But government expenditures are a function of production in the state controlled market. It [GDP] is a sufficient measure of production, it’s just not at all useful measuring the real wealth of an economy.
So when the Pentagon loses trillions of dollars in accounting boondoggles, that is a measure of production? When black market activity is not reported, is that production?
Even if you index for M2/M3, you still don’t know what amount to factor for as dollars are swallowed up into foreign reserves and sovereign wealth funds.
GDP is useless because the inputs don’t make sense. Garbage in, garbage out.
But that’s the black market, and I was only talking about the statist market.
I believe Net Exports accounts for that.
Right, and GDP measures how much garbage is produced.
No it doesn’t. It only measures what was paid, not what was received. That’s why the inputs are garbage, because in a command economy, in a mixed economy, the inputs don’t reflect real competitive and market prices.
If someone pays $200 million for an IKEA coffee table, and GDP reflects that, it’s meaningless.
GDP doesn’t indicate what was produced. It indicates what is consumed. Big difference.
I don’t believe it does.
Did anyone else immediately think of the “how is babby formed” meme when they read the original post?
sigh Oh enviro-communist, where is thy sting?
Even if any of this dreck were true, I fail to see how it concerns me. (I hear there’s a galaxy that’s suppose to collide with the Milky Way in a billion years; perhaps we should prepare for that as well).
You’ve made that abundantly clear. One short and basic lesson should refute everything you’ve written here, and any other dreams you might conjure up: increase in demand or decrease in supply for a particular commodity results in an increase in prices, which results in a reduction of purchases (assuming a free market in that commodity). This means that when natural resources (like wood or fresh water) begin to diminish, people will, automatically, stop buying so much of them, giving them time to replenish. Similarly if the population becomes high, causing the price of living to increase, people will, almost magically, stop procreating so much.
I’m rather impressed with your ideas; you’ve managed to take modernized versions of the fantasies of all the major utopian socialists (from Fourier to Trotsky), Plato’s ideal society, orthodox Marxism, anti-consumerism, plain old collectivist hatred of competition and self-interest, contemporary eco-scare tactics, and syncretized them into a political-economic system of absolute jibberish.
Let this thread serve as a tribute* to a new ideology: Jibberism
*warning
the simple fact is the growth rate of human population is faster than the natural resources able to supply to all our needs. then gov need to give excuses with this ‘inflation’ and who is the one paying more? u might probably think, 'yea.. prices of goods has been increased, so do our salary rate. but let me tell you its a trap. because ur salary increment is slower than the increasing rate for price of those goods.
sure you can critize my idea because im not perfect either, & who is the one only knows how to critic but didnt suggest any solution?
Natural resources do not sustain human life. Humans must produce those things that they need to survive. Luckily, the more people that exist the greater the amount of things that can be produced.
Here’s a suggestion. Type in complete sentences.
for those who thinks my idea are actually communist, now let me tell you actually also live in some form of communism too.
youself & your kids/everybody else learning from the same school
when youre sick, everybody else also visiting the same hospital
youre using the same internet that everybody else is using in it too
youre watching tv exactly like everybody else is watching,
youre watching the same movie like everybody else is watching
youre listening the music like everybody else is listening
youre buying cars from the very same manufacturer
youre buying your grocery also very same from the food manufacturer/supermarket
youre using the computer made by very same manufacturer
in fact, most of your basic needs are provided by the very same society that made communist possible!
i know if getting rid of those big corporation will be a big drawdown to economy, or whatever theory youre believe in. therefore the solution is if our basic necessity is supported by robots & we can made living possible without relying too heavily on monetary systems because it will be worthless no matter backed up by what due to natural resources always limited. yea.. u might said this is like communist, but wait i mentioned that we should have ‘free energy dev’ that means if everyone has access to this ‘free energy device’ actually this is the first step to becoming independent and creating true free society.
i know those bigger guy & big corporation will seriously affected by this due to low profits and such, but actually focusing on money is NOT HEALTHY. money is a just a tools to enable human survive and go on with their lifes. in future i think the idea of money would be too old, need to move on something healthier (for eg: read my first post)
You don’t know what communism is. Two people shopping at the same place is not communism.
Seriously, proof-read your posts. They are practically unreadable.
There’s a simple solution to this: just allow the market to work its magic and supply of natural resources will quickly fall into equilibrium with demand for them.
WTF are you palavering about?
It’s not that we think your ideas are impractical (though they are by any sane person’s standard), or that they’re irrational (though they are), or even that the problems you present don’t exist (even though they don’t). It’s that their not problems at all, at least in the sense that problems as such are purely objective facts. You believe that, if present trends continue, humanity is doomed and the universe will implode; my response to this is So what? Everyone’s dead in the long run anyway, and it certainly doesn’t justify the violent acquisition of people’s property. Why do you feel so compelled to uplift humanity anyway? Why not take the more rational view that human beings are no better than dirt?
but the robots will be goed crazy and taking over society.
because human programmer did that.. dont blame the robots/machine
no, human are selfish and greedy, thats why people dont want to walk instead of driving cars, gov launching mission to space to learn more things, human itself want more & more things, it would never end.
but that weren’t necessary intentional. And what about self-modifying code?
no, human are selfish and greedy, thats why people dont want to walk instead of driving cars, gov launching mission to space to learn more things, human itself want more & more things, it would never end.
Edited : human always constantly seek to improve & make life easier, what im suggesting in the first post are no different than that. i do agree everyone’s dead in the long run, thats why im saying why we cant make it to the best..?
How did you find the Mises forums, honestly?