Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by toomuchtodo 657 days ago
How is that different than the small cohort of ultra wealthy driving policy, both directly and through soft influence? It’s all sausage making, pick your flavor.

I don’t believe such a conclusion is forgone.

1 comments

Our current system has objectively delivered massive economic growth and standard of living improvements.
It has delivered for the shareholder class while driving down fertility rates through unfavorable economic macros.

“Growth for whom”? Growth has proven valuable primarily to the wealthiest, who continue to demand more. Good luck with future squeezing as structural demographic declines are locked in.

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2024/08/5e488d2474cf-japa... (Japan)

https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/2024/chinas-popula... (China)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-68402139 (South Korea)

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2024/... (US)

Fertility rates have been decrease with improved standard of living, and the poorest have the most children. Hungary gives 5% of gdp to people who have children, yet have barely stopped the decline in births because of this. Other countries have similarly failed.