Poofter = gay
    Sheila = woman
    Maggotted = drunk
    Knock-off = end of the day's work

    I have left the obscenities out. The man in the drawing would not use them - he would probably say "bloody" instead. Also, they are not just known by Australians.
  3. My Aussie friends say no one uses fair dinkum anymore – even claim that the less discerning of yutes can’t even recognise it.

    • Replies: @George
    I think 'Fair Dinkum' might be contemporary with Mises and Hayak. Like late 1800s early 1900. It's possible that the wise crack was being passed around Australia for a century. Maybe it should give the date of the Pissup Act as 1883 not 1983.

    https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/fair-dinkum.html

    , @NickG

    My Aussie friends say no one uses fair dinkum anymore – even claim that the less discerning of yutes can’t even recognise it.
     
    Whereas 'no worries' may be encountered from Dartmouth Devon, to Cape Town.
  4. American economics is a mixture of the Austrian and Australian theories, is it not?

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    Yep. It's called a mixed economy. It's the best system we humans can devise in this stage of our evolution.
  5. It’s a pity the great Australian larrikan has gone the way of the Tasmanian Tiger. Now the whiniest pack of whinging SJWs in the western world. Sad.

    • Agree: Simon in London
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Larrikin.
  6. Yeah, all fun about Australians aside (cause Americans, including me, love all thing stry-lin!), I don’t think making fun of Austrian economics because it’s too esoteric cuts it as humor. Yeah “blah, blah..” – the reason they may have to drone on like that is because lots of people have minds that have been too closed by big-ed brainwashing to understand very SIMPLE concepts like say “what do prices mean?” They need a simple concept explained to them in 5 ways, because they can’t wrap their mind around the previously-widely-understood concept of freedom.

    Take interest rates – what too early in the morning for this? It doesn’t have to be boring, Just consider that the use of someone else’s money for a time has a natural price*, just like anything else. When the privately-run “FED” forces interest rates down into the basement for a decade (via setting the price of US Treasury bonds) it screws up pricing of money (interest rates). Little old ladies whose husbands had worked their asses off to save, are now getting $200 monthly from that investment pot rather than the expected $1200. Their investment “advisors” must then invest in the risky propped-up stock market.

    All this is a “moral hazard” a term the Austrian Economists would use, meaning it discourages others from doing WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN the right thing, saving up some money for later.

    I guess I’m not in the mood for fun this morning, or I didn’t get this cartoon, one.

    * No, Interest rates are NOT supposed to be = inflation!

    • Replies: @Glaivester
    Basically, I describe Austrian economics this way:

    In a given unit of time, an economy produces x units of goods/services/value-added resources etc. It can do three things with these: consume them for immediate use (I'll call this "consumption" although technically the second category also consumes them), use them to improve future production for future use ("investment"), or stockpile them (I would call this "savings" but I will call it "stockpile" so as not to confuse people using monetary/accounting definitions of savings).

    In the same given unit of time, previously stockpiled goods are also consumed; generally when things are stockpiled by an economy, the stockpiles are dynamic rather than static (i.e. you don't save something until there is a shortage, rather you are constantly taking out older inventoried goods and replacing them with new ones).

    Basically, an economy has an equilibrium state where the stockpile is a certain percentage of the economy (determined by the preferences of the people in the economy); use of previous goods will be balanced out by the addition of new goods, with the only changes being that the stockpile grows (or shrinks) with the economy, or that the size changes if people's preferences change. Basically, interest rates are the mechanism for keeping investment, stockpiling, and consumption in line with people's preferences.

    According to the Austrian theory, when credit is artificially expanded (interest rates made artificially low), the result is that the society begins consuming and investing more than it is producing. This is sustained by drawing down the stockpiles. The recession occurs when one of two things happen: (1) the decreased stockpile causes changes in interest rates, credit availability, etc. that cause consumption and investment to return to normal patterns (actually, to go lower for a period of time in order to restore the stockpile, then to return to normal), or (2) the stockpile runs out of certain necessary things. Basically, (1) happens if the economy is left alone after the initial expansion, and we only approach (2) if the banks keep trying to forestall the recession by expanding credit - once (2) happens, there will be a recession, because at that point expanding credit simply means hyperinflation.

    Basically, imagine any situation where you think you have more of some consumable good than you do, and base your decisions on the idea that you have more in reserve than you have. What happens when you find out that you had less than you thought - what happens if you find out because you run out? That's a recession.

    A few points: Why is it bad to invest more than you are producing? Because a lot of investments are not worth anything (except potentially) until they are complete. A 90%-finished hotel is useless - its only value is in the potential that it gets completed. Also, because a lot of investments are gambles - you research 1000 compounds, only 1 of which turns out to be a useable drug. If you think you have more to invest than you do, you might invest in riskier investments than you can afford (i.e. researching compounds with a 0.1% chance of finding a drug when you really need to only research ones with at least a 0.3% chance). Increasing investment beyond production increases the numbers of investments that waste resources.

    Why does the recession produce unemployment? Because jobs not only produce goods, they consume goods, and generally they produce different goods than they consume. For example, a baker produces baked goods, but he consumes wheat, eggs, milk, etc. Also, a lot of jobs are essentially investments and follow the same rules as above: an R&D job may take years before an actual product is produced based on the R&D; and there may be 10 researchers going down dead ends for every one researcher who is on the right track.

    The point is, an economy can sustain risk-of-no-return jobs and delayed-return jobs by using the stockpile to fund them. When the stockpile is depleted, jobs have to consume more efficiently (e.g. lower pay), and the time frame for a return on the investment in the job becomes shorter (i.e. fewer research jobs, what jobs there are will be more focused on producing something right now).
    , @Thorfinnsson
    It's three jokes.

    Joke #1 - Austrians are pedantic dweebs
    Joke #2 - Australians are belligerent, colorful, and not very intellectual
    Joke #3 - Austria and Australia sound very similar which leads to occasional confusion

    Joke #1 is at your expense.

  7. @Anonymous
    Need a few translations of the Aussie lingo.

    I think it was just making fun and is fake Stry-in lingo, ya dingo.

    BTW, I don’t feel bad saying that I wouldn’t take advise on how to tie my shoelaces, much less economic policy, from a people who eat condiments that taste like asphalt … nay, not just a piece of the road, but a piece of the road marinated in roadkill for a week out in the outback.

