Tag Archives: economic growth

The Year of the Flood

I finally got around to reading The Year of the Flood, the second book in Margaret Atwood’s MaddAdam trilogy. And I liked it. I remember not loving the first book, Oryx and Crake. Sometimes whether or not you love a book depends on where you are and what you are doing when you read it. Often, I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I read a book I loved. And I don’t remember where I was when I read Oryx and Crake, which is a telling sign. However, I remember exactly when I read The Space Merchants by Frederik Pohl – 2009. And I remember thinking that Margaret Atwood lifted themes directly out of that book, only didn’t use them quite as well, so I guess I read Oryx and Crake after that. And I remember being annoyed that Atwood would not admit that the book was a work of science fiction, and that serious people were reading and positively reviewing the book who thought they were too serious for science fiction. Well, I have news – it was science fiction all along, and not only that, it’s cyberpunk. Well, I’ve decided to forgive all this. I can give her the benefit of the doubt, or else I can decide that she was paying homage to an earlier science fiction master and give her credit for that. As I’ve gotten more into science fiction, I’ve seen that done several times, obviously on purpose, and it seems to be acceptable where it might not be acceptable in another genre. So, I’ve decided since then that both books are pretty good after all, and I plan to read the third book.

In The Year of the Flood, there are themes that seem like they are taken right out of The Hunger Games. I found this interview online where Atwood says she has never heard of The Hunger Games, and forgives the author of The Hunger Games for taking her idea.

Have you had a chance to read or see The Hunger Games? The games are designed for the districts to pay back the Capitol for a past rebellion, via the lives of their children, like the heroine Katniss Everdeen. It seems to be inspired in part by elements of The Handmaid’s Tale, Oryx and Crake, and Year of the Flood, especially in terms of the structure of postapocalyptic society, how the disenfranchised are “chosen” for an honor that is anything but …
In kind of a game show? So, basically it’s Painball from Year of the Flood in which people are pitted against other people so other people can watch it on TV? And the origin of that of course is paintball, which is a real thing! It’s always nice to have people see the beauty of one’s ideas. I’m flattered. [Chuckles.] It sounds interesting. Some of these things go way back, mythologically. How did she end up in this position?

Because there’s a lottery, and her sister was chosen, and so she volunteers to take her place.
Shirley Jackson! How old are they?

Between the ages of 11 and 18.
Theseus and the Minotaur! Love it. And so they put these people in a very large area? It’s Painball. Same idea. If you survive, will they let you out?

I don’t want to spoil it too much for you.
That’s okay — I can guess. I haven’t written my third one yet, so whatever’s in it can’t be used in The Hunger Games.

The original Hunger Games novel was released in 2008, and The Year of the Flood in 2009. So it’s plausible that it was a coincidence and I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt again. Anyway, maybe she’s right and there are only a certain number of themes and plots out there, and good fiction is all about how you apply them to your characters and your time.

The MaddAdam books present a near-future dystopian society in a very entertaining way, and I was entertained by that. I don’t think I would be giving away too much if I told you there is a collapse of industrialized, urbanized civilization in this story. You find that out in the first few pages of the first book. Then the rest of the story is really about who, how, and why that happened. The first book focuses more on consumer society and dangerous technology in the hands of amoral – in fact immoral – private corporations, while the second mixes that with a bit of climate change, habitat and species loss.

You find out pretty early what actually caused the collapse, but the more interesting part to me, which Margaret hints at but ultimately leaves to our imaginations, is how the society got to the point it was at before the crash. Any sort of representative government seems to be completely absent, but you don’t get the sense that the corporations muscled it aside through any sort of armed means. Maybe they simply starved it of resources to the point where it gave up. The entire society is designed to accumulate wealth and power at the top, but it is a bit of a puzzle how that works. The corporations themselves create new value through their research into the new technologies, but then they have to make the whole society want to buy those things from them. They have to let just enough wealth trickle down to enough people so they can spend the wealth and let it be gathered back up. So there must be a very, very large number of relatively poor people working hard to support the elite few, without realizing they are doing that. I say relatively poor because they can’t be so poor they decide to drop out of the consumer system entirely (as a few people do, which is the focus of the second book.) They can’t realize how poor they are, and they have to have a little bit of income that they can spend on all the things the corporations provide, which is everything – food, shelter, clothing, drugs, even access to reproduction. They have to believe in money, and want to accumulate money, but they have to want the products and services of the corporations so much that they never actually accumulate much money but spend it all. Of course, the corporations are exploiting not just all these people but the natural environment, so at some point that is either going to catch up to them, unless there is an accident or deliberate act to help the process along first…

November 2014 in Review

At the end of October, my Hope for the Future Index stood at -2.  I’ll give November posts a score from -3 to +3 based on how negative or positive they are.

