757 Packersfan, many of us have belonged to organizations that said they embraced change (and perhaps, even wanted to change) but lacked the intellectual curiosity and tenacity to actually implement beneficial change. Organizations want change the same way people want to quit smoking. They say they want to change but their heart's not in it.
@@mrcalista722 How many times can I "thumbs up " your statement?! To be more precise regarding your statement about the heart: we only want the kind of change that WE want.
Thanks, Deborah. I hope what this economist is saying speaks to everyone. Sometimes, we get lucky. But for the most part, life only makes sense when we make it make sense.
As a professional in a couple vastly different fields, his point about indecision and paralysis in the face of uncertainty, it's interesting because I feel like it's a trend in most areas of society. Is social media harming our ability to interact? (This is something that is being discussed vehemently in child-development.)
Most politicians are definitely intelligent but it seems they don't get anything done or make bad or incremental decisions. I think it's because politics is too bureaucratic. Creative people don't want to be held back by rules and multiple levels of approval, so they'll make the world a better place and let their ideas flourish more freely through innovation.
I disagree. I'm talking about U.S. politics. You need to be smart to fund raise and win elections. Although yeah a lot of races are safe R and D. You also need to have social skills. Like talking to groups of constituents. I've read about plenty of smart people in politics. Like Keith Hennessy on his personal website, Joe Manchin's moderate views, and Elizabeth Warren to name a few across the spectrum. The thing about politics is that it's "boring" to many. And it's takes time to keep up with what's happening in DC and state legislatures. Pajula makes a good point. It also has a lot of bureaucracy.
@@CentralCAhomie How so? I saw one of his town halls and he gives reasonable answers. Like how environmental regulations were hurting West Virginia. You don't even refute my point and just attack me. You're the one acting like a dumbass.
absolutely inspiring. I recently sold a business I built around several mechanical inventions. I have been contemplating whether I should take an extended period off before starting a new business based on a couple new gizmos that have been on the back burner for years. *Indecision leads to stagnation.* That's all I needed to hear. Back to work :)
Sorry to disappoint you but the book is written by David Romer, not Paul - though Paul himself is involved/credited in the book (via his growth theory)
I love the fifa 13 music. And I’m glad to hear that connection is a big part of the future, as our cities seem primed to incorporate the notion of parkways and TODs
Really interesting! Wish this was a long form conversation and not so quick. Big ideas like these should really be explained in long form so the listener can gather more info and make their own opinion on the subject.
When it comes to currency giving value to objects with scarcity(copper silver gold) is an absolute necessity if you want your currency to be a store of value and not be inflated away.
"Everyone wants growth but no one wants to change." This is so TRUE, especially if you were living in under/developing countries when corruption is so prone. And when you are trying so hard to help the grass root people, however those grass root people still on mindset reluctant to learn, reluctant to listen, reluctant to change, then in contrary they want to have a better living standard.
The problem that we have now is the "new ideas" that Paul (nice to hear a genius talk in a way I can understand) Roemer seem to all revolve around profiting off convenience (phones, apps, uber) rather than solving real problems. Bullet trains? Nice to have, especially in population-dense Japan where I live, but not exactly necessary. Smart grid? Necessary. Solar? Necessary. Environmental protection? Necessary.
Profiting off convenience and solving real problems are not mutually exclusive. Uber and Lyft are real problems in terms of asymmetric information. It's difficult to obtain information about getting a ride, how much it costs, the rider himself, how far away the rider is, etc. Maybe you mean the magnitude of the problem. Maybe the problem of getting a ride somewhere but not having the information to get one is not “important" relative, to say, poverty. I can agree to that, but I don't think it's unimportant either.
He is so right, not a single Ghost City in the US. We are losing the war in building empty structures. We have alot of old empty commercial properties, but very little in the way of empty homes. This is a national disgrace.
Saw you on Adam ruins everything.. you seemed so polite, and friendly. I thought outloud: he seems so friendly. My wife said: maybe hes just friendly. I replied: no hes definitely faking it.