  8. And yet, somehow Australia continues to be not only the best country on earth, but an outright paradise compared to just about anywhere else.

    • Replies: @dr kill
    Settle down.
    , @Lurker
    Sadly certain parties are working 24/7 to bring that state of affairs to a close.
  9. If optics matter, then Australian economics looks whole lot more fun.

  10. Auspol twitter is pretty funny. My personal favourites.

    And here is a nice nexus point for more memery like the image above.

    Essentially the Australian political class is thoroughly corrupt and the FIRE economy people are the main lobby. Along with a Murdochified press who have enabled the centre right in Australia to support the privatisation and gutting of the country along with worse and worse labour conditions and importation of more and more Asian immigrants on all kinds of visas. Australia is the most extreme example of this kind of economics that is popular in the Anglosphere. (Despite it being unpopular in all the kinds of countries that people from the Anglosphere visit and say ‘I wish we could have things like that’) It’s like Thatcher/Reagan/Blairism honed to a fine art.

    Australia has the highest proportion of temporary employment contracts in the developed world and the highest price to wage costs for housing. (Linking Tweets so Steve can get into Auspol twitter and because they get displaced more commonly than direct image links.)

    Australia always used to be a kind of utopia in Britain and Ireland (Where most immigrants to Australia came until very recently). A normal man could get a nice house in a nice suburb and there was a real sense of a classless society. Now dual income earning young people can’t get a house to start a family unless they sign on to mortgages they can only just afford (Assuming job security or wage security that are less and less certain) that are assured to go into negative equity, only question is by how much. (Making it even harder to leave if your neighbourhood gets consumed by the pale of diversity)

    https://twitter.com/BoomersAreEvil/status/978457573085990912

    https://twitter.com/BoomersAreEvil/status/955628858278948865

    My favourite tweet.


    Won’t somebody think of the real estate agents who can’t trick and cheat young couples anymore?!

  11. Once again, here is the philosophy department at an Australian university, courtesy of Monty Python:

    Note to younger commenters: The original video of our TV shows was not quite as fuzzy and out of focus as what you see here. It’s just that the only way we could copy things back then was by chiseling each individual frame into stone.

    • LOL: PV van der Byl
    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Buzz, I'm surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python. I know that the Simpson's and American Dad are popular with my two young daughters, as was South Park, they're all funny, but I think MP was classic humor.
    , @Achmed E. Newman

    It’s just that the only way we could copy things back then was by chiseling each individual frame into stone.
     
    LUXURY! In my day, we had to hold an 800 lb. video camera in front of the TV very steady for the whole show, then run 34 kilometers down to the film developers at the drug store apothecary's before the film expired, sleep on a park bench for a week until the movie came back developed, then scan each frame, 30 per each second of the movie, into a compressed mpeg file, then drag and drop it onto the cloud. I mean a real cloud - you needed an open-cockpit bi-plane, like a Waco or a Stearman.

    And the kids geeks today, they wouldn't believe you. No.

    BTW, it's bad enough listening to British or Australian accents. It's even worse listening to Englishmen imitating Australians, which I think they're doing, but how would I know for sure? I still miss about 1/4 of the lines here, after having seen this 4 or 5 times!

  12. @Buzz Mohawk
    Once again, here is the philosophy department at an Australian university, courtesy of Monty Python:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh66yZj3qlk

    Note to younger commenters: The original video of our TV shows was not quite as fuzzy and out of focus as what you see here. It's just that the only way we could copy things back then was by chiseling each individual frame into stone.

    Buzz, I’m surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python. I know that the Simpson’s and American Dad are popular with my two young daughters, as was South Park, they’re all funny, but I think MP was classic humor.

    • Replies: @European-American
    The Entire Monty Python Catalog is Headed to Netflix
    https://screenrant.com/netflix-monty-python-catalog/
    , @MJMD
    There was a major cable expansion where I live in 1994. It took more than a decade for nearly all of the new channels to be dumbed down into playing nothing but reality TV, but when they started out they took their niche mandates seriously, and the one with a more artistic bent reran Monty Python for the first five years of its existence. My brothers and I watched the entire series, loved it, demanded to see all the movies, and our irresponsible parents indulged us (12 is probably too young to watch "The Meaning of Life," but it's still my favourite).

    You're right, though. No one I know of has reran "Monty Python's Flying Circus" since then, and it's become unjustly obscure among young people. I would love to revisit it, and see what I get out of it now. It seemed just like wildly funny craziness when I was a kid, but the odd thing that I realize rewatching some of their sketches as an adult is how dated and political (and British) many of their jokes are.

    But then the first six or so seasons of "The Simpsons", which I also watched at the time, were the same way. They've been in syndication constantly, and I actually rewatched each episode as I grew older and got more and more of the jokes each time. It's sad that that show is going to be permanently ruined for future syndication by all of the absolutely terrible episodes from Season 8 on. "South Park" is perhaps the only show in history to consistently get funnier and funnier with time.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Joe, I just caught that Abo line after having heard this before and missing it and noticed the ape-looking aborigine serving Bruce, Bruce, Bruce, Bruce, and Micheal some food. Between that and the poofter lines, I don't thing this will EVER come back on TV before Peak Stupidity! Damn shame though.
    , @Olorin
    Way too politically incorrect. "Prejudice/Shoot the Poof," "Military Close Order Swanning About," "The Lumberjack Song," and "University of Woolloomooloo Philosophy Department" (with its blackface waiter)--nope, fahgeddaboudit.

    And all that joking about The Chosen in "Life of Brian." Plus poor Loretta.

    Also gorgeous Carol Cleveland. The mere sight of her would launch a passel of pussyhats in that general direction to scream at the sky about the injustices of true Diversity. You know, the kind that makes some people smart and beautiful and desirable and smart...and others not.

    If they launched a reprise of Monty Python it'd look like this:

    https://s-i.huffpost.com/gen/3175916/images/n-GHOSTBUSTERS-628x314.jpg

    I hate giving PuffHo clicks, but that photo says it all.

    , @dfordoom

    Buzz, I’m surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python.
     
    Monty Python hasn't aged that well. Especially their TV series. Some inspired moments but a lot of it is trying desperately to be clever and edgy and ending up being pretty tedious.