Negative trends and predictions (-6):

  • There is mounting evidence that the world economy is slowing, financial corporations are still engaged in all sorts of dirty tricks, and overall investment may be dropping. Financial authorities are trying to respond through financial means, but the connections are not being made to the right kinds of investments in infrastructure, skills, and protection of natural capital that would set the stage for long-term sustainable growth in the future. (-2)
  • Public apathy over climate change in the U.S. may have been manufactured by a cynical, immoral corporate disinformation campaign over climate change taken right out of the tobacco companies’ playbook. It’s true that the tobacco companies ultimately were called to account, but not until millions of lives were lost. Will it be billions this time? (-2)
  • Glenn Beck has gone even further off his rocker, producing a video suggesting the U.N. is going to ration food and burn old people alive while playing vaguely middle eastern music. One negative point because some people out there might not laugh. (-1)
  • The new IPCC report predicts generally negative effects of climate change on crops and fisheries. The good news is it doesn’t seem to predict catastrophic collapse, but we need to remember that the food supply needs to grow substantially in the coming decades, not just hold steady, so any headwinds making that more difficult are potentially threatening. (-1)

Positive trends and predictions (+6):

  • A lot is known about how to grow healthy trees in the most urbanized environments. But only a few cities really take advantage of this readily available knowledge. (+0)
  • As manufacturing becomes increasingly high-tech, automation vs. employment is emerging as a big theme for the future. The balance may swing back and forth over time, but in the long term I think automation has to win. New wealth will be created, but the question is how broadly it will be shared. The question is not just an economic one – it depends on the kind of social and political systems people will live under in various places. This might be why the field of economics was originally called “political economy”. So I’m putting this in the positive column but giving it no points because the jury is out. (+0)
  • Google is working on nanobots that can swim around in your blood and give an early diagnosis of cancer and other diseases. (+1)
  • Economic slowing is probably the main reason why oil prices are way down. Increased supply capacity from the U.S. also probably plays a role, although there are dissenting voices how long that is going to last. I find it hard to say whether cheaper oil is good or bad. I tend to think it is just meaningless noise on the longer time scale, but you won’t hear me complain if it brings down the price of transportation and groceries for a year or two. (+0)
  • Millennials aren’t buying cars in large numbers. I don’t believe for a second that this means they are less materialistic than past generations, but I think a shift in consumption from cars to almost anything else is a net gain for sustainability. (+2)
  • I discovered the FRAGSTATS package for comprehensive spatial analysis of ecosystems and habitats. This gives us quantitative tools to design green webs that work well for both people and wildlife. Bringing land back into our economic framework in an explicit way might also help. (+1)
  • “Perennial polyculture” gardens may be able to provide food year round on small urban footprints in temperate climates. (+1)
  • A vision for smart, sustainable infrastructure involves walkable communities, closing water and material loops, and using energy wisely. Pretty much the same points I made in my book, which I don’t actively promote on this site;) (+1)

Hope for the Future Index (end of October 2014): -2

change during November 2014: -6 + 6 = 0

Hope for the Future Index (end of November 2014): -2 + 0 = -2

not so fast, says Paul Krugman

Not so fast with the backslapping on the U.S. economy, says Paul Krugman:

On Dec. 16, 2008, the Fed set its interest target between 0 and 0.25 percent, where it remains to this day.

The fact that we’ve spent six years at the so-called zero lower bound is amazing and depressing…

It’s true that with the U.S. unemployment rate dropping, most analysts expect the Fed to raise interest rates sometime next year. But inflation is low, wages are weak, and the Fed seems to realize that raising rates too soon would be disastrous. Meanwhile, Europe looks further than ever from economic liftoff, while Japan is still struggling to escape from deflation. Oh, and China, which is starting to remind some of us of Japan in the late 1980s, could join the rock-bottom club sooner than you think.

In other inflation news, the price of Thanksgiving was up slightly this year:

– The American Farm Bureau Federation’s annual price survey found the average cost of this year’s Thanksgiving meal for 10 is $49.41, a 37-cent increase from last year.