So, is he suggesting that the economy is not necessarily a zero sum game? Because that'd finally give respectable support to the way I see economics :-o
Only fools think being successful in capitalistic societies is a zero sum game. Innovators are creating markets for things that didn't even exist 4 years ago. And this economist actually seems to get this.
"Everyone wants growth but no one wants change" says the guy who marries his girlfriend just before he receives his Nobel Prize! Congratulations on both, this late in life its not enough just to be accomplished, you deserve happiness... and commitment. I know that feeling🎆
Brilliant gut, nice comments. But, cities are obsolete. Commuting around physically is a waste of time when you can connect in forums and online, before you meet in person. Online networks are currently driving the massive change and innovation going on now, not crowded and crappy subways.
Its not that they're scarce because of population growth, its that they are INCREASINGLY scarce AS population grows. Its not that complex. If you have 4 cookies, and there are four people in the kitchen, everyone gets a cookie. If four more people enter the room, your cookie resource just became a lot more scarce. You now have only enough to give half a cookie to everyone, or horde them all to yourself and give one cookie to the entire group to split amongst themselves. Congratulations, your now living in the United States, land of opportunity.
@@ftlpunk in a world where one person has 3 cookies and seven people have to share 1 you can't with a straight face call any of that scarcity. Economics is the mathematics of greed.
‘Known worldwide copper resources are estimated at nearly 5.8 trillion pounds of which only about 0.7 trillion pounds (12%) have been mined throughout history... and nearly all of that is still in circulation, because copper's recycling rate is higher than that of any other engineering metal.’
There must be businesses that government can run better after you've gotten past the emotionally potent oversimplification obstacles and labels. Health Care insurance; why is it not possible to eliminate the profits for Hedge fund multi millionaires, shareholders and administration, hire back all the same rank and file including actuaries and customer service, possibly more for the sake of lowering premiums deductibles et al. ? Then, mining; saw a thing on television where mining our Oceans for mineral and elements will become a multi trillion dollar enterprise. Why just give Our Earth (if its not OUR EARTH, then whose is it? ) to Cabals that have managed to network the Powers that determine that opportunity distribution patronage by back room donations, campaign contributions, money laundering, influence and everything but benefitting The People of the Earth to whom it ultimately belongs? Create a department that represents US and all the debt we have to pay down even infrastructure seems to have taken a back seat to even a Space Force and the Wall. If we can get past that brainwashing element the benefits are for Everybody.
Why are so many of the comments on this channel hateful, derogatory, ignorant statements not backed up by any kind of facts? I hate to answer my own questions, but I don't think it's people with legitimate gripes about his economic theories. Something tells me the trolls have been sick'd on Scott Galloway. I dont know by whom, but my guess would be Amazon and Facebook.
It should be noted that in wide circles the Nobel Prize has come to be regarded as a badge of shame - at least in the disciplines of Economics and Peace. I should say, disciplines "in name", that is. That's not an indictment of this recipient; just a sad reflection on the sad deterioration of the award's (awards') fall from prestige.
What basis do you have for that statement on how the Nobel prize is regarded when it comes to economics? I've not gotten that impression at all, just wondering what led you to that conclusion. You said in "wide circles" its considered a badge of shame. Please elaborate.
@@frenandin Let me see if I got that right: "Dico ergo non est verum. I say, therefore it is true." Oh my God, you are a genius. They should give you some kind of award. I know just the one. Your hubris shiningly illustrates how economists are broadly full of shit. Broadly - not all of them.
@@Bill_Woo What, do you expect I provide any concrete proof of what I said? I'm not going to do that on a RUclips video, my time is more valuable than that. Also, your initial statement lacks any evidence too and I would say the onus of proof lies with you from the start. At the moment, both of our statements hold the same truth value for any reader and you're condemning me for the same sin you're guilty yourself. Also, you're the one exposing your hubris with your broken latin, your irony (namecalling, how childish) and your generalizations. Dismissing an entre discipline (especially one as broad as economics) is one of the telltale signs of an ignorant person and one of the quickest ways to get your opinion discarded (by me, at least).