    The relentless mocking of everything English also gets a bit wearying. Monty Python played its small part in trashing English society.
  13. Australian economics explained:

    American Empire ruling class, starting with Nixon, prepares to use China as cheap labor location to increase profits for transnational corporations. Nixon sells out the sovereignty of the USA by preparing China to be cheap labor area to enhance the plutocrat plundering of the globe. It’s called “globalization.”

    Australia digs stuff out of ground to sell to China and Australia uses monetary extremism and mass immigration to create asset bubbles in real estate.

    Australian movie about post-financial collapse — The Rover — starring Guy Pearce, has the right instinct for what will soon happen to Australia as China is isolated by newly nationalist Trump-inspired Trilateral types.

    Australian kangaroos are now using performance enhancing steroids to increase their fighting skills and ability to take a beating. This kangaroo takes a solid punch and doesn’t seem bothered at all.

    Australian Alzado Boom Boom Mancini Kangaroo:

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Nixon sells out the sovereignty of the USA by preparing China to be cheap labor area to enhance the plutocrat plundering of the globe. It’s called “globalization.”

    China made little use of foreign investment in building their industrial infrastructure and trade liberalization preceded the advent of the Nixon administration by more than three decades. It's the consumption of agricultural goods and raw materials which is the most price sensitive (i.e. tariff sensitive), not manufacutres.
  14. There’s actually a great Australia series that deals with these sorts of things. Details the doings of a government agency trying to build all the new infrastructure the country needs from the rapid growth from immigration. Two episodes highlight the kind of FIRE economy lobby in the form of the government liaison guy. Also generally satirises modern office environment and beyond.

    Steve would enjoy this. (You’ll get used to the high pitch needed to evade copyright claim)

    This one details corruption in a Chinese luxury apartment development.

    This one details the lobbyists trying to get land rezoned for ghost estates. (Lots of FIRE growth rhetoric, though they never mention immigration. “Let’s get the conversation started”)

  15. @Buffalo Joe
    Buzz, I'm surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python. I know that the Simpson's and American Dad are popular with my two young daughters, as was South Park, they're all funny, but I think MP was classic humor.

    The Entire Monty Python Catalog is Headed to Netflix
    https://screenrant.com/netflix-monty-python-catalog/

  16. MJMD says:
    @Buffalo Joe
    Buzz, I'm surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python. I know that the Simpson's and American Dad are popular with my two young daughters, as was South Park, they're all funny, but I think MP was classic humor.

    There was a major cable expansion where I live in 1994. It took more than a decade for nearly all of the new channels to be dumbed down into playing nothing but reality TV, but when they started out they took their niche mandates seriously, and the one with a more artistic bent reran Monty Python for the first five years of its existence. My brothers and I watched the entire series, loved it, demanded to see all the movies, and our irresponsible parents indulged us (12 is probably too young to watch “The Meaning of Life,” but it’s still my favourite).

    You’re right, though. No one I know of has reran “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” since then, and it’s become unjustly obscure among young people. I would love to revisit it, and see what I get out of it now. It seemed just like wildly funny craziness when I was a kid, but the odd thing that I realize rewatching some of their sketches as an adult is how dated and political (and British) many of their jokes are.

    But then the first six or so seasons of “The Simpsons”, which I also watched at the time, were the same way. They’ve been in syndication constantly, and I actually rewatched each episode as I grew older and got more and more of the jokes each time. It’s sad that that show is going to be permanently ruined for future syndication by all of the absolutely terrible episodes from Season 8 on. “South Park” is perhaps the only show in history to consistently get funnier and funnier with time.

  17. @Hubbub
    American economics is a mixture of the Austrian and Australian theories, is it not?

    Yep. It’s called a mixed economy. It’s the best system we humans can devise in this stage of our evolution.

  18. Baby Boomer coward Steve Keen is an Australian economist who understands Austrian economics.

    Steve Keen knows his money and banking but he is such a baby boomer coward that he doesn’t have the balls to honestly incorporate mass immigration into his monetary policy thinking.

    Steve Keen talks about Australian and Canadian private debt being massive and ready to cause a financial implosion and asset price collapse. Australian and Canadian real estate interests and financial interests have used mass immigration and monetary policy — and resource extraction — to create two economies set to implode.

    I’ll say it:

    Deport the foreigners — legal or not — and raise the interest rates — and you’ll see real estate prices implode in Australia and Canada.

  19. Immigration and asylum The Observer

    Legal challenge says ‘right to rent’ rules discriminate against non-UK nationals

    The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants argues that status checks make landlords favour those with British passports

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/02/legal-challenge-rent-rules-discriminate-non-uk-nationals

    An interesting case where a faction of the real estate industry does not want to service the forced migration industry, even though all real estate would appear to benefit greatly from immigration.

  20. @Cloud of Probable Matricide
    My Aussie friends say no one uses fair dinkum anymore - even claim that the less discerning of yutes can’t even recognise it.

    I think ‘Fair Dinkum’ might be contemporary with Mises and Hayak. Like late 1800s early 1900. It’s possible that the wise crack was being passed around Australia for a century. Maybe it should give the date of the Pissup Act as 1883 not 1983.

    https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/fair-dinkum.html

  21. … proper blokes work paid higher than poofter and Sheila work …

    As it should be.

  22. The “Australian Economics” section above is actually very darn close to how the country was managed during its period of greatest prosperity: ensure that working men could earn a good single-income family wage, buy a house and a car, and have plenty of leisure time to boot. My Silent Generation parents bought their first house in suburban Sydney in 1964 for about two years-worth of my father’s salary as a recently graduated teacher. Today, a 3-bedroom house in that same suburb (Dundas Valley) has a median price of $1.2m, or roughly 17 years’ salary for a graduate teacher.

    The only error in the cartoon is the FDPPA date of 1983. That’s about two decades too late. By 1983, Australia was about to embark on its “economic rationalization” adventure: floating the dollar, dropping tariffs, etc., in the name of “competitiveness”. Oh, and opening the floodgates wide to immigration, especially of Asians and Africans.

  23. Roth and Wolfe are gone, but literary criticism lives on.

  24. @Charles Pewitt
    Australian economics explained:

    American Empire ruling class, starting with Nixon, prepares to use China as cheap labor location to increase profits for transnational corporations. Nixon sells out the sovereignty of the USA by preparing China to be cheap labor area to enhance the plutocrat plundering of the globe. It's called "globalization."

    Australia digs stuff out of ground to sell to China and Australia uses monetary extremism and mass immigration to create asset bubbles in real estate.

