On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 03:21 am, Dan Minette wrote:
You and I have a different understanding of spiralling, then. The
non-European ethnic makeup of GB is 2.8%. They are optimistically
projecting enough immigration to make this about 6% or so in 20 years.
And
its the shining star.
--- William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 03:21 am, Dan Minette wrote:
You and I have a different understanding of spiralling, then. The
non-European ethnic makeup of GB is 2.8%. They are optimistically
projecting enough immigration to make this
On Thursday, July 3, 2003, at 04:13 am, Dan Minette wrote:
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://society.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4605024,00.html
Two boroughs of Britain have more black and Asian people than white
people for the first time ever, according to figures from the 2001
William T Goodall wrote:
On Thursday, July 3, 2003, at 04:13 am, Dan Minette wrote:
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://society.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4605024,00.html
Two boroughs of Britain have more black and Asian people than white
people for the first time
I've been quite, because I'm still overwhelm
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 03:21 am, Dan Minette
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chad Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This model of Education being the principal factor would also
hold through to undeveloped countries, contrary to JDG's
proposal that religion is a catalyst for having children in
developed countries.
I don't see why you think
iaamoac wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chad Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This model of Education being the principal factor would also
hold through to undeveloped countries, contrary to JDG's
proposal that religion is a catalyst for having children in
developed countries.
I don't see
From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Social Security retirement age is being increased
very gradually. Too
gradually, if you ask me -- I'll theoretically be
able to collect full
benefits at 67, rather than 65. Of course, that'll
From: Ray Ludenia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
iaamoac wrote:
Moreover, hopefully by then Social Security will be means-tested,
forcing those who have saved to not realy upon the efforts of those
1.5 workers for sustenance.
The implication being that those who have saved should be
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 04:23:51PM -0500, Horn, John wrote:
That said, I don't have a problem with a means test. Considering that
the vast majority of people get more out of social security than they
put into it, it doesn't seem that horrible to cut down a bit on the
more wealthy people.
I'm not quite sure what you mean -- if you mean that having more
children after 1 boy and 1 girl doesn't increase your costs, you're
wrong. Talk to someone with 2 kids about their grocery bill for a week,
and then talk to someone with 4 kids about their grocery bill. Shoes
don't last forever to
Gautam Mukunda wrote (about birth rates):
I think that probably has something to do with it. My
best guess, though, is that the main reason is that
the US is just so much wealthier than other countries,
even other industrialized countries. It's just
incredibly expensive to have kids in a
On 29 Jun 2003 at 17:33, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
All of this excluding England, of course, which _has_
fixed its pension problem, and at least has healthier
demographics than the rest of Europe, if not as good
as the US.
Umm?
No, we have NOT. Germany has, by offloading it entirely onto
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm referring to the problem of only 1.5 workers per
retired person (if retirement stays at 65) in 2050.
Which it won't. As advances in medicine make people more able-bodied
older, *and* as evidence accumulates that on-going
iaamoac wrote:
Moreover, hopefully by then Social Security will be means-tested,
forcing those who have saved to not realy upon the efforts of those
1.5 workers for sustenance.
The implication being that those who have saved should be penalised for
their thrift? As a general principle I agree
On Monday, June 30, 2003, at 02:34 pm, Ray Ludenia wrote:
iaamoac wrote:
Moreover, hopefully by then Social Security will be means-tested,
forcing those who have saved to not realy upon the efforts of those
1.5 workers for sustenance.
The implication being that those who have saved should be
The Oregonian on Sunday published a great article about this subject. It was
mentioned in the article that education played the biggest role in whether
or not people had children, particularly in Europe. The premise being that
children interfered with professional development.
This model of
iaamoac wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm referring to the problem of only 1.5 workers per
retired person (if retirement stays at 65) in 2050.
Which it won't. As advances in medicine make people more able-bodied
older, *and* as evidence
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
One of the truisms that has been accepted by me, and others, is
that the US ecconomy has been growing faster than Europe's, and
that this reflects the advantages of less governmental control of
the ecconomy.
Dan:
In the
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah, but out real motto should be:
We have healthy demographics, while Europe (with the
exception of Britain) is about to go down the toilet
because of the age of its population.
Having just spent the last week or so furiously
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
America's demographics aren't so hot either, just not as bad as
Europe's. But that isn't anything to be happy about.
Which, by the way, is a very good thing.
