Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by CalRobert 851 days ago
But you are not trying to produce a fixed amount of goods. You are trying to compete with your peers for a limited supply of goods. Some of these things are artificially constrained (housing), and some of these things are hard or impossible to scale and thereby subject to Baumol's cost disease (surgeons, teachers/tutors, etc.)

So long as 2 people are chasing 1 house, or worse, one oncology appointment for their child, you will have people working themselves to the bone to outcompete their peers. We could, of course, allow building more homes and improve the supply of healthcare, but that might mean people wouldn't work as hard, which would mean less surplus wealth for capital owners and state actors to enjoy.

1 comments

>But you are not trying to produce a fixed amount of goods

At some point we should, for the most part of what we consume, instead of ever expanding into BS things we don't need (like "smart fridges") and burning down things we do need (time, which we aren't getting back, and is spend working and paying for such bullshit).

Absolutely! All I really want is a warm, insulated home where my kids can run and bike around with other kids, and decent access to education and health care. A 70sqm flat in a car-free city would do the trick. We definitely need less crap in our lives, and more time with the people we love.