
The US Economic Growth Is Over. (2014) [pdf] - sremani
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Interactives/2014/thinktank20/chapters/tt20%20united%20states%20economic%20growth%20gordon.pdf
======
wrong_variable
NO ONE - can accurately predict the economic future in the short term - its
chaotic like the weather.

But the biggest indicator of economic health is demographics - and the US wins
in this category hands down compared to other developed countries.

While Japan, Germany and other countries are rapidly aging - the united states
continues to be culturally very open and meritocratic.

Britain tried being "open" but it backfired in a big way.

The United States will continue to dominate - its biggest rivals are of'course
China and India. China is facing a huge demographic cliff while India even
though it has the demographic advantage does not have the energy reserves nor
is able to fully get rid of structural corruption ( US too has corruption but
everything is relative )

At the end of the day - growth is just an anomaly - the longest state of the
universe is decay.

~~~
cylinder
Demographics don't matter if those people don't have income and wealth.

~~~
wrong_variable
Income and wealth can be created out of thin air with a willing, determined
and optimistic set of people.

The people who first came to the new world had no wealth or income - they
built it themselves.

It's not something that is static, it can be created anywhere. There is
nothing special about american soil.

------
cms07
Growth is not over:

[https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPC1](https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDPC1)

Edit: To elaborate, the rantings of one economist who has been wrong many
times over does not make for a compelling work.

~~~
fweespeech
No, but the rate of growth is slower than it was before.

~~~
Zach_the_Lizard
That's still a far cry from "growth is over."

~~~
fweespeech
Yeah, but headlines/titles are almost always exaggerations. The paper
basically says "slower" not "over".

------
crimsonalucard
This is good news. Economic growth has an inverse relationship with
sustainability.

In the natural world we see ecosystems that exist in balanced cycles of
equilibrium because the ecosystems that consume unsustainably have destroyed
themselves. Natural selection selects that which is stable over that which is
fit.

Modern civilization is an unsustainable ecosystem. It will not last and it
will eventually be selected for self termination.

What will be left in the end are societies that do not grow but remain in
equilibrium with the natural world. Keep in mind that we as modern humans
living in a modern civilization are use to continuos compounding economic
growth. The reality of the world is that growth is actually a temporary and
very unnatural anomaly. The true state of the world is one of zero growth and
total equilibrium.

The final question is, are we living in a sustainable society today? Or at
least will the society we live in today be able to transform itself into a
sustainable civilization before it inevitably self terminates as a result of
uncontrollable growth?

~~~
smaddox
s/equilibrium/steady state/g

Equilibrium and steady state are two very different things. Strictly, the path
we eventually want to tread is not even steady state, since internal variables
can change dramatically (e.g. switching from fossil fuels to
nuclear/solar/wind). Only the large-scale metrics need to be steady state.

To give an analogy, the earth's climate is far from equilibrium (same
temperature everywhere), but it is fairly close to steady state (same average
temperature over long periods of time).

------
randomname2
Today the Q4 2015 GDP number came in at 0.69% only, so for the short term this
may actually be coming true!

~~~
ArkyBeagle
I personally derive great pleasure from the Cassandra-like voice of the
prophet Scott Sumner crying in the wilderness.

------
ArkyBeagle
What is funny ( and I'm the poster child for this ) but we have massive
defense engineering disasters and corporate IT is one bloody trench battle
after another, yet we seem to have no other ideas for "fixing" things.

And then we overmeasure the wrong things and make it worse.

------
fweespeech
As interesting as this is, it isn't really news.

The US is going to be stuck in stagnation unless it can solve its structural
problems and the solution to that will take decades plus political sanity.
Political sanity is something we are very much lacking. :/

~~~
collyw
"Political sanity is something we are very much lacking"

You got Trump going for president though!

~~~
theseatoms
Honest question: Do people think that Trump believes the ignorant (and racist)
rhetoric he spouts? Isn't it clear that he's just doing what it takes to get
elected?

~~~
jonsen
Do you think he believes it will get him elected?

~~~
ferentchak
The odds makers are giving him a fair shot at it next best after Hillary. If
you disagree that he has a shot against her you can make some cash from it.

[http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/us-
pol...](http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/us-
politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=791149)

------
Bud
The leading "The" and the trailing period need to be edited out of the title.
Neither is appropriate.

------
orf
> Britain tried being "open" but it backfired in a big way.

Care to elaborate?

> the united states continues to be culturally very open and meritocratic.

Hmm... tell that to Trump, the frontrunner for one of your two parties.

~~~
mikeash
Trump is in no way representative of the country as a whole. He exists as a
phenomenon because a relatively small minority really likes him, and because
the Republicans have not managed to find any candidate even slightly
worthwhile.

When you see that Trump is polling at 31% or whatever, keep in mind that 31%
of early Republican primary voters is a pretty small number of people. With a
more normal candidate you might take that as being in some way representative
of the wider population, but Trump is probably not going to gain much more
support than he already has, since he's so extremely polarizing.

~~~
pc86
It's been said a couple of times by people smarter than myself in this area -
Trump has a high floor [of votes], but a very low ceiling.

~~~
mikeash
Yep, that's exactly what I'm trying to say with a larger quantity of less
intelligible words.

------
MCRed
With the federal reserve pumping out money like nobodies business, the
resulting inflation is a major brake on the economy. It also results in less
profits for companies, less income growth for employees etc.

The only people it really benefits are wall street and other politically well
connected entities (solyndra et. al.)

The government is basically sucking up all of the value from advances in
technology ,and redirecting it to the political class who then profit from the
carry trade of investing it in the stock market and the like.

Ironically, of course, none of the mainstream candidates for president will
fight this, though many of them are trying to get elected on the backs of the
outrage over "income inequality"... and this comment is likely to be buried
because it points out a crime committed under both Bush and Obama and nobody
wants to admit their guy is a bad guy.

~~~
codyb
Inflation rates were very low in 2015 (sometimes even slightly negative) [0],
and historically have been relatively constant at around 1-5% (even during the
economic crisis of 2008).

Aside from extraneous years of course where it hit high teens.

So, yea, if there is a break on the US economy, it doesn't appear to be
stemming from inflation.

The United States has an extremely diversified economy, plenty of natural
resources, an abundance of talent, a relatively low population, incredible
military strength, technological dominance in many areas, a healthy population
(unlike, as pointed out, some countries which are declining in population, or
about to hit cliffs where the majority of the population is above the working
age), and huge geographical buffers.

Some economists say the dollar might be _too_ strong for short term gains for
the American worker, and the Fed is having trouble hitting inflation targets
between 1-3%.

The private sector benefits primarily from government funding of research.

So I'm just not sure where you're basing your analysis from?

[0] - [http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-
in...](http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-
rates/)