    Australian movie about post-financial collapse -- The Rover -- starring Guy Pearce, has the right instinct for what will soon happen to Australia as China is isolated by newly nationalist Trump-inspired Trilateral types.

    Australian kangaroos are now using performance enhancing steroids to increase their fighting skills and ability to take a beating. This kangaroo takes a solid punch and doesn't seem bothered at all.

    Australian Alzado Boom Boom Mancini Kangaroo:

    https://youtu.be/FIRT7lf8byw

    Nixon sells out the sovereignty of the USA by preparing China to be cheap labor area to enhance the plutocrat plundering of the globe. It’s called “globalization.”

    China made little use of foreign investment in building their industrial infrastructure and trade liberalization preceded the advent of the Nixon administration by more than three decades. It’s the consumption of agricultural goods and raw materials which is the most price sensitive (i.e. tariff sensitive), not manufacutres.

  25. @Cowboy Shaw
    It's a pity the great Australian larrikan has gone the way of the Tasmanian Tiger. Now the whiniest pack of whinging SJWs in the western world. Sad.

    Larrikin.

  26. @Buzz Mohawk
    Once again, here is the philosophy department at an Australian university, courtesy of Monty Python:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh66yZj3qlk

    Note to younger commenters: The original video of our TV shows was not quite as fuzzy and out of focus as what you see here. It's just that the only way we could copy things back then was by chiseling each individual frame into stone.

    It’s just that the only way we could copy things back then was by chiseling each individual frame into stone.

    LUXURY! In my day, we had to hold an 800 lb. video camera in front of the TV very steady for the whole show, then run 34 kilometers down to the film developers at the drug store apothecary’s before the film expired, sleep on a park bench for a week until the movie came back developed, then scan each frame, 30 per each second of the movie, into a compressed mpeg file, then drag and drop it onto the cloud. I mean a real cloud – you needed an open-cockpit bi-plane, like a Waco or a Stearman.

    And the kids geeks today, they wouldn’t believe you. No.

    BTW, it’s bad enough listening to British or Australian accents. It’s even worse listening to Englishmen imitating Australians, which I think they’re doing, but how would I know for sure? I still miss about 1/4 of the lines here, after having seen this 4 or 5 times!

    • Replies: @Graham
    "I still miss about 1/4 of the lines here, after having seen this 4 or 5 times!"

    There were subtitles in Catalan. Sheer luxury.
  27. @Buffalo Joe
    Buzz, I'm surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python. I know that the Simpson's and American Dad are popular with my two young daughters, as was South Park, they're all funny, but I think MP was classic humor.

    Joe, I just caught that Abo line after having heard this before and missing it and noticed the ape-looking aborigine serving Bruce, Bruce, Bruce, Bruce, and Micheal some food. Between that and the poofter lines, I don’t thing this will EVER come back on TV before Peak Stupidity! Damn shame though.

  28. Does the weakening of Australia implied above mean New Zealand finally gets the cruel Ozzie boot off It’s throat?

  29. OT: First quarter economic growth in the U.S. was just downgraded
    to 2.2%. Out of this 1% is due to the rapid population
    growth. Hence 1.2% is the real growth – that’s basically stagnation,
    far cry from the 5-6% rates of economic growth the U.S. was
    experiencing in the 1960s, at the height of its prosperity and social equality.
    It’s strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don’t seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Interesting post. Are those inflation-adjusted numbers?
    , @PhysicistDave
    Anon 2 wrote:

    It’s strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don’t seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.
     
    Our productivity in manufacturing and agriculture has just exploded over the last 70 years.

    But, the problem is that ag and manufacturing is now only a small part of the economy: we are now a "service" economy. Some of those "services" are really part of the manufacturing economy: e.g., tasks that used to be done in-house that are now outsourced.

    But, an awful lot of the "service" economy are "services" that no one really wants or needs but that we have to, somehow, pay for collectively. There is the whole "education" bubble from K-12 through to universities -- bloat in administrators, classroom teachers who are no longer teaching legit subjects, millions of kids in college learning nothing of value, etc. There's the health-care mess: try looking at a hospital bill for just a few days stay -- the accounting is all fantasy world: they have no idea of their actual costs.

    Our financial system is a house of cards -- anti-productive, but it pays some people very well; our monetary system is one of the great fakes of human history.

    Politicians, the legal profession, the judicial system -- just reading the daily papers makes the point.

    The productive fraction of our economy is the most productive in human history, and yet most of this production is being siphoned off to pay for various parasites and in simple waste.

    I do wonder how long this can go on before the whole thing just falls apart.

    , @Intelligent Dasein

    It’s strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don’t seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.
     
    How could they? It should be obvious (but for some reason it isn't) that more effort expended to accomplish the same task is by definition a decrease in productivity, and that's exactly what the latest wave of automation-hype is all about.

    For instance, let's take a relatively simple task like burger-flipping, which always seems to be the stereotypical example. The basic approach to flipping burgers is to pay a low wage to a low-skilled person who will require little more than a spatula and a two minute tutorial to get squared away---not very capital intensive at all. But now suppose you want to design a robot and an AI system to perform the same task. The capital expenditures are multiple orders of magnitude higher.

    First, you have to hire engineers and programmers to design the system, test it, and work out all the bugs, so you'll require the services of an engineering firm which will naturally need to amortize not only the salaries of its employees but all of its overhead, which will be reflected in the fee they charge you. Then, once you have a serviceable design, you will still need to manufacture the robot, which will require you to enlist the services of (probably several) manufactures and pay for their overhead. The final bill is already mounting steeply, so in order to make this venture profitable you will have to take advantage of economies of scale by mass-producing your new robots and hoping to sell them. But that will require a sales and marketing team, and even if you've sold thousands of units forward, you will still need to ship and install them, and that means transportation fees, contractors, and the remodeling of thousands of burger joints. Even after all this is said and done, your robots will have a depreciation cycle throughout which they will need to be regularly repaired or replaced, lest they stop working altogether. Do you see where I'm going this?

    Compare that entire Rube Goldberg scheme to Pedro and his spatula, and tell me which is more efficient? Which is a better use of scare capital? Or to phrase it another way, how could it possibly be more productive to automate burger-flipping than to just hire somebody to do it?

