Ed,

 

Just getting round to some interesting bits I tagged but didn't
answer.

 

When you get round to " fixing up our cities and helping people to
open and maintain useful small businesses" you will run into rising
land prices and rents.

 

This is why the present nonsense about "infilling" the empty and
blighted spaces in our cities doesn't work.

 

Perhaps the least noticed part of our lives is the ground under our
feet.

 

Harry

 

*******************************

Harry Pollard

Henry George School of Los Angeles

Box 655   

Tujunga  CA 91042

(818) 352-4141

*******************************

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Weick
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 5:51 AM
To: Keith Hudson; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Consumer-led recovery, not infrastructure

 

Here we go again, Keith.  From stuff I've seen in the media recently,
an increasing number of consumers are very concerned about being able
to pay their rent and feed their kids.  Status goods are the last
thing on their minds --- well, except for poor teenagers, who'll do
anything, even kill, to get somebody's ipod.  It's not classic
Keynesianism that's needed, nor the bailout of General Motors, but a
lot could be done by putting people to work on fixing up our cities
and helping people to open and maintain useful small businesses.  By
useful I mean corner stores and shops that people can easily walk to
instead of having to drive to the nearest ultra-huge big box.  We've
had two corner stores shut down in our neighborhood recently, and it's
made a huge difference when it comes to simply buying some milk or a
loaf of bread.  One reason for the shut down is that a huge big box
has opened within easy driving distance.  Another is theft --- kids
holding up the store so that they can buy an ipod or another consumer
gadget or for money to buy some food.  One of the storekeepers decided
to just plain quit because running the store became just too
dangerous.

 

Ed

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Keith <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Hudson 

To: [email protected] 

Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 4:12 AM

Subject: [Futurework] Consumer-led recovery, not infrastructure

 

Keynesianism won't work in the Western world for one major reason.
Economic growth (or recovery in the present case) has always been
driven by status aspirations by the rich and the middle class first --
and there is no new tranche of suitable consumer goods awaiting their
attention at the moment. We only have embellishments of the consumer
goods that were invented in the 1920s and 30s. (Even the one big
exception -- "serious" modern art is now tumbling as a manifestation
of high status and worthwhile investment .)

Instead, a great many of the nouveau riche and their financial
institutions have already been disembowelled by the financial crisis.
The middle class generally will not at all be responsive to the idea
that if they spend now they are going to be more heavily taxed later
if normal economic throughput is resumed. 

There is already evidence that some sort of world-wide initiative --
such as a new Bretton Woods agreement on trade -- a sort of super-Doha
round by the WTO -- is not on the cards in the immediate future. What
we have seen so far are attempts at (or discussion about) recovery
plans at regionally-sized chunks only -- in America, the European
Union and China -- and these are likely to intensify as protectionist
devices -- the devil take the hindmost -- unless some miracle occurs
at an international level. 

Government-led infrastructure spending won't succeed in America or the
European Union for the reason given in my first paragraph -- that is,
that the vast majority of their populations is already satiated by the
present tranche of consumer goods and there is nothing new that people
are going to work hard and save hard for. Better railways and roads
might help recovery in China because two-thirds of its population
outside of the coastal provinces still have very little by way of
adequate consumer goods. Indeed, one third of China (around 400
million people) still live in the direst poverty. However, even in
China the prospects are not good. Scores of millions of factory
workers who previously sent back much of their earnings to their
families in the rural interior -- the major redistributive machine of
China's recent recovery -- are now having to return to poverty
conditions themselves as their places of work close down in their
thousands. 

The only new tranche of consumer goods that I can foresee on the
horizon are not strictly goods but services. These are in health and
education. And these will be motivated by an even more powerful
instinct than status-seeking -- individual survival -- and that of
his/her 0.90 child (the average in the developed world). 

Health and education are already being served by the two disciplines
that appeal to the brightest young scientific minds -- genetics and
neurology -- just as the consumer goods of the last century were the
product of geniuses in engineering and physics of the preceding
century. 

But how long will it be before a sufficient number of precise services
will be deliverable? They are likely to be less capital intensive than
the present crop of consumer goods and, because of the Internet, they
will be marketed more efficiently and rapidly than anything
heretofore. But we are still in the early days of these technologies
and we simply don't know what form their goods are going to be and
when they are going to be marketable. However, they will be sold to
the rich and the middle class first before proceeding southwards and
it's only in this way that any sort of economy recovery can proceed.

And will governments have any role in this recovery? Hardly.
Governments always lag behind new developments. Infrastructure
spending is always shaped by the consequences of consumer spending and
doesn't precede it. Besides, a high proportion of research in
neurology and genetics is already being financed by private endowments
rather than governments. Once the first few products start taking
shape then business will dive in first to develop them in order to
take advantage of the initially high profit margins -- and thus
re-investment potential -- that will be available. Goodness knows,
business needs this fillip because, apart from the temporary fling of
the now-extinct investment banks, most manufacturing and commerce were
getting by with only the flimsiest of profit margins even during
recent years of "prosperity". 

All this is probably a generation away as the present recession grinds
on into  a depression, but that's only my guess. I would be delighted
if I'm proved wrong.




Keith Hudson, Bath, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org
<http://www.evolutionary-economics.org/> >,
<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020
<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/> /
<http://www.amazon.com/dp/1906557020/> > 


  _____  


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to