Who Ordered This Crap?

[StevSmar]

I have no issue with immigration, however I do with population growth and the economic lie that it is needed.

My current understanding is that our economy is based upon continual growth. The generation of today can afford more things because there will be additional people in the future to pay for it (say like getting a larger return on investment for money, a return that’s above the level of inflation)

Personally, I suspect that in the ”near” future the need for zero population growth and zero economic growth will be an aim for societies.

 

[Ironman]

Well hey how about the weather out there?

It's been a big improvement and it was -6 yesterday afternoon so I started the JD loader and plowed out my driveway. It is a loop between 2 gates. It dropped down to 30 overnight and when the sun started shining it is -14 and my pussycat wants out. I have a stray here I'm trying to kill before it hurts my little guy(again) but he's out there. I wish city slickers would not do drive by cat flinging as they often do, and the poor critters go feral trying to survive. My wife is afraid of being attacked again by one.
I can't foresee the weather but I am as good a guesser as the paid ones, and I don't see much more -40 in the future.

 

[Susquatch]

You guys should all read the book "RISK - The Science and Politics of Fear" by James Gardner.

It's a great read about how we are all genetically programmed to be afraid and how that is exploited by the news and government. Highly recommended book. It will make you question your fears and your assumptions.

 

[Susquatch]

I wish city slickers would not do drive by cat flinging as they often do, and the poor critters go feral trying to survive.

The cats don't really bother me. The coyotes get most of them within a few days.

What really bothers me is the racoons, possums, and rats the city folks relocate to the country because "That's where they belong."

When will they realize we farmers trap them all and bring them back to the city where they belong.....

 

[StevSmar]

When will they realize we farmers trap them all and bring them back to the city where they belong.....

I like squirrels, and rabbits. The foxes have moved in though so both of their numbers have declined.

Our neighbour across the road traps both of them and moves them “somewhere”. I joke with her that there’s someone living in the area she drops them off that catches them and then brings them back…

 

[Ironman]

I like squirrels, and rabbits. The foxes have moved in though so both of their numbers have declined.

Our neighbour across the road traps both of them and moves them “somewhere”. I joke with her that there’s someone living in the area she drops them off that catches them and then brings them back…

Wow, that's like our "justice" system

 

[Mcgyver]

My current understanding is that our economy is based upon continual growth. The generation of today can afford more things because there will be additional people in the future to pay for it (say like getting a larger return on investment for money, a return that’s above the level of inflation)

That is the bill of goods we've been sold, but from an economic perspective I don't believe is true, and were it true, we'd be doomed when the entire country is paved. Trees don't grow to the sky. A market based economy is incredibly resilient and does not require growth, it's the current levels of spending that requires growth. It's not sustainable and higher populations degrades quality of life and increases the wealth gap. (wages are a price, the price of labour, and like any price are set by supply and demand. With a massive and growing supply, those in the bottom portion will not see wages move up). Meanwhile its cringe worthy pretending to care about the environment as we keeping adding millions of people in a high consumption country (cold and great distances). Its a subject I think deserves to be in the forefront and imo is important and interesting, but I'll leave it at that so as to not stray further.

 

[Susquatch]

Its a subject I think deserves to be in the forefront and imo is important and interesting, but I'll leave it at that so as to not stray further.

If, and only if, it can be discussed without strong emotions like anger and passion, it is indeed a subject that should be discussed. But perhaps this forum is not the place for that. Food for more thought I guess. If it gets out of hand, I'll have unpopular moderation work to do.

As I understand it, Canada has net negative population growth, an aging population, and a stable economy. To the extent that immigration focusses on stabilizing ALL of these factors, it is probably a good thing. Let us never forget that the vast majority of us are either the product of previous immigration policies or are ourselves immigrants.

Good intentions alone are not sufficient. Immigration policies that simply increase immigration without a view toward ensuring that new immigration addresses the weaknesses we want them to address (aging population, negative population growth, and a stable economy) is likely to result in bigger problems instead of solving the problems we have. Therein lies my primary concerns about the subject of immigration policy.

To a great extent the environment is a huge factor in the world today. It is simply illogical to think we can improve the environment at the same time as increasing the population and/or having economic growth. Very few would argue against the fact that the fastest way to improve the environment is negative growth. Some environmental extremists even believe we should enforce lower birth rates. I'm certainly not on that page, but I could support stabilization as a reasonable goal. That said, from a global perspective its an impossible goal and the net global environment is going to suffer. Nobody will agree to global policies that maintain the status quo for developing nations (keep them poor) and nobody will openly say that developed nations must give up their wealth to compensate. I only say openly because it is well known that this must happen if we really want to make a difference.