    Automation does not work for simple, service-based tasks. The Industrial Revolution achieved initial success in the areas of transportation, agriculture, mining, and manufacturing because these processes can all be massively scaled up and markets can still be found for the excess.* But there is no natural market for a machine that can flip 200 burgers per hour. There are not that many customers wanting to buy that many burgers, no matter how low the price goes. It's all uneconomical and really rather silly.

    So why have there been so many articles about automation and AI recently, and why does there seem to be a full court PR campaign on to mainstream these ideas? It's because this is how modern corporations operate these days. They do not care about sustainability or the long-term profitability of their business initiatives. They've all adopted the Silicon Valley unicorn model of pump-and-dump, i.e. they come up with some bright and shiny idea about how to technologize the workplace, sell it to the idiotic management, attract huge amounts of investment capital on the promise of future productivity gains, and then distribute the largess throughout the whole parasitical ecosystem of consulting firms, tech workers, marketers, and overseas labor arbitragers. The original "capitalists" are paid off long before the ill effects are felt. The whole thing is a classic bust-out.

    (*This is not invariably true. The Industrial Revolution both required and came of age with the credit-lending practices of the modern banking industry and its associated bubbles and busts. These three things---machine industry, bank credit, and financialization---are cognate phenomena and are but different facets of the same fundamental process.)
  30. J.Ross says: • Website

    >where this is from

    The greatest thing about 4chan memes is that anonymous universality is part of their style — a Zionist, a post-Zionist, and a Zionism-neutral person can repurpose fundamentally the same cartoon or characters to fight each other, true informational equality — but at the same time there is a maximum of style and not just a stick figure.
    This is best seen in Polandball, where the histories and characters of nation-states are represented by sentient orbs spread with the country’s colors. The Russian propaganda apparatus (in a move which most thoroughly renders establishmentarian theories about Russian electoral interference laughable) utterly failed to grasp the anonymous universality aspect when it put forward a professionally executed, highly-polished, simplistically propagandistic ripoff titled “Country Spheres.” This ripoff has been mercilessly parodied, which is almost unnecessary, since it is so bad. A polandball comic might encompass the sweep of Roman imperial history, represent the Falklands conflict, or a daydream; Country Spheres is almost always a one-panel dialogue between Russia and a competitor, and always with the result that the competitor wishes they could be Russia. Apart from Ukrainians, nobody, least of all a Russian, could possibly believe this. Not even if they have space tigers.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    IIRC Polandball comes from Krautchan.
  31. @Buffalo Joe
    Buzz, I'm surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python. I know that the Simpson's and American Dad are popular with my two young daughters, as was South Park, they're all funny, but I think MP was classic humor.

    Way too politically incorrect. “Prejudice/Shoot the Poof,” “Military Close Order Swanning About,” “The Lumberjack Song,” and “University of Woolloomooloo Philosophy Department” (with its blackface waiter)–nope, fahgeddaboudit.

    And all that joking about The Chosen in “Life of Brian.” Plus poor Loretta.

    Also gorgeous Carol Cleveland. The mere sight of her would launch a passel of pussyhats in that general direction to scream at the sky about the injustices of true Diversity. You know, the kind that makes some people smart and beautiful and desirable and smart…and others not.

    If they launched a reprise of Monty Python it’d look like this:

    I hate giving PuffHo clicks, but that photo says it all.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Olorin, thank you, PC ruins a lot of things, humor included.
  32. Call that a knife?

  33. @Anon 2
    OT: First quarter economic growth in the U.S. was just downgraded
    to 2.2%. Out of this 1% is due to the rapid population
    growth. Hence 1.2% is the real growth - that's basically stagnation,
    far cry from the 5-6% rates of economic growth the U.S. was
    experiencing in the 1960s, at the height of its prosperity and social equality.
    It's strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don't seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.

    Interesting post. Are those inflation-adjusted numbers?

  34. @Anonymous
    Need a few translations of the Aussie lingo.

    This may help:

    Non-bludging = hard-working (in this context)
    Cobber = friend, who must be another male. A very old-fashioned word, rarely used now.
    Fair shake of the sauce bottle = fair deal
    Slab of VB = six-pack of VB, a type of beer
    Durry = cigarette
    Yakka = work (physical work, not office work)
    Smoko = morning or afternoon break from work
    Telly = television
    Bloke = man. Equivalent to “guy”, except that “you blokes” always refers to men.
    Poofter = gay
    Sheila = woman
    Maggotted = drunk
    Knock-off = end of the day’s work

    I have left the obscenities out. The man in the drawing would not use them – he would probably say “bloody” instead. Also, they are not just known by Australians.

    • Replies: @anon
    Fair shake of the sauce bottle = fair deal
    Slab of VB = six-pack of VB, a type of beer


    1. It's ''Fair suck of the sauce bottle'', or ''Fair suck of the Sav[eloy]'', or just ''Fair suck''.
    Haven't heard it in at least 30 years. A saveloy is a type of boiled sausage, dyed red.. Haven't seen one for years. Sauce bottle refers to a wine or spirit bottle being passed around
    2.A slab is a carton of cans or small bottles of beer, so called because of the resemblance to a concrete slab.
    In common use only for the last 20 years or so.
  35. @Dave from Oz
    And yet, somehow Australia continues to be not only the best country on earth, but an outright paradise compared to just about anywhere else.

    Settle down.

  36. @Anon 2
    OT: First quarter economic growth in the U.S. was just downgraded
    to 2.2%. Out of this 1% is due to the rapid population
    growth. Hence 1.2% is the real growth - that's basically stagnation,
    far cry from the 5-6% rates of economic growth the U.S. was
    experiencing in the 1960s, at the height of its prosperity and social equality.
    It's strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don't seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.

    Anon 2 wrote:

    It’s strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don’t seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.

    Our productivity in manufacturing and agriculture has just exploded over the last 70 years.

    But, the problem is that ag and manufacturing is now only a small part of the economy: we are now a “service” economy. Some of those “services” are really part of the manufacturing economy: e.g., tasks that used to be done in-house that are now outsourced.

    But, an awful lot of the “service” economy are “services” that no one really wants or needs but that we have to, somehow, pay for collectively. There is the whole “education” bubble from K-12 through to universities — bloat in administrators, classroom teachers who are no longer teaching legit subjects, millions of kids in college learning nothing of value, etc. There’s the health-care mess: try looking at a hospital bill for just a few days stay — the accounting is all fantasy world: they have no idea of their actual costs.