As our population ages and our health and abilities in old age
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Secondly, it's being
revised at the moment.
According to _The Economist_, France and others succeeding in putting
the kabosh on that, getting a moratorium on reforms until 2005 or
2006 passed.
We'll see how serious they are
--- iaamoac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If only those countries, many of which were once
heavily Catholic,
had listened to the Church's teachings on the
blessins of children.
John D.
Well, maybe. Given that the two countries in worst
shape are Spain and Italy, probably the two most
Catholic
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
America's demographics aren't so hot either, just
not as bad as
Europe's. But that isn't anything to be happy about.
As William
Bernstein puts it, a lot of retired Americans may be
eating Alpo in 20
years. Probably a lot of people won't be able to
--- Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
America's demographics aren't so hot either, just
not as bad as
Europe's. But that isn't anything to be happy
about.
As William
Bernstein puts it, a lot of retired Americans may
be
eating Alpo in 20
On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 05:33:59PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.efficientfrontier.com/ef/103/hell4.htm
I'm not in the least happy about it, but I'm not sure
what you mean by not so hot.
I mean we are going to have some problems in
On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 05:42:08PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
I should add one more thing - I've looked at the article, and I
don't agree, but the data I'm basing that disagreement on is largely
proprietary
Specifically what do you disagree with? The argument is fairly simple.
Their IS an
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. But the economy isn't likely to be strong
during 2020-2040. I
think a depression (little or no growth, poverty,
very low wages or high
unemployment) is likely. That is what I mean by not
so hot.
Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah,
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Specifically what do you disagree with? The argument
is fairly simple.
Their IS an age wave nearing (traditional)
retirement, surely you don't
dispute that? What do YOU think will happen when
they start selling all
of their stocks and bonds to
IMF chart appears to do some correction for labor force
participation
There are several types of people in economic statistics:
1) Non-workers (children, elderly, institutionalized, etc.)
2) Workers (includes both fully employed and under-employed)
3) Unemployed (these people are looking for
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, maybe. Given that the two countries in worst
shape are Spain and Italy, probably the two most
Catholic countries in Europe, it's hard to argue that
Catholicism is helping here. They may not practice
all that much in either
--- iaamoac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That would be an interesting correlation to run -
Church Attendance
vs. Birth Rate.
I'd be surprised if the birth rate fell below the
replacement level
before Church Attendance started dropping
precipitously.
JDG
Well, it fell below replacement
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
I'm not in the least happy about it, but I'm not sure
what you mean by not so hot. By 2050, the US's
median age is going to go up by something like a year
- to around 37, IIRC. That's pretty good. It's not
_ideal_, but it's pretty good.
Isn't median age a fairly
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, it fell below replacement level only recently,
but it started falling a long time ago.
Well, for sure. Development is obviously going to cause the birth
rate to fall - but to what level?
To put it another way, imagine three
--- iaamoac [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyhow, I could be off-my-rocker on this, but it
seems to me to be at
least a plausible reason as to why America, with its
stronger (albeit
not necessarily Catholic) religious roots has
arrived at birth rate
#2, and Europe has arrrived at birth rate
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 01:22:30AM -, iaamoac wrote:
High unemployment would strike me very unlikely, since a large number
of retirees will have a positive impact on demand. i.e. there will be
more consumers of labor, and fewer suppliers. I don't see how this
will produce high
On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 05:50:19PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
(although the chance of intelligent reforms now is fairly small, since
Social Security privatization has gone out the window
Social Security privatization isn't likely to help the problem I'm
talking about. I'm referring to the
I would guess that global economic
growth will transition towards the US/China/India,
certainly. If India ever gets its act together and
does serious reform that order might change to
India/US/China, but I'm not immensely optimistic on
that, sadly.
Gautam Mukunda
I'm not presuming to say you
On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 06:02:19PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
and they will keep buying stocks. Take a look at the Goldman Sachs
paper I posted a link to on capital market implications - I think the
anlaytics there are pretty good, and it doesn't suggest that anything
disastrous is going
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Social Security privatization isn't likely to help
the problem I'm
talking about. I'm referring to the problem of only
1.5 workers per
retired person (if retirement stays at 65) in 2050.
But perhaps that
just means that people will delay retirement
iaamoac wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, it fell below replacement level only recently,
but it started falling a long time ago.
