EconChrisClarke

No Planet Money! Not the Fake Graph! You can't compare mean productivity to median wages. When we do compare mean to mean, the gap disappears. Real median wages are not stagnating either. We need accurate data to solve today's very real problems.
@planetmoney.bsky.social

YouTube video by Christopher Clarke Does Welfare Reduce Poverty?

Tax funded anti-poverty programs predate both socialism & capitalism. Accompanied with modern markets, they've done wonders to alleviate suffering. But today, demographics and continued subsidies for the elderly threaten safety nets for the young and poor.
youtu.be/P7Iq4c8V06A?...

YouTube video by Christopher Clarke Is $140k the New Poverty Line? Economist Answers

Should the new poverty line be $140k? No. It's inaccurate math. It's inaccurate English. Michael Green seems to use a "comfortable living wage" source, and relabel it as "poverty."

youtu.be/O84sYFh20Sw?...

Thanksgiving Dinner has never been more affordable. TDay dinner now takes the smallest share of our weekly median wages in the 40 yrs of Farm Bureau data. Produce is significantly more expensive though. Immigration crackdown is impededint even better news.

Did you read the article I took the time for find for you?

Ok, now you're being rude, there is no need for that. Did you even bother to read the article I found for you? Nobody in the "economic profession" is ignoring consumer depreciation. You're just too lazy to read yourself. The BLS and the BEA publicizes their "vaults" for free. It's no secret.

Look, I hope I've been generous with my time and pointed you towards resources that can help you get started on your learning journey. There are answers to your questions, if you're willing to put in the curiosity and time to read some manuals.

A consumption measure for automobiles : Monthly Labor Review : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

They do. As I said, you need to spend some time reading before claiming we don't.

A consumption measure for automobiles : Monthly Labor Review : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics share.google/Bw7Ft4yr3Vp0...

And how expensive are the 18-wheeler engines? If you do the math, it works to be about the same price per mile, more or less.

Again, economists measure "depression" is measured. And has been measured by economists for generations.

So we should do the most effective policies we have. Get the most emissions reductions per resource of input. Lowering consumption is one of the most clunky and inefficient methods per unit of resources to reduce emissions we have.

They also split consumer goods between durable vs non durable. They calculate durable goods depreciation.

What I really don't understand about your whole worry is vehicles. They last for at least 100k miles longer today than they did in the 90's.

Look, take some time reading some BEA method manuals for how they do national accounts. Look up how they calculate depreciation. Then get back to me.

I read your charts. I know what they said. I simply don't get your issue. It doesn't make any sense to me. I've listened. Have a good night

Budy, I just don't see the issue here. You're critiquing the field because we use GDP instead of NDP? You do realize there are literally thousands of data series & measure out there. The media & society can't pay attention to all of them. if you want NDP, then go look it up! Nobody is stopping you.

We work towards doing the best we can as soon as we can. The effects of climate change aren't binary. The quicker we do things the better. We've made a lot of progress on the last 20 yrs to minimize emissions, we'll continue to see more

What?! What do NGrams have to do with BEA National Accounting methods? If you think the BEA is not accurate, then cite criticisms of their methods. Or at the very least, become familiar with them first.

What?! I'm here, mate. Life is busy, I can't answer every comment. I frankly don't see what you claim to be true. They literally calculate depreciation. They calculate both Gross Domestic Product and Net Dkemsric Product.

Providing decent living with minimum energy: A global scenario It is increasingly clear that averting ecological breakdown will require drastic changes to contemporary human society and the global economy embedded…

Right, that's why I didn't make my video about automobiles.

Here is the link to the "Decent Standard of Living" paper.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...

I understand the limitations of lifestyle when we live in certain systems. But there are things we do choose. Your sq ft is 400 per person, or twice what the Millward paper said was "decent." Electric vacuums also go over their limit. And if you only shower every other day, then you're in limit

If I may be specific. How large is your apartment and how many folks live in it? How long do you shower? Do you use an electric vacuum? Do you dry your clothes by hand? No toast? Ive read a lot of degrowth lit. I understand it's far more than personal consumption. But personal choice is a part.

Do you live the lifestyle required by degrowth advocates? How large is your apartment? How long is your shower? How many energy using appliances do you use? If more than Millward paper table 2, then you do not live what you preach.

I'm in favor of reduced meat consumption. But I think the best mechanism there will be via lab grown meat. That will lower the price of meat and therefore our compete traditional means. IE: economic growth.

I agree with your last comment. But I'd like to see folks who advocate for "degrowth" would actually live the lifestyle that they want others to live. Before they do that, it's not an honest conversation.

I didn't pick Millward Hopkins. It is prominently cited in the Hickel, Rawworth et al lit review. Hickel cites all the time in his writings.

"essential" is a relative term. My point is that a "degrowth" policy will drastically reduce our standard of living. I'm sure adding a couple of appliances wont change their results too much. But a vacuum and clothes dryer would. It's more efficient to invest in green energy than degrowth.

The ceiling is to prevent an unsustainable use of energy. It literally describes everyone else as using "surplus" energy. "Degrowth" is all about creating a consumption ceiling to solve our environmental issues, rather than focusing on policies that more effectively reduce emissions.

Nope. What matters is our resources use. When we invent new tech (such as such as an induction stove), we can create more consumption with less energy. An induction stove will heat your food more quickly using less electricity than conventional methods. That's growth :)

Table 2 of the paper in the cited Millward-Hopkins, et al (2020) that I discuss. It had an household budget for energy and only has very few appliances (heating and a stove). Not my idea. It's what they said is a "decent standard."

YouTube video by Christopher Clarke Can Degrowth Solve Climate Change?

New video. Go watch. Are the economic degrowth scholars actually doing the "decent" standard of living they advocate for? Do they not have dryers, dishwashers, or TVs? This entire literature is a distraction from real environmental solutions. youtu.be/fNLbtWcHDZE?...

New Data! How's the economy? Unemployment ticks up to 4.4% in Sept. More current Unemployment Claims continue to slowly rise in Nov. Yet, inflation is slowly rising to 3.0% as of Sept. What will the Fed do?