    Our financial system is a house of cards — anti-productive, but it pays some people very well; our monetary system is one of the great fakes of human history.

    Politicians, the legal profession, the judicial system — just reading the daily papers makes the point.

    The productive fraction of our economy is the most productive in human history, and yet most of this production is being siphoned off to pay for various parasites and in simple waste.

    I do wonder how long this can go on before the whole thing just falls apart.

  37. @J.Ross
    >where this is from

    The greatest thing about 4chan memes is that anonymous universality is part of their style -- a Zionist, a post-Zionist, and a Zionism-neutral person can repurpose fundamentally the same cartoon or characters to fight each other, true informational equality -- but at the same time there is a maximum of style and not just a stick figure.
    This is best seen in Polandball, where the histories and characters of nation-states are represented by sentient orbs spread with the country's colors. The Russian propaganda apparatus (in a move which most thoroughly renders establishmentarian theories about Russian electoral interference laughable) utterly failed to grasp the anonymous universality aspect when it put forward a professionally executed, highly-polished, simplistically propagandistic ripoff titled "Country Spheres." This ripoff has been mercilessly parodied, which is almost unnecessary, since it is so bad. A polandball comic might encompass the sweep of Roman imperial history, represent the Falklands conflict, or a daydream; Country Spheres is almost always a one-panel dialogue between Russia and a competitor, and always with the result that the competitor wishes they could be Russia. Apart from Ukrainians, nobody, least of all a Russian, could possibly believe this. Not even if they have space tigers.

    IIRC Polandball comes from Krautchan.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Probably, Germans always make great stuff. Also, a lot of good early ones were about Germany.
    http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--oRsonMNK--/778031796987559720.gif
  38. @snorlax
    IIRC Polandball comes from Krautchan.

    Probably, Germans always make great stuff. Also, a lot of good early ones were about Germany.

  39. @Buffalo Joe
    Buzz, I'm surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python. I know that the Simpson's and American Dad are popular with my two young daughters, as was South Park, they're all funny, but I think MP was classic humor.

    Buzz, I’m surprised that no network has reprised or re-run Monty Python.

    Monty Python hasn’t aged that well. Especially their TV series. Some inspired moments but a lot of it is trying desperately to be clever and edgy and ending up being pretty tedious.

    The relentless mocking of everything English also gets a bit wearying. Monty Python played its small part in trashing English society.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
  40. @Olorin
    Way too politically incorrect. "Prejudice/Shoot the Poof," "Military Close Order Swanning About," "The Lumberjack Song," and "University of Woolloomooloo Philosophy Department" (with its blackface waiter)--nope, fahgeddaboudit.

    And all that joking about The Chosen in "Life of Brian." Plus poor Loretta.

    Also gorgeous Carol Cleveland. The mere sight of her would launch a passel of pussyhats in that general direction to scream at the sky about the injustices of true Diversity. You know, the kind that makes some people smart and beautiful and desirable and smart...and others not.

    If they launched a reprise of Monty Python it'd look like this:

    https://s-i.huffpost.com/gen/3175916/images/n-GHOSTBUSTERS-628x314.jpg

    I hate giving PuffHo clicks, but that photo says it all.

    Olorin, thank you, PC ruins a lot of things, humor included.

  41. @Achmed E. Newman
    Yeah, all fun about Australians aside (cause Americans, including me, love all thing stry-lin!), I don't think making fun of Austrian economics because it's too esoteric cuts it as humor. Yeah "blah, blah.." - the reason they may have to drone on like that is because lots of people have minds that have been too closed by big-ed brainwashing to understand very SIMPLE concepts like say "what do prices mean?" They need a simple concept explained to them in 5 ways, because they can't wrap their mind around the previously-widely-understood concept of freedom.

    Take interest rates - what too early in the morning for this? It doesn't have to be boring, Just consider that the use of someone else's money for a time has a natural price*, just like anything else. When the privately-run "FED" forces interest rates down into the basement for a decade (via setting the price of US Treasury bonds) it screws up pricing of money (interest rates). Little old ladies whose husbands had worked their asses off to save, are now getting $200 monthly from that investment pot rather than the expected $1200. Their investment "advisors" must then invest in the risky propped-up stock market.

    All this is a "moral hazard" a term the Austrian Economists would use, meaning it discourages others from doing WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN the right thing, saving up some money for later.

    I guess I'm not in the mood for fun this morning, or I didn't get this cartoon, one.

    * No, Interest rates are NOT supposed to be = inflation!

    Basically, I describe Austrian economics this way:

    In a given unit of time, an economy produces x units of goods/services/value-added resources etc. It can do three things with these: consume them for immediate use (I’ll call this “consumption” although technically the second category also consumes them), use them to improve future production for future use (“investment”), or stockpile them (I would call this “savings” but I will call it “stockpile” so as not to confuse people using monetary/accounting definitions of savings).

    In the same given unit of time, previously stockpiled goods are also consumed; generally when things are stockpiled by an economy, the stockpiles are dynamic rather than static (i.e. you don’t save something until there is a shortage, rather you are constantly taking out older inventoried goods and replacing them with new ones).

    Basically, an economy has an equilibrium state where the stockpile is a certain percentage of the economy (determined by the preferences of the people in the economy); use of previous goods will be balanced out by the addition of new goods, with the only changes being that the stockpile grows (or shrinks) with the economy, or that the size changes if people’s preferences change. Basically, interest rates are the mechanism for keeping investment, stockpiling, and consumption in line with people’s preferences.

    According to the Austrian theory, when credit is artificially expanded (interest rates made artificially low), the result is that the society begins consuming and investing more than it is producing. This is sustained by drawing down the stockpiles. The recession occurs when one of two things happen: (1) the decreased stockpile causes changes in interest rates, credit availability, etc. that cause consumption and investment to return to normal patterns (actually, to go lower for a period of time in order to restore the stockpile, then to return to normal), or (2) the stockpile runs out of certain necessary things. Basically, (1) happens if the economy is left alone after the initial expansion, and we only approach (2) if the banks keep trying to forestall the recession by expanding credit – once (2) happens, there will be a recession, because at that point expanding credit simply means hyperinflation.

    Basically, imagine any situation where you think you have more of some consumable good than you do, and base your decisions on the idea that you have more in reserve than you have. What happens when you find out that you had less than you thought – what happens if you find out because you run out? That’s a recession.