Stop calling it the Nobel Prize! There is no Nobel Prize for economists. This is a swindle of the Swedish National Bank. It is also correctly called the "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences". That would be like the Culinary Guild awarding a Nobel Memorial Prize for the best cook. Alfred Nobel hated economists.
People overrstimate China. Manufacturing will continue to migrate to SE Asia & their business culture dictates that they won't become a tech innovator anytime soon. There growth is going to come at the expense of exploiting the natural resources of poor countries in Africa through secured loans & OBOR.
This seems like a baseless statement really. True about Africa and OBOR re: resources, but if you look at China's own market there's already quite a lot of innovation, and it would be foolish to think such a big market will be otherwise. Some of it may be linked to IP theft, which is a separate issue, but there's undeniable innovation there too.
@@Joe-jh8po IP theft isn't rampant it's normalized. To understand why they don't see this as a problem you need to understand Chinese culture. Their value system is different from the West. Lastly, the CCP. This regime would never allow FAANG or any company that could threaten their power. Sorry, but I don't want to invest or do business in a country where you can be imprisoned for criticizing the government.
Every country copied until they started leading. Look at 1880s Europe and US, stealing ideas from each other left and right. And China has massive innovation going on now. Think bigger and longer term.
Night off the bat I have to disagree with him. We are not constantly finding new ways to use the things we take out of the ground, especially in relation to metals. When was the last major breakthrough in metallurgy? I think we have reached pretty darn near the peak of what we can do in the realm of structural materials.
Come on... Its a metaphore. Hes just saying that when you hit a ceiling on a particular resource or tool, you have to innovate to break through that ceiling. The bronze/copper thing isnt supposed to be a real argument. Hes just trying to paint you a picture.
@@ftlpunk right, but I worry a lot about economists projecting technological innovation as some sort of inevitable trek forward. In my view, we have hit plateaus in a shocking number of fields, and may have reached the limits of what is physically possible.
@@Wltrwllyngaeiou its a lot easier to just assume we've reached the limits of whats humanly possible than to show that we have not. No offense to your logic, you may be right... but If everyone had that mindset we never would have been able to get out of the earths atmosphere, clone a sheep, or create carbon nanotubes. Your mindset is essentially an excuse to not try and innovate. Innovation isnt always needed, but when it is needed, it will always be a mistake to assume we've "reached the limits of whats physically possible."
@@ftlpunk don't get me wrong, I currently work in materials R&D, and I think there are still plenty of advances to be made, but I think they just keep getting more and more incremental as time goes on. I dont doubt that there will be enormous leaps and bounds in fields like biology, but I doubt that we will ever make any significant improvements in other areas of technology, particularly in regards to metals and alloys, which is why the initial statement kind of irked me.
what a bunch os platitudes. "you need to be connected to become more productive". wow. who would guess that. i'm glad we have a nobel prize winner to share this gem with us. I wish they had deepened the conversation
How about you read his books and papers, dipshit? This is just a simple overview of his work, which you now know focuses on indigenous growth (through technological progress with increased interconnectedness).
Nice get Scott, a resounding Harrumph for his second appearance. "Everyone wants growth, no one wants change". Amen brother. Oh, and Scott, "Europe as a moral leader"?!? I hope that was just lousy faculty-lounge humor...
"Everyone wants growth but no one wants change." How insightful!
It's a nice bumper sticker, but is it actually true? I completely disagree with the "no one wants change" part.
Julian McQueen Exactly what I thought, so apt, precise and true!
757 Packersfan, many of us have belonged to organizations that said they embraced change (and perhaps, even wanted to change) but lacked the intellectual curiosity and tenacity to actually implement beneficial change. Organizations want change the same way people want to quit smoking. They say they want to change but their heart's not in it.
@@mrcalista722 How many times can I "thumbs up " your statement?! To be more precise regarding your statement about the heart: we only want the kind of change that WE want.