Secularism, however, is not nearly as pro-family. In particular, a
hallmark of secularism is individualism - i.e. where one's
At 12:20 PM 6/30/2003 +1000, you wrote:
iaamoac wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, it fell below replacement level only recently,
but it started falling a long time ago.
Secularism, however, is not nearly as pro-family. In particular, a
hallmark of
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 05:50:19PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
(although the chance of intelligent reforms now is fairly small, since
Social Security privatization has gone out the window
Social Security privatization isn't likely to help the problem I'm
talking
Kevin Tarr wrote:
At 12:20 PM 6/30/2003 +1000, you wrote:
iaamoac wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, it fell below replacement level only recently,
but it started falling a long time ago.
Secularism, however, is not nearly as pro-family. In
--- Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Social Security retirement age is being increased
very gradually. Too
gradually, if you ask me -- I'll theoretically be
able to collect full
benefits at 67, rather than 65. Of course, that'll
be before 2050. I
think that in order to keep the
On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 08:51:17AM -0400, Erik Reuter wrote:
years Austral France Germany Japan Sweden Switzrl UK US World
-
1900-20 7.8 1.0-4.9 9.4 7.9-9.4 0.2 2.5
On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 10:08:03AM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
I was reading a different table and the text. I think I misread the
slope as the total productivity. Its interesting that Brad's paper
has the US staying in front of those countries in productivity. France
is at 98% of the US
On 26 Jun 2003 at 22:31, Julia Thompson wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
Another example is the fact that half of the EU budget goes to
subsidize inefficient farms.
Really? How big is that budget? Where does the rest of it go?
You mean the Common Agricultural Policy?
Firstly, not all of
Here's some data I obtained from the superb compendium _Triumph of the
Optimists_ by Dimson, Marsh, and Staunton. This book presents data and
commentary for 1900-2000 for the returns of equities, bonds, bills, and
inflation for 16 countries.
I've copied some of the data below for a selection of
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 09:11:02PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 06:16 PM 6/26/03 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
Right, but the median real wage started going down around 1980.
The increase in income for all but the top 20% of households was
due to the
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 03:30:33PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/movable_type/archives/000949.html
we find recent quotes from the IMF showing that the US now leads
Europe in productivity per hour
Huh? I read it that in 2001, Germany, France, and Italy all beat the
US
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 04:04:13PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Yeah, but out real motto should be: We have healthy demographics,
while Europe (with the exception of Britain) is about to go down the
toilet because of the age of its population.
America's demographics aren't so hot either,
At 09:11 PM 6/26/03 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
At 06:16 PM 6/26/03 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
Right
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
At 09:11 PM 6/26/03 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship
- Original Message -
From: Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 03:30:33PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/movable_type
On NPR last night, they had a guy on that suggested that for the median
worker, the Nordic countries have a higher standard of living than in the
United States.
He also suggested that there will be the rise of what he called Confucianism
economics, where Asia will become the dominant economic
On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 08:03:02AM -0700, Chad Cooper wrote:
He stated that in India, they are benefiting from the colonialism
of Britain, which brought English as a secondary language, and
significant education for the masses. There will be a demographic
of 40-something's Indians who are
Gautam said:
Herbert Stein famously said that an unsustainable
trend will not be sustained. I don't quite see how
this particular trend is going to end, though.
By 2050, I fully expect full-spectrum anti-agathic treatments, a mature
nanotechnology, human-equivalent AI and so forth. Given all
By 2050, I fully expect full-spectrum anti-agathic treatments, a mature
nanotechnology, human-equivalent AI and so forth.
Drexler himself recently responded to Richard Smalley's claim that Molecular
manufacturing is a pipedream. Drexler is still confident we will have
molecular assemblers, but
On Friday, June 27, 2003, at 03:21 am, Dan Minette wrote:
You and I have a different understanding of spiralling, then. The
non-European ethnic makeup of GB is 2.8%. They are optimistically
projecting enough immigration to make this about 6% or so in 20 years.
And
its the shining star.
One of the truisms that has been accepted by me, and others, is that the US
ecconomy has been growing faster than Europe's, and that this reflects the
advantages of less governmental control of the ecconomy. I decided to try
to find the numbers on this.
I took longer term growth: '73-'00. I
Now, this is not a certainty; all curves are not regular and
extremely well
behaved. Thus, it would make sense to look at the local slope; which I
proposed to do by comparing the ecconomic performance under
Democratic and
Republican administrations. I'd be more than willing to consider data
Dan said:
One of the truisms that has been accepted by me, and others, is that
the US ecconomy has been growing faster than Europe's, and that this
reflects the advantages of less governmental control of the ecconomy.