    A few points: Why is it bad to invest more than you are producing? Because a lot of investments are not worth anything (except potentially) until they are complete. A 90%-finished hotel is useless – its only value is in the potential that it gets completed. Also, because a lot of investments are gambles – you research 1000 compounds, only 1 of which turns out to be a useable drug. If you think you have more to invest than you do, you might invest in riskier investments than you can afford (i.e. researching compounds with a 0.1% chance of finding a drug when you really need to only research ones with at least a 0.3% chance). Increasing investment beyond production increases the numbers of investments that waste resources.

    Why does the recession produce unemployment? Because jobs not only produce goods, they consume goods, and generally they produce different goods than they consume. For example, a baker produces baked goods, but he consumes wheat, eggs, milk, etc. Also, a lot of jobs are essentially investments and follow the same rules as above: an R&D job may take years before an actual product is produced based on the R&D; and there may be 10 researchers going down dead ends for every one researcher who is on the right track.

    The point is, an economy can sustain risk-of-no-return jobs and delayed-return jobs by using the stockpile to fund them. When the stockpile is depleted, jobs have to consume more efficiently (e.g. lower pay), and the time frame for a return on the investment in the job becomes shorter (i.e. fewer research jobs, what jobs there are will be more focused on producing something right now).

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Thank you for that explanation in the plainest English possible, Glaivester. One term used a lot is "mal-investment". Any time extra money (from the stockpile) could be used more efficiently (for a better increase in productivity or better returns) than it is used for, that's mal-investment. Artificially low interest rates encourage this, as you state.
  42. @Anon 2
    OT: First quarter economic growth in the U.S. was just downgraded
    to 2.2%. Out of this 1% is due to the rapid population
    growth. Hence 1.2% is the real growth - that's basically stagnation,
    far cry from the 5-6% rates of economic growth the U.S. was
    experiencing in the 1960s, at the height of its prosperity and social equality.
    It's strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don't seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.

    It’s strange that all those changes we see around us in AI, robotics,
    and tech industries in general don’t seem to contribute much
    to the growth in productivity.

    How could they? It should be obvious (but for some reason it isn’t) that more effort expended to accomplish the same task is by definition a decrease in productivity, and that’s exactly what the latest wave of automation-hype is all about.

    For instance, let’s take a relatively simple task like burger-flipping, which always seems to be the stereotypical example. The basic approach to flipping burgers is to pay a low wage to a low-skilled person who will require little more than a spatula and a two minute tutorial to get squared away—not very capital intensive at all. But now suppose you want to design a robot and an AI system to perform the same task. The capital expenditures are multiple orders of magnitude higher.

    First, you have to hire engineers and programmers to design the system, test it, and work out all the bugs, so you’ll require the services of an engineering firm which will naturally need to amortize not only the salaries of its employees but all of its overhead, which will be reflected in the fee they charge you. Then, once you have a serviceable design, you will still need to manufacture the robot, which will require you to enlist the services of (probably several) manufactures and pay for their overhead. The final bill is already mounting steeply, so in order to make this venture profitable you will have to take advantage of economies of scale by mass-producing your new robots and hoping to sell them. But that will require a sales and marketing team, and even if you’ve sold thousands of units forward, you will still need to ship and install them, and that means transportation fees, contractors, and the remodeling of thousands of burger joints. Even after all this is said and done, your robots will have a depreciation cycle throughout which they will need to be regularly repaired or replaced, lest they stop working altogether. Do you see where I’m going this?

    Compare that entire Rube Goldberg scheme to Pedro and his spatula, and tell me which is more efficient? Which is a better use of scare capital? Or to phrase it another way, how could it possibly be more productive to automate burger-flipping than to just hire somebody to do it?

    Automation does not work for simple, service-based tasks. The Industrial Revolution achieved initial success in the areas of transportation, agriculture, mining, and manufacturing because these processes can all be massively scaled up and markets can still be found for the excess.* But there is no natural market for a machine that can flip 200 burgers per hour. There are not that many customers wanting to buy that many burgers, no matter how low the price goes. It’s all uneconomical and really rather silly.

    So why have there been so many articles about automation and AI recently, and why does there seem to be a full court PR campaign on to mainstream these ideas? It’s because this is how modern corporations operate these days. They do not care about sustainability or the long-term profitability of their business initiatives. They’ve all adopted the Silicon Valley unicorn model of pump-and-dump, i.e. they come up with some bright and shiny idea about how to technologize the workplace, sell it to the idiotic management, attract huge amounts of investment capital on the promise of future productivity gains, and then distribute the largess throughout the whole parasitical ecosystem of consulting firms, tech workers, marketers, and overseas labor arbitragers. The original “capitalists” are paid off long before the ill effects are felt. The whole thing is a classic bust-out.

    (*This is not invariably true. The Industrial Revolution both required and came of age with the credit-lending practices of the modern banking industry and its associated bubbles and busts. These three things—machine industry, bank credit, and financialization—are cognate phenomena and are but different facets of the same fundamental process.)

  43. @Dave from Oz
    And yet, somehow Australia continues to be not only the best country on earth, but an outright paradise compared to just about anywhere else.

    Sadly certain parties are working 24/7 to bring that state of affairs to a close.

  44. anon[370] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alan D
    This may help:

    Non-bludging = hard-working (in this context)
    Cobber = friend, who must be another male. A very old-fashioned word, rarely used now.
    Fair shake of the sauce bottle = fair deal
    Slab of VB = six-pack of VB, a type of beer
    Durry = cigarette
    Yakka = work (physical work, not office work)
    Smoko = morning or afternoon break from work
    Telly = television
    Bloke = man. Equivalent to "guy", except that "you blokes" always refers to men.
    Poofter = gay
    Sheila = woman
    Maggotted = drunk
    Knock-off = end of the day's work

    I have left the obscenities out. The man in the drawing would not use them - he would probably say "bloody" instead. Also, they are not just known by Australians.

    Fair shake of the sauce bottle = fair deal
    Slab of VB = six-pack of VB, a type of beer

    1. It’s ”Fair suck of the sauce bottle”, or ”Fair suck of the Sav[eloy]”, or just ”Fair suck”.
    Haven’t heard it in at least 30 years. A saveloy is a type of boiled sausage, dyed red.. Haven’t seen one for years. Sauce bottle refers to a wine or spirit bottle being passed around
    2.A slab is a carton of cans or small bottles of beer, so called because of the resemblance to a concrete slab.
    In common use only for the last 20 years or so.