Thanks, Deborah. I hope what this economist is saying speaks to everyone. Sometimes, we get lucky. But for the most part, life only makes sense when we make it make sense.
As a professional in a couple vastly different fields, his point about indecision and paralysis in the face of uncertainty, it's interesting because I feel like it's a trend in most areas of society. Is social media harming our ability to interact? (This is something that is being discussed vehemently in child-development.)
Amazing smart man, sometimes I think “why don’t smart people like this get into politics” then I remember smart & politics don’t usually go together.
Most politicians are definitely intelligent but it seems they don't get anything done or make bad or incremental decisions. I think it's because politics is too bureaucratic. Creative people don't want to be held back by rules and multiple levels of approval, so they'll make the world a better place and let their ideas flourish more freely through innovation.
But they should
I disagree. I'm talking about U.S. politics. You need to be smart to fund raise and win elections. Although yeah a lot of races are safe R and D. You also need to have social skills. Like talking to groups of constituents. I've read about plenty of smart people in politics. Like Keith Hennessy on his personal website, Joe Manchin's moderate views, and Elizabeth Warren to name a few across the spectrum. The thing about politics is that it's "boring" to many. And it's takes time to keep up with what's happening in DC and state legislatures. Pajula makes a good point. It also has a lot of bureaucracy.
@@Farnetus if you think Joe Manchin is smart then you must be a dumbass.
@@CentralCAhomie How so? I saw one of his town halls and he gives reasonable answers. Like how environmental regulations were hurting West Virginia. You don't even refute my point and just attack me. You're the one acting like a dumbass.
Dear Stockholm - Please accept the nomination of Professor Galloway for the Nobel Prize in Economics... He needs the free parking spot at NYU. ;-)
Well when so many "teachers" have Stockholm Syndrome to the idea money creation is free is it no wonder there are no parking spots left?
WHY
SO
SHORT
because low attention spans
Seriously. This could easily be a 2 hour podcast. I would subscribe (monthly payment) to that!
Agreed. It's to short to offer anything of substance.
that's what she said (sorry I had to...)
absolutely inspiring. I recently sold a business I built around several mechanical inventions. I have been contemplating whether I should take an extended period off before starting a new business based on a couple new gizmos that have been on the back burner for years.
*Indecision leads to stagnation.*
That's all I needed to hear. Back to work :)
Can we get more of Paul Roemer? He's a very interesting and knowledgeable bloke
Worked through his textbook 'Advanced Macroecononis'. One of the best books ever! Congratulations in the Nobel!
Sorry to disappoint you but the book is written by David Romer, not Paul - though Paul himself is involved/credited in the book (via his growth theory)
@@Lasssiii Thanks for correcting me!
have to know this dude's stuff for my final next week - happy to see this video :D
I love the fifa 13 music. And I’m glad to hear that connection is a big part of the future, as our cities seem primed to incorporate the notion of parkways and TODs
Time to learn some new concepts
Scott: We’ll see you next me
Me, having watched the finale: Will you?
Really interesting! Wish this was a long form conversation and not so quick. Big ideas like these should really be explained in long form so the listener can gather more info and make their own opinion on the subject.
When it comes to currency giving value to objects with scarcity(copper silver gold) is an absolute necessity if you want your currency to be a store of value and not be inflated away.
haha
"Everyone wants growth but no one wants to change." This is so TRUE, especially if you were living in under/developing countries when corruption is so prone. And when you are trying so hard to help the grass root people, however those grass root people still on mindset reluctant to learn, reluctant to listen, reluctant to change, then in contrary they want to have a better living standard.
The problem that we have now is the "new ideas" that Paul (nice to hear a genius talk in a way I can understand) Roemer seem to all revolve around profiting off convenience (phones, apps, uber) rather than solving real problems. Bullet trains? Nice to have, especially in population-dense Japan where I live, but not exactly necessary. Smart grid? Necessary. Solar? Necessary. Environmental protection? Necessary.
Yes, it seems the first question an idea needs to go through is "how much money I can make" rather than how will these help us solve the problem.