I decided to try to find the numbers on this.
I've just started reading
- Original Message -
From: Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
Dan said:
One of the truisms that has been accepted by me, and others, is that
the US ecconomy
- Original Message -
From: Chad Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 1:36 PM
Subject: RE: Comparision of ecconomic growth
Now, this is not a certainty; all curves are not regular and
extremely well
behaved. Thus
On Thursday, June 26, 2003, at 09:30 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/movable_type/archives/000949.html
we find recent quotes from the IMF showing that the US now leads
Europe in
productivity per hour as well as productivity per capita. Considering
the
fact that the US has a
On 26 Jun 2003 at 13:07, Dan Minette wrote:
**One might argue for including 45-47. However, if one doesn't
include the great wartime improvement in GDP between 41 45, I don't
think one should include the relatively small letdown right after the
war.
That's certainly a factor for Europe -
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
On 26 Jun 2003 at 13:07, Dan Minette wrote:
**One might argue for including 45-47. However
I wouldn't be complacent as an American.
Andy
Dawn Falcon
But that's our motto: Fat, dumb, and lazy!
KevinT. - VRWC
and proud of it
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/movable_type/archives/000949.html
we find recent quotes from the IMF showing that the
US now leads Europe in
productivity per hour as well as productivity per
capita. Considering the
fact that the US has a large
Kevin Tarr wrote:
I wouldn't be complacent as an American.
Andy
Dawn Falcon
But that's our motto: Fat, dumb, and lazy!
KevinT. - VRWC
and proud of it
Hey, I'm only going to admit 2 of the 3 right now, and the reason for
the first explains the other. :)
Julia
spent
--- Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But that's our motto: Fat, dumb, and lazy!
KevinT. - VRWC
and proud of it
Yeah, but out real motto should be:
We have healthy demographics, while Europe (with the
exception of Britain) is about to go down the toilet
because of the age of its
- Original Message -
From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://econ161.berkeley.edu/movable_type/archives/000949
The best data on world markets is from _Triumph of the Optimists_. I'll
post some more on that in another message.
A more comprehensive (1000 years of data!!!), albeit lower quality, set
of data is available in Angus Maddison's _The World Economy: A Millenial
Perspective_.
Brad DeLong keeps a
- Original Message -
From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
Having just spent the last week or so furiously
studying worldwide demographics, the situation
On Thursday, June 26, 2003, at 11:57 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
Well, complacency is never good, but the challenge to the US will not
be
from Europe in 30 years. How will an old society that is shrinking be
able
to challenge for supremacy? Europe is in the process of fading away.
The
only way I
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, complacency is never good, but the challenge
to the US will not be
from Europe in 30 years. How will an old society
that is shrinking be able
to challenge for supremacy? Europe is in the
process of fading away. The
only way I can see this
- Original Message -
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
On Thursday, June 26, 2003, at 11:57 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
Well, complacency is never good
At 06:16 PM 6/26/03 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
Right, but the median real wage started going down around 1980. The
increase in income for all but the top 20% of households was due to the
additional hours work outstripping the drop in wagers.
Wanna bet?
-- Ronn! :)
God bless America,
Land
On 26 Jun 2003 at 17:57, Dan Minette wrote:
But seriously, unless Turkey is admitted, the countries that it is
expanding to have the same or worse demographic problems as Western
Europe.
Not really - and their less developed economic structures are markets
which America will find it a lot
On 26 Jun 2003 at 16:04, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But that's our motto: Fat, dumb, and lazy!
KevinT. - VRWC
and proud of it
Yeah, but out real motto should be:
We have healthy demographics, while Europe (with the
exception of Britain) is about
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
At 06:16 PM 6/26/03 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
Right, but the median real wage started going down
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
On 26 Jun 2003 at 17:57, Dan Minette wrote:
But seriously, unless Turkey is admitted
Dan Minette wrote:
Another example is the fact that half of the EU budget goes to subsidize
inefficient farms.
Really? How big is that budget? Where does the rest of it go?
Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
- Original Message -
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: Comparision of ecconomic growth
Dan Minette wrote:
Another example is the fact that half of the EU budget goes to
subsidize
85 matches
Mail list logo