  45. @Glaivester
    Basically, I describe Austrian economics this way:

    In a given unit of time, an economy produces x units of goods/services/value-added resources etc. It can do three things with these: consume them for immediate use (I'll call this "consumption" although technically the second category also consumes them), use them to improve future production for future use ("investment"), or stockpile them (I would call this "savings" but I will call it "stockpile" so as not to confuse people using monetary/accounting definitions of savings).

    In the same given unit of time, previously stockpiled goods are also consumed; generally when things are stockpiled by an economy, the stockpiles are dynamic rather than static (i.e. you don't save something until there is a shortage, rather you are constantly taking out older inventoried goods and replacing them with new ones).

    Basically, an economy has an equilibrium state where the stockpile is a certain percentage of the economy (determined by the preferences of the people in the economy); use of previous goods will be balanced out by the addition of new goods, with the only changes being that the stockpile grows (or shrinks) with the economy, or that the size changes if people's preferences change. Basically, interest rates are the mechanism for keeping investment, stockpiling, and consumption in line with people's preferences.

    According to the Austrian theory, when credit is artificially expanded (interest rates made artificially low), the result is that the society begins consuming and investing more than it is producing. This is sustained by drawing down the stockpiles. The recession occurs when one of two things happen: (1) the decreased stockpile causes changes in interest rates, credit availability, etc. that cause consumption and investment to return to normal patterns (actually, to go lower for a period of time in order to restore the stockpile, then to return to normal), or (2) the stockpile runs out of certain necessary things. Basically, (1) happens if the economy is left alone after the initial expansion, and we only approach (2) if the banks keep trying to forestall the recession by expanding credit - once (2) happens, there will be a recession, because at that point expanding credit simply means hyperinflation.

    Basically, imagine any situation where you think you have more of some consumable good than you do, and base your decisions on the idea that you have more in reserve than you have. What happens when you find out that you had less than you thought - what happens if you find out because you run out? That's a recession.

    A few points: Why is it bad to invest more than you are producing? Because a lot of investments are not worth anything (except potentially) until they are complete. A 90%-finished hotel is useless - its only value is in the potential that it gets completed. Also, because a lot of investments are gambles - you research 1000 compounds, only 1 of which turns out to be a useable drug. If you think you have more to invest than you do, you might invest in riskier investments than you can afford (i.e. researching compounds with a 0.1% chance of finding a drug when you really need to only research ones with at least a 0.3% chance). Increasing investment beyond production increases the numbers of investments that waste resources.

    Why does the recession produce unemployment? Because jobs not only produce goods, they consume goods, and generally they produce different goods than they consume. For example, a baker produces baked goods, but he consumes wheat, eggs, milk, etc. Also, a lot of jobs are essentially investments and follow the same rules as above: an R&D job may take years before an actual product is produced based on the R&D; and there may be 10 researchers going down dead ends for every one researcher who is on the right track.

    The point is, an economy can sustain risk-of-no-return jobs and delayed-return jobs by using the stockpile to fund them. When the stockpile is depleted, jobs have to consume more efficiently (e.g. lower pay), and the time frame for a return on the investment in the job becomes shorter (i.e. fewer research jobs, what jobs there are will be more focused on producing something right now).

    Thank you for that explanation in the plainest English possible, Glaivester. One term used a lot is “mal-investment”. Any time extra money (from the stockpile) could be used more efficiently (for a better increase in productivity or better returns) than it is used for, that’s mal-investment. Artificially low interest rates encourage this, as you state.

  46. @Achmed E. Newman

    It’s just that the only way we could copy things back then was by chiseling each individual frame into stone.
     
    LUXURY! In my day, we had to hold an 800 lb. video camera in front of the TV very steady for the whole show, then run 34 kilometers down to the film developers at the drug store apothecary's before the film expired, sleep on a park bench for a week until the movie came back developed, then scan each frame, 30 per each second of the movie, into a compressed mpeg file, then drag and drop it onto the cloud. I mean a real cloud - you needed an open-cockpit bi-plane, like a Waco or a Stearman.

    And the kids geeks today, they wouldn't believe you. No.

    BTW, it's bad enough listening to British or Australian accents. It's even worse listening to Englishmen imitating Australians, which I think they're doing, but how would I know for sure? I still miss about 1/4 of the lines here, after having seen this 4 or 5 times!

    “I still miss about 1/4 of the lines here, after having seen this 4 or 5 times!”

    There were subtitles in Catalan. Sheer luxury.

  47. @Cloud of Probable Matricide
    My Aussie friends say no one uses fair dinkum anymore - even claim that the less discerning of yutes can’t even recognise it.

    My Aussie friends say no one uses fair dinkum anymore – even claim that the less discerning of yutes can’t even recognise it.

    Whereas ‘no worries’ may be encountered from Dartmouth Devon, to Cape Town.

  48. @Achmed E. Newman
    Yeah, all fun about Australians aside (cause Americans, including me, love all thing stry-lin!), I don't think making fun of Austrian economics because it's too esoteric cuts it as humor. Yeah "blah, blah.." - the reason they may have to drone on like that is because lots of people have minds that have been too closed by big-ed brainwashing to understand very SIMPLE concepts like say "what do prices mean?" They need a simple concept explained to them in 5 ways, because they can't wrap their mind around the previously-widely-understood concept of freedom.

    Take interest rates - what too early in the morning for this? It doesn't have to be boring, Just consider that the use of someone else's money for a time has a natural price*, just like anything else. When the privately-run "FED" forces interest rates down into the basement for a decade (via setting the price of US Treasury bonds) it screws up pricing of money (interest rates). Little old ladies whose husbands had worked their asses off to save, are now getting $200 monthly from that investment pot rather than the expected $1200. Their investment "advisors" must then invest in the risky propped-up stock market.

    All this is a "moral hazard" a term the Austrian Economists would use, meaning it discourages others from doing WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN the right thing, saving up some money for later.

    I guess I'm not in the mood for fun this morning, or I didn't get this cartoon, one.

    * No, Interest rates are NOT supposed to be = inflation!

    It’s three jokes.

    Joke #1 – Austrians are pedantic dweebs
    Joke #2 – Australians are belligerent, colorful, and not very intellectual
    Joke #3 – Austria and Australia sound very similar which leads to occasional confusion

    Joke #1 is at your expense.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS