Never once has it occurred to anyone in the mainstream (and very few outside of the mainstream) that it's okay for people to produce less, consume less, and have more leisure.

  1. Really? Because I hear economists talk about the value of leisure time quite frequently.
  2. IMO, most economists don't fetishize GDP the way you suggest they do.
  3. You seem to be denying the benefits of Keynesian stimulus in a downturn. That position is not indefensible, but you're not defending it, you're just claiming it.

Really? Because I hear economists talk about the value of leisure time quite frequently. ...IMO, most economists don't fetishize GDP the way you suggest they do.

Both of these are contradicted by the fact that no economist, in discussion of the recent economic troubles, has suggested that letting the economy adjust to a lower level of output/work would be an acceptable solution.

Yes, they recognize that leisure is good in the abstract, but when it comes to proposals for "what to do" about the downturn, the implicit, unquestioned assumption is t... (read more)

Open Thread June 2010, Part 3

by Kevin 1 min read14th Jun 2010627 comments

6


This thread is for the discussion of Less Wrong topics that have not appeared in recent posts. If a discussion gets unwieldy, celebrate by turning it into a top-level post.

The thrilling conclusion of what is likely to be an inaccurately named trilogy of June Open Threads.