|
|
|
|
|
by Rinzler89
784 days ago
|
|
>And no you don't need constantly a growing economy. Communism tried that and it doesn't really work well, especially now in a globalized economy when you're competing with growing economies for limited resources and who can outspend you if you're not growing more than them. You don't need a growing economy only if you can be 100% self suficient, which virtually no country is (US comes the closest), or you're OK with getting poorer by the year and willing to reduce your standard of living accordingly to the bare essentials, like in the USSR. >Do you know what it means if something grows 2% per year? But do you know what it means when it doesn't? |
|
For me the growth means a mix of things like being more productive, increasing life standards etc but we have great life standars.
Japan has a high living standard too and no to negative growth.
Either there is some magic economic model you will not be able to explain to me in this format (wall of text / necessary university degree/ just too much) or I will not change my opinion on this rat race thing.
Your point of other countries outbidding us on resources is that really the main argument for necessary economy growth?
At least for software engineering that's not true.
Farming probably hasn't changed that much in the last 20 years either.
The growth discussion is for me as shitty as all those news about share prices. Random stocks get mentioned in the news for random reasons while apparently the best way to invest in shares is to not bother with daily trends at all.