Does America need to grow its population?

[desihawk]

…”reasonable” according to who?

in this day and age it’s difficult to take at face value that tens of millions are allowed in as asylees because we are do gooders or coz dems want to fix elections. similarly hard to fathom that half the population (women) get subjected to nonsense laws in the name of religion simply because we are so pious. seems to indicate that we want more population.

 

[billanole]

Yep, it's tied directly to wage growth right?

Wow.

in this day and age it’s difficult to take at face value that tens of millions are allowed in as asylees because we are do gooders or coz dems want to fix elections. similarly hard to fathom that half the population (women) get subjected to nonsense laws in the name of religion simply because we are so pious. seems to indicate that we want more population.

i think your “tens of millions “ comment is BS.
What time frame for those numbers do you suggest?

 

[billanole]

Yep, it's tied directly to wage growth right?

Wow.

 

[desihawk]

Yes, but only because we’ve built a massive social welfare system on a Ponzi scheme principle unrelated to capitalism

we can hopefully still pull it off. some of europeans otoh are in it deep

 

[seminole97]

Absolutely, capitalism requires a never ending and constant expansion of population to increase markets

No it doesn't.
Capitalism demands profitability.
Profits can be entirely consumed, or invested in more productive capacity to increase future production (and thereby wealth and consumption levels).

Ponzi schemes require constant expansion of 'contributors' because the proceeds are simply passed (at an expense) through the Ponzi to the earliest enrollees without productive investment to actually fund the payments made.

 

[seminole97]

Yep, it's tied directly to wage growth right?

This is of course 'inflation adjusted' compensation, because we know that worker compensation has grown more than 9% over the last 40 years.

Going full fiat in 1971 has certainly benefitted those closer to Wall Street than Main Street.

Our inflation is a policy choice, with observable negative consequences for poor and middle class, and the benefit of new credit for the rich.

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

Not really. Capitalism constantly creates new markets, often through advertising. Otherwise, explain vaginal deodorants.

I’m not buying that. Literally.

Markets close too, when’s the last time you needed a horse buggy or a wagon wheel, but I get your drift.

 

[Firekirknow]

Really important question. I believe the answer is no. The entire WORLD population has been growing for however long. It is unsustainable

 

[ClarindaA's]

The affluent and educated are having few kids, the people having kids are poor and uneducated with sketchy values

 

[Firekirknow]

How would capitalism survive a decline in population

 

[seminole97]

How would capitalism survive a decline in population

Why wouldn't it?

Capitalism is a system of private production, trade and consumption.
You could do it with 5 people or 5 billion.
Or 500 million people and 50 billion robots.

 

[RileyHawk]

Why wouldn't it?

Capitalism is a system of private production, trade and consumption.
You could do it with 5 people or 5 billion.
Or 500 million people and 50 billion robots.

Only if those 5 people buy more than the 5 billion.

50 billion robots don't buy anything.

 

[seminole97]

Only if those 5 people buy more than the 5 billion.

50 billion robots don't buy anything.

Who needs to buy if the robots are building and the 5 people are consuming it?
If we each have 10 billion robots meeting our needs we're immensely richer per capita than now.

 

[RileyHawk]

Who needs to buy if the robots are building and the 5 people are consuming it?
If we each have 10 billion robots meeting our needs we're immensely richer per capita than now.

Again, only if those 5 are buying as much as the 5 billion which we know is absurd. Par for the course with your theories.

 

[billanole]

Again, only if those 5 are buying as much as the 5 billion which we know is absurd. Par for the course with your theories.

Dare the economist theorize wrongly.

 

[MilleGinja]

We need robots, AI and nuclear power. Not people.

How many people actually produce things?

Is that why we are alive? To produce things??

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Is that why we are alive? To produce things??

Not the point.

We need to produce the things that make our civilization what it is. But we don't necessarily need those things to be produced by people.

Between automation/robots/AI (doing the work) and climate change (reducing the safe working hours for humans in many work venues), what society needs will increasingly be produced by tech, not people.

So what will the people do for income?

The entrepreneur who displaces human workers with tech isn't going to keep paying his former employees. When those former employees find the jobs they're looking for already filled by tech, what happens?