Fully rebated price on greenhouse gas emissions? Necessary. citizensclimatelobby.org/basics-carbon-fee-dividend
Profiting off convenience and solving real problems are not mutually exclusive. Uber and Lyft are real problems in terms of asymmetric information. It's difficult to obtain information about getting a ride, how much it costs, the rider himself, how far away the rider is, etc.
Maybe you mean the magnitude of the problem. Maybe the problem of getting a ride somewhere but not having the information to get one is not “important" relative, to say, poverty. I can agree to that, but I don't think it's unimportant either.
Congratulations on the Nobel Price!
I like the idea which is central to economics of handling scares resources like money, raw material etc.
He is so right, not a single Ghost City in the US. We are losing the war in building empty structures. We have alot of old empty commercial properties, but very little in the way of empty homes. This is a national disgrace.
Yeah, what the hell does he know? Hes just an economics professor. YOU'RE THE REAL EXPERT.
ftlpunk that's reply
Congratulations Paul! 👏👏👏
Wish this was longer!!
what is the name of the song played at the end?
It'd be interesting to calculate the value of public parks and green spaces in cities.
"Granaries are filled to overflowing, and commodities, even these we have tried to make dear by tariff, were never before so cheap."
Nice one refreshing view
NYU Stern is spelled wrongly and is it "roemer" or "romer"?
Roemer
Classic tool = easier to get dinner reservations
Match your camera colors in post folks.
Explain
great handshake
Saw you on Adam ruins everything.. you seemed so polite, and friendly. I thought outloud: he seems so friendly. My wife said: maybe hes just friendly. I replied: no hes definitely faking it.
So, is he suggesting that the economy is not necessarily a zero sum game? Because that'd finally give respectable support to the way I see economics :-o
Only fools think being successful in capitalistic societies is a zero sum game. Innovators are creating markets for things that didn't even exist 4 years ago. And this economist actually seems to get this.
It's zero sum on three axis, where labor is converted, so net sum is always increasing.
This is a pretty good vid about just that idea, ruclips.net/video/rvskMHn0sqQ/видео.html
Most economists that have won the Nobel Prize would say that the free market need not be zeros sum.
"Everyone wants growth but no one wants change" says the guy who marries his girlfriend just before he receives his Nobel Prize! Congratulations on both, this late in life its not enough just to be accomplished, you deserve happiness... and commitment. I know that feeling🎆
Nobel Prize in Economics Smart == saving money renting a tux just once and using it twice in one day - 6:18
Brilliant gut, nice comments. But, cities are obsolete. Commuting around physically is a waste of time when you can connect in forums and online, before you meet in person. Online networks are currently driving the massive change and innovation going on now, not crowded and crappy subways.
Isn't his wife, Christine I believe, also an economist. Wasn't she on the president's board of economists for Obama?
you should have included his name (Paul Roemer) in the title, not just the description.
6 minutes I’m not getting back
What If No Money in future
is that mean an absolute solution to the prisoner's dilemma ?
Scotty what happened to that V neck? You got room for one more in there.
Sad not to see an African city in that map
I don't get their accent, Need subtitles.
If krugman can get an economics Nobel prize in economics it is an idiot award
If you can't explain it simply enough, you don't know it that well. This applies to this Nobel Prize winner.
Or maybe you are too stupid to understand
Are "scarce" resources really scarce because of population growth tho?
Its not that they're scarce because of population growth, its that they are INCREASINGLY scarce AS population grows. Its not that complex. If you have 4 cookies, and there are four people in the kitchen, everyone gets a cookie. If four more people enter the room, your cookie resource just became a lot more scarce. You now have only enough to give half a cookie to everyone, or horde them all to yourself and give one cookie to the entire group to split amongst themselves. Congratulations, your now living in the United States, land of opportunity.
@@ftlpunk in a world where one person has 3 cookies and seven people have to share 1 you can't with a straight face call any of that scarcity. Economics is the mathematics of greed.