At the same time I know that there are things that can make a difference without compromising individual or collective wealth. The simple problem is that none of them are even remotely enough even when they are all added together. So we all argue amongst ourselves over things that might make a small difference, while we ignore the monster in the closet - economic and population growth. Essentially we are penny rich, pound foolish, and simply propagate the big lies so we can pat ourselves on the back and feel good about it.

I'm done.

A good insight into all of this can be gained by reading "Risk - the science and politics of fear." by Dan Gardner. The focus is health & safety risks, but the political and media mechanisms are the same.

 

[DPittman]

But perhaps this forum is not the place for that.

Ya tend to think things can go sideways purty darn fast if we are not careful.

 

[StevSmar]

it's the current levels of spending that requires growth.

I think you’re right about that. The readiness of our Politicians to take on greater and greater levels of debts per capita (I’m not sure if this is actually true…I haven’t checked) is concerning. It feels like we’re making a house of cards. Stealing from tomorrow to pay for today.
I can sort of understand that as long as the economy is growing, increasing debt is Ok(‘ish?…), but what happens when there’s a hiccup?

I definitely agree that basing our societal systems on continuous growth in a limited planet seems preposterous.

In all honesty, I understand economics even less than I understand Women. I know women smell good and are soft, but I don’t even have that level of comprehension of economics.

I believe economics is like a completion for limited resources, where there will be some winners and some losers. But if I really think I about it, I’m not sure if I even know that. Perhaps I should stick to trying to understand things that are easier, like women…

 

[jcdammeyer]

At the end of my economics class in Uni the prof asked if I was interested in pursuing a masters degree in economics. I'd done really well in that class. However, statistics was my worst class in Uni plus Computer Engineering was way more interesting.

Since then I've learned of the alternative name for an economist so I'm glad I didn't go in that direction. What is that name you might ask?

Soothsayer

 

[DPittman]

In all honesty, I understand economics even less than I understand Women. I know women smell good and are soft, but I don’t even have that level of comprehension of economics.

 

[whydontu]

“There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics”. Unfortunately, statistics are used to justify public policy by people who have no understanding of math or statistics, and these people have a skill set and personality that enables them to get elected but not much else.

Every time I hear a politician say “x percent of y” I scream at the tv and SWMBO tells me to go out to the shop and calm down.

 

[Mcgyver]

I believe economics is like a completion for limited resources, where there will be some winners and some losers. But if I really think I about it, I’m not sure if I even know that. Perhaps I should stick to trying to understand things that are easier, like women…

My sense is there would be a lot greater economic and other benefits to understand women than economics! Alas, understanding economics is comparatively child's play.

It's a big, broad subject few have much of a sense of so it gets trashed and kicked and blamed. Most would be surprised to learn that if you pick up an economics journal, maybe non of the articles are about GDP, interest rates, money supply or employment. (although all are obviously prevalent in basic macroeconomics)

I'd describe along the lines of its about being able to distill meaning from analyzing data, assessing cost and benefit, understanding cause and effect, incentives and sanctions etc, and its never about judging as that introduces bias.

Macro economics is trying to understand something so complex its near impossible to use as a crystal ball, with a far worse a record than the weatherman, so it s routinely criticized. What people miss is its quite good at understanding cause and effect......but as a predictor, there's just too many "effects"for it to be much good. As such it can be good at helping decide should we do A or B, but at best that will influence the future, not predict it.

Its also rather apolitical. Again, if one reads an economics journal or attends a lecture, it is not usually clear the political leanings of the author/lecturer. As such, I always felt its discussion was largely divorced from politics, but someone inevitably sends it in that direction.

 

[DPittman]

My sense is there would be a lot great economic and other benefits to understand women than economics!

It's a big, broad subject few have much of a sense of so it gets trashed and kicked and blamed. Most would be surprised to learn that if you pick up an economics journal, maybe non of the articles are about GDP, interest rates, money supply or employment. (although all are obviously prevalent in basic macroeconomics)

I'd describe along the lines of its about being able to distill meaning from analyzing data, assessing cost and benefit, understanding cause and effect, incentives and sanctions etc, and its never about judging as that introduces bias.

Macro economics is trying to understand something so complex its near impossible to use as a crystal ball, with a far worse a record than the weatherman, so it s routinely criticized. What people miss is its quite good at understanding cause and effect......but as a predictor, there's just too many "effects"for it to be much good. As such it can be good at helping decide should we do A or B, but at best that will influence the future, not predict it.

Its also rather apolitical. Again, if one reads an economics journal or attends a lecture, it is not usually clear the political leanings of the author/lecturer. As such, I always felt its discussion was largely divorced from politics, but someone inevitably sends it in that direction.

And an interesting fact that may surprise some, is that economics is a "humanity" based subject ie. It is really about understanding humans and how they react to to finite resources.

 

[jorogi]

Economics ?
Heck, I can't even spell GDP.