The Scary Debate Over Secular Stagnation

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web:
  1. Melvis commented on Oct 26

    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.

    • wally commented on Oct 26

      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.

    • DeDude commented on Oct 26

      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.

    • gordo365 commented on Oct 26

      I recall that there are more people employed in solar industry than the coal industry.

    • willid3 commented on Oct 26

      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

  2. sellstop commented on Oct 26

    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.

Read this next.

Posted Under