– Don’t blame the turkey for the slight uptick. The AFBF says the typical 16-pound turkey will cost $21.65. That’s an 11-cent decrease from last year.

– In fact, cranberries, stuffing and pie shells are down in price. The slight rise in total meal cost can be blamed on higher prices for sweet potatoes, milk and whipping cream.

China is now the world’s biggest economy

From Jeffrey Sachs:

According to the IMF, China’s GDP will be $17.6 trillion in 2014, outstripping US output of $17.4 trillion. Of course, because China’s population is more than four times larger, its per capita GDP, at $12,900, is still less than a quarter of the $54,700 recorded in the US, which highlights America’s much higher living standards.
In other U.S. – China news, the NSA is worried that China has the ability to crash the U.S. electrical grid with a cyber attack:
China and “one or two others” can shut down the U.S. electric grids and other critical infrastructure and is performing electronic reconnaissance on a regular basis, said NSA director Admiral Michael Rogers, testifying Thursday (Nov. 20) at a House Select Intelligence Committee hearing on U.S. efforts to combat cybersecurity.

habitat loss and animal welfare

Brian Czech makes the point that habitat loss causes a lot of animal suffering. I think this is almost certainly true, and sad. He mostly blames urbanization. I want to argue with that, because a compact, well-designed city should have a relatively small ecological footprint per person living in it, compared to people spread out over a more rural landscape. For example, the Amish way of farming actually is a big contributor to the water pollution destroying the Chesapeake Bay. If there are going to be 7 billion of us, or 10 billion, we can’t all live like the Amish or it would be an ecological disaster. Of course, it is true that the relatively low-impact lifestyle in the city is supported by an enormous rural base of agriculture, forestry, fishing, resource extraction, mining, and manufacturing that has a huge and growing ecological footprint. It’s possible to envision a world where we eventually turn the corner and manage to grow in quality without growing our physical footprint. But we are far from that, and natural ecosystems are certainly the big losers whether or not we are actually on the verge of destroying ourselves.

Japan

According to the Economist, Japan’s economy is officially back in recession. I don’t fully understand these things, but I do find them interesting, so here’s my attempt at an explanation. They’re in a deflationary spiral, which means prices are falling, and people aren’t spending money because they expect prices to keep falling. It makes sense – if you want to buy something, and you expect it to be cheaper next week than it is this week, you will wait. It’s hard for an economy to grow under these circumstances. The government combats this by printing massive amounts of money and loaning it to itself, which it can then spend. Normally that would create massive inflation, but it doesn’t because no matter how much they print, everybody just sits on it and won’t spend it. If you think about it too much, you can’t help wondering whether money actually has any value or meaning under these conditions. It’s best if people don’t sit around wondering about that too much.

World Economies

According to NPR, the U.S. economy has picked up, which is nice.

In the most recent quarter, this country grew at 3.5 percent — a very robust pace for a mature economy.

In the United States, the stock market is booming, budget deficits are melting away, corporate profits are breaking records and the unemployment rate is falling, down to nearly half the level set five years ago.

U.S. success shows “the resilience and determination of the American people,” Lew said. “It also reflects the ease of starting businesses, our highly competitive product markets, and the ability to reap rewards from entrepreneurship.”

In fact, the U.S. is doing so well that we have resumed wagging our fingers at other countries.

Meanwhile, Japan’s economy is stuck, with its inflation-adjusted growth rate running at less than 1 percent over the past decade. Europe may be on the brink of its third recession in six years.

Lew says that to grow, countries need a “comprehensive policy approach” that involves not only better fiscal and monetary decisions, but “structural” changes. When he talks about “structure,” he’s referring to the policy frameworks that hold back growth.

This sounds pretty good. We should also remind ourselves to have a comprehensive policy approach to not crash the world financial system again.

American Made: The New Manufacturing Landscape

NPR has this series called American Made. It has a variety of interesting articles/interviews but there is a common theme. We are making and selling a lot of stuff, and it has a lot of economic value to be captured. But manufacturing is now a tech industry. It is more capital- and technology-intensive all the time, and less labor-intensive. So favoring manufacturing over other industries is not going to be a path to full employment and sharing the wealth with low- and medium-skilled workers like in the U.S. of the 50s and 60s, or the Asia of the 80s and 90s and 00s. By default the value is going to be captured by a small elite who own the capital or have the skills to create and operate the technology, unless we think of something better.

Also related to this topic, be sure to check out this Dilbert.

