The reason why we care about growth in GDP has tended to be its correlates - people in countries with higher GDP tend to live longer (life expectancy), and have happier lives (Cantril ladder), and have higher educational outcomes (international test scores and years of education), and more leisure time and spend fewer hours on the job.
Is there a reason that we should instead prefer "material production"? Does material production have better correlates? Do bigger houses, more energy used for heating and transporation, all up to better outomes? If not, then why should we want them? Show us the charts.
You cannot eat bank loans. GDP is an abstraction of units of something. On an island, no energy and no food means your $1232931032 art does not translate to any standard of living whatsoever, neither do your mansions. It is a sitting piece of useless, decaying material. $2030230 of digital avatars is also not the same. What matters is minimum viable EROEI needed to extract materials at some rate at a constant level to support pensions, art, etc. Higher GDP is not happier lives for the majority because the population is increasing and per-work hour the energy returned or gallons of fuel available per work-hour is declining. This means you spend more of your lifetime on food. Even if you don't want a big mansion to live in or whatnot, you need it for transportation... if you disagree, why hasn't anyone voluntarily decided to go back to walking instead of using cars nationwide (other than for historical reasons like urban planning). GDP correlates with energy 1 to 1 and it is energy, not GDP. GDP is like you being able to export IOUs because you sent the military over to do so and so, installing central banks and re-diverting resources to your country. It does not represent the physical reality whatsoever. Yes, I consider not being able to gorge on dinners at luxury restaurants frequently and being able to order something on 1-day delivery and all the conveniences of the western world such as having immediate potable water, toilets, electricity to be a definitive factor in the ''standard of living'' compared to Southeastern parts of Asia or whatever where you might get intermittent electricity, polluted land or whatever. Yes you should prefer material production. There is a baseload cost of maintenance and decay; you need lubricants and everything to keep the upkeep of complexity of modern civilization and the rate of utilization is proportionate to population size with available technology level given and resources given (with minimum IQ). Does it need to be increasing? No, but it should stay constant and high.. That is impossible over long time due to rate-limiting factors of fluxes in energy not accelerating re-flows of geological processes but nevertheless population refuses to stay at a certain limit to allow mankind to live thousands of years at this standard of living, so yes -- material consumption is paramount.
As correctly stated, this material and energy throughput austerity has been lauded as "relative decoupling" but the reality for standards of living are far far different.
This "relative decoupling" translates as manufacturing poverty, investment poverty and a reliance on middle income earners to support a demoralised minimum wage service sector leading to welfare opportunism.
The most damaging aspect of all is the resulting trade deficit with increasing import dependencies requiring greater and greater levels of foreign ownership of capital assets with profits and dividends pouring out of the country.
Our once great country is now in the grip of vulture capitalism with national resilience eroding by the day, especially as Britain increasingly becomes a globalised welfare state. Almost makes me want to cry.
There is also a global slowdown generally as coal, gas and oil are in advanced depletion everywhere, with poor energy return on energy invested becoming the norm in all fields. Since it is these types of fuels that drive all imports,exports and consumption then these will inevitably decline.
The implications for the humans species are profound
Conventional oil production peaked nearly 20 years ago, we have been desperately cannibalizing nuclear war heads to fuel reactors, and shale oil production is now declining. Renewable energy is nothing more than a mirage of hopium.
The fourth horseman of the apocalypse is now mounted - natural gas production is contracting.
Remarkable insight. Many thanks.
Incidentally, in retrospect, the PRC's official GDP figures are considerably lower than the Li Keqiang index predicts.
I think it was deliberate to not embarrass the West, because they know we can't handle the truth. We see it in Trump's flailing.
The reason why we care about growth in GDP has tended to be its correlates - people in countries with higher GDP tend to live longer (life expectancy), and have happier lives (Cantril ladder), and have higher educational outcomes (international test scores and years of education), and more leisure time and spend fewer hours on the job.
Is there a reason that we should instead prefer "material production"? Does material production have better correlates? Do bigger houses, more energy used for heating and transporation, all up to better outomes? If not, then why should we want them? Show us the charts.
You cannot eat bank loans. GDP is an abstraction of units of something. On an island, no energy and no food means your $1232931032 art does not translate to any standard of living whatsoever, neither do your mansions. It is a sitting piece of useless, decaying material. $2030230 of digital avatars is also not the same. What matters is minimum viable EROEI needed to extract materials at some rate at a constant level to support pensions, art, etc. Higher GDP is not happier lives for the majority because the population is increasing and per-work hour the energy returned or gallons of fuel available per work-hour is declining. This means you spend more of your lifetime on food. Even if you don't want a big mansion to live in or whatnot, you need it for transportation... if you disagree, why hasn't anyone voluntarily decided to go back to walking instead of using cars nationwide (other than for historical reasons like urban planning). GDP correlates with energy 1 to 1 and it is energy, not GDP. GDP is like you being able to export IOUs because you sent the military over to do so and so, installing central banks and re-diverting resources to your country. It does not represent the physical reality whatsoever. Yes, I consider not being able to gorge on dinners at luxury restaurants frequently and being able to order something on 1-day delivery and all the conveniences of the western world such as having immediate potable water, toilets, electricity to be a definitive factor in the ''standard of living'' compared to Southeastern parts of Asia or whatever where you might get intermittent electricity, polluted land or whatever. Yes you should prefer material production. There is a baseload cost of maintenance and decay; you need lubricants and everything to keep the upkeep of complexity of modern civilization and the rate of utilization is proportionate to population size with available technology level given and resources given (with minimum IQ). Does it need to be increasing? No, but it should stay constant and high.. That is impossible over long time due to rate-limiting factors of fluxes in energy not accelerating re-flows of geological processes but nevertheless population refuses to stay at a certain limit to allow mankind to live thousands of years at this standard of living, so yes -- material consumption is paramount.
As correctly stated, this material and energy throughput austerity has been lauded as "relative decoupling" but the reality for standards of living are far far different.
This "relative decoupling" translates as manufacturing poverty, investment poverty and a reliance on middle income earners to support a demoralised minimum wage service sector leading to welfare opportunism.
The most damaging aspect of all is the resulting trade deficit with increasing import dependencies requiring greater and greater levels of foreign ownership of capital assets with profits and dividends pouring out of the country.
Our once great country is now in the grip of vulture capitalism with national resilience eroding by the day, especially as Britain increasingly becomes a globalised welfare state. Almost makes me want to cry.
There is also a global slowdown generally as coal, gas and oil are in advanced depletion everywhere, with poor energy return on energy invested becoming the norm in all fields. Since it is these types of fuels that drive all imports,exports and consumption then these will inevitably decline.
Natural Gas Production is Contracting
The implications for the humans species are profound
Conventional oil production peaked nearly 20 years ago, we have been desperately cannibalizing nuclear war heads to fuel reactors, and shale oil production is now declining. Renewable energy is nothing more than a mirage of hopium.
The fourth horseman of the apocalypse is now mounted - natural gas production is contracting.
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/natural-gas-production-is-contracting
https://fasteddynz.substack.com/p/is-russia-running-out-of-gas
Brace Brace Brace
Lovely stuff, good brain, thanks fella.
Extremely interesting.
What are the implications of leaving non-fossil energy out of the mix?
Amazingly informative article