Root cause analysis
‘Known worldwide copper resources are estimated at nearly 5.8 trillion pounds of which only about 0.7 trillion pounds (12%) have been mined throughout history... and nearly all of that is still in circulation, because copper's recycling rate is higher than that of any other engineering metal.’
What? South Korea and Japan were left out give me a break.
Nothing to say about Tumblr? Huh
This video has been a huge "no shit" to me. Can someone direct me to someone I don't already know from this professor?
Scott will ward off climate change by reflecting solar rays with his bald pate
There must be businesses that government can run better after you've gotten past the emotionally potent oversimplification obstacles and labels. Health Care insurance; why is it not possible to eliminate the profits for Hedge fund multi millionaires, shareholders and administration, hire back all the same rank and file including actuaries and customer service, possibly more for the sake of lowering premiums deductibles et al. ? Then, mining; saw a thing on television where mining our Oceans for mineral and elements will become a multi trillion dollar enterprise. Why just give Our Earth (if its not OUR EARTH, then whose is it? ) to Cabals that have managed to network the Powers that determine that opportunity distribution patronage by back room donations, campaign contributions, money laundering, influence and everything but benefitting The People of the Earth to whom it ultimately belongs? Create a department that represents US and all the debt we have to pay down even infrastructure seems to have taken a back seat to even a Space Force and the Wall. If we can get past that brainwashing element the benefits are for Everybody.
Why are so many of the comments on this channel hateful, derogatory, ignorant statements not backed up by any kind of facts? I hate to answer my own questions, but I don't think it's people with legitimate gripes about his economic theories. Something tells me the trolls have been sick'd on Scott Galloway. I dont know by whom, but my guess would be Amazon and Facebook.
"NYU Stren" sounds like a Chinese knockoff university
Its NYU stern, and it sounds like a chinese knockoff because your stupid. If you were smart, it would just sound like the name a school.
ftlpunk - there was a typo in the video in which “Stern” was spelled “Stren.”
There is no true nobel prize in Economics.
It should be noted that in wide circles the Nobel Prize has come to be regarded as a badge of shame - at least in the disciplines of Economics and Peace. I should say, disciplines "in name", that is. That's not an indictment of this recipient; just a sad reflection on the sad deterioration of the award's (awards') fall from prestige.
What basis do you have for that statement on how the Nobel prize is regarded when it comes to economics? I've not gotten that impression at all, just wondering what led you to that conclusion. You said in "wide circles" its considered a badge of shame. Please elaborate.
As opposed to thin circles?
I'm an economist and your statement is patently false
@@frenandin Let me see if I got that right: "Dico ergo non est verum. I say, therefore it is true." Oh my God, you are a genius. They should give you some kind of award. I know just the one.
Your hubris shiningly illustrates how economists are broadly full of shit. Broadly - not all of them.
@@Bill_Woo What, do you expect I provide any concrete proof of what I said? I'm not going to do that on a RUclips video, my time is more valuable than that. Also, your initial statement lacks any evidence too and I would say the onus of proof lies with you from the start. At the moment, both of our statements hold the same truth value for any reader and you're condemning me for the same sin you're guilty yourself.
Also, you're the one exposing your hubris with your broken latin, your irony (namecalling, how childish) and your generalizations. Dismissing an entre discipline (especially one as broad as economics) is one of the telltale signs of an ignorant person and one of the quickest ways to get your opinion discarded (by me, at least).
there is no such thing as nobel price for economics, go figure
Always forgetting the African continent.
“US”
“Moral Leader of the world”
Lmao
Stop calling it the Nobel Prize! There is no Nobel Prize for economists. This is a swindle of the Swedish National Bank.
It is also correctly called the "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences".
That would be like the Culinary Guild awarding a Nobel Memorial Prize for the best cook. Alfred Nobel hated economists.
People overrstimate China. Manufacturing will continue to migrate to SE Asia & their business culture dictates that they won't become a tech innovator anytime soon. There growth is going to come at the expense of exploiting the natural resources of poor countries in Africa through secured loans & OBOR.
This seems like a baseless statement really. True about Africa