 

October 2014 in Review

At the end of September, my Hope for the Future Index stood at +1.  As I did last month, I’ll sort selected posts that talk about positive trends and ideas vs. negative trends, predictions, and risks. Just for fun, I’ll keep a score card and pretend my posts are some kind of indicator of whether things are getting better or worse. I’ll give posts a score from -3 to +3 based on how negative or positive they are.

Negative trends and predictions (-11):

  • The Wall Street Journal prints an op-ed by a climate change skeptic. Wait, I thought there was a pure consensus among serious scientists about climate change. Or is it just serious climatologists, with a few lone dissenting physicists like this guy? Either way, there is an overwhelming near-consensus and by printing this the WSJ gives the idea that there is still a significant debate, thereby reducing the chances of action being taken. Meanwhile, the New York Times tells us where in the U.S. to move as the heat creeps up on us – Alaska, Seattle, and Detroit. Tidal flooding may also become a bigger problem in coastal cities. (-1)
  • Economists and economic journalists are buzzing about a worldwide slowdown and an even more severe financial crisis that may be on the horizon. Europe, and France in particular, seem to be getting into dangerous territory right now. (-2)
  • The new Living Planet Report says our ecological footprint has not ticked up from 1.5 planets since the last Living Planet Report. That is, no change given the rounding error of 0.1 planets. Before we get too happy, remember that a number over 1 is meant to measure the rate of decline. So these would be mean not that our situation has stabilized, but that the rate of decline has not accelerated. (-1)
  • Slavery is a good example of how amoral profit-seeking private enterprise can lead to evil consequences. (-3)
  • The drought in California and the U.S. desert southwest continues to get worse. Ours is not the first civilization to be impacted by drought in the U.S. desert southwest, and hopefully we will deal with it better than last time. (-1)
  • The U.S. medical system may not be prepared for Ebola, and if not it would be even less well prepared for something even more serious. (-1)
  • The American entrepreneurial spirit may have slowed down over the last generation. If this is true, it would be yet one more drag on the innovation pickup the world needs. (-1)
  • Energy prices are down. I’m not smart enough to tell you definitively if this is good or bad. If it reflected a breakthrough in renewable energy technology and cost-effectiveness, or low energy, sustainable food production, it would be great news. I hope renewable energy is starting to have an effect. But the bulk of the effect, most likely, reflects upward pressure on supply from hydraulic fracturing, and downward pressure on demand from economic slowing in Asia and Europe. High energy and food prices over the past decade quite likely have a hand in the economic slowing. Economic slowing can lower the world’s ecological footprint a bit, but it can also slow down innovation and, of course, lead to unemployment, hunger, unrest and conflict. (-0)
  • Echoes of the Cold War are rearing their ugly head, with Sweden out searching for Russian submarines in its territorial waters. (-1)

Positive trends and predictions (+8):

  • Maybe green consumer behavior can be scaled up through clever advertising. (+1)
  • Mosquitoes are being purposely infected with a naturally occurring bacteria, then released to control Dengue fever. (+1)
  • Automation (i.e. increasing computer control of nearly everything) is really taking hold of our economy and society, with potentially positive consequences for overall productivity and wealth, but potentially negative consequences for employment and distribution of wealth, depending on how it is handled. (+0)
  • There really are a lot of good examples and a lot of knowledge out there on how to have a lot of healthy trees in cities. This is known technology. Now cities in North America and the developing world just need to catch up and adopt the technology. (+1)
  • The old economy, for example dirty old fossil fueled electric utilities and sleazy taxi companies, are fighting the new, such as solar road materials and ride sharing. As they realize the technological and economic tide is turning against them, they are fighting in legislatures and courts for special laws that are unfair in their favor. They might win some battles and retard progress for a while, but I don’t see how they can win the long-term war. (+1)
  • LED light bulbs are now the overwhelming best household lighting choice, even in terms of purchase price. (+1)
  • Developing countries today are achieving much better health outcomes than developing countries of the past did at similar income levels. (+1)
  • People are waking up to fact that computer-controlled cars may free up large amounts of space in cities for new uses. (+2)
  • New technology for freezing human eggs may give women more flexibility on how and when to start a family, but muddle the historical meaning of biological relationships and generations. (+0)

Hope for the Future Index (September 2014): +1

October 2014 change: -11 + 8 = -3

Hope for the Future Index (October 2014): +1 – 3 = -2