Quote: (02-12-2013 01:53 AM)T and A Man Wrote:
Erhh, that's not a good interpretation of Adam Smith, and reall isn't important.
Actually, it's a direct interpretation. The greater the labor force, the greater the wealth. Look at China, a prime example of a large labor force producing massive amounts of wealth.
It is also highly important. You cannot have a large group of people in retirement while the workforce is small. No country can sustain a relatively large group of people who have passed the working age, it leads to rapid economic downfall. Again, I point to Japan as a prime example of this.
Quote: (02-12-2013 01:53 AM)T and A Man Wrote:
A nation's wealth is the aggregate of its product. Now sure your labuor force diminishing usually means diminished aggregate product, however it can be compensated by improvements in productivity, and that means investment in technology that enhances inputs, (and that means keynesian economics)
But even if the aggregate diminishes, it doesn't matter because you've got less people to share it around with.
It's only meaningful if you want to engage in a dickwaving contest about comparing GDP sizes. Otherwise India is a better country than Normay, because of a bigger GDP.
How are you going to make improvements in productivity? That is the question. It costs money to improve productivity. Will those costs that are onset initially be offset at a rapid pace, or will it never generate profit? Is there technology that is even available to increase productivity? Even more so, which areas of workforce would deplete and be in need of increased productivity? A lot of questions, little to no answers.
If the aggregate diminishes, especially if it is largely occurring in the working force due to decreasing birthrates, then the wealth of the nation produced takes a rapid drop in addition to the population drop. In fact, the wealth of the nation would decrease faster than the population due to the fact that the working force would be decreasing in size faster relative to the rest of the population decrease.
GDP size does not matter as much as economic stability along with the average person's well being, which is what I am discussing here.
Quote:Quote:
A shrinking national economy is a lie sold to useful idiots. Workers quality of life diminshed for the preserve of the rent seeker.
Well, it seems that the idiots understand basic reality while you cannot see things that are clearly happening in the world. I will say this again, look at Japan. Japan is facing severe economic crisis due to the fact that its workforce is too small to sustain the entire relative population (aka too many old people). The reason why countries like the U.S. and Germany allow so many immigrants is because it sustains the workforce and neutralizes many of the problems that would occur in a country where its workforce is rapidly decreasing.