The Scary Debate Over Secular Stagnation
October 26, 2015 5:00am by
This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment. The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client. References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others. The Compound Media, Inc., an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here: https://www.ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers Please see disclosures here: https://ritholtzwealth.com/blog-disclosures/
What's been said:
Discussions found on the web:Posted Under
Previous Post
What Makes You, You?Next Post
10 Monday AM Reads
Ok, I read the article. Conclusion of author is we need to spend massive amounts of money to battle Global Warming in order to stimulate the economy. He also thinks that a massive increase in environmental regulation will help grow jobs. Very, very funny stuff.
Well, why not? We spend massive amounts on military hardware that basically either goes up in smoke or goes obsolete. 100 percent pure non-productive spending, but it stimulates the economy.
Yes SecStag is about a lack of demand because there is too much saving and not enough spending. To fix that on the private side we would have to move wealth and income from the rich (investor class) to the poor (consumer class). Unfortunately the rich has succeeded in a massive power grab that makes such a redistribution very unlikely. The alternative would be to increase demand by increasing government activities (or mandates). Doing that by attacking a very serious threat to the economy and the wealth of the country is probably more politically doable. Within the next decade or so a substantial percent of the rich will understand that global warming is a direct threat to their personal wealth. They are not so stupid that they would have to see their Florida mansions floating of into the ocean before they realize the danger. They are more than willing to see government spending on something that will protect them (just look at the absurd military spending they support and want increased). So most politically viable route out of SecStag is a massive program to stop global warming – but it will likely take about a decade before the Koch’s wake up and get behind it.
I recall that there are more people employed in solar industry than the coal industry.
well how well has the reverse of non regulation done? seems like pretty poorly. almost all of the unemployment we have had since 2007 came from the deregulation movement. and the mis allocation of resources. and a dandy over large housing bubble, plus an enormous financial sector.
so just how well did deregulation create jobs? pretty badly
The big political and economic question is ‘how do we get growth?’ Perhaps growth, whatever that means, is not so easy to get as it once was. IMHO, capitalism was a system that worked fantastically for the last 300 years or so to develop and exploit the worlds resources, particularly when combined with the hydrocarbon energy cornucopia. But humans have filled all of the earth. And the cities are swollen, and the water is in increasingly short supply, plentiful energy is dependent on cheap investment money, labor is dirt cheap, and any attempt at global free trade to mobilize the savings glut is met with manipulation by nations through relative currency values, leaving large pockets of educated but dissatisfied people who haven’t the money to buy the fruits of technology. Capitalism and the fractional reserve banking system may have run it’s course. We need a new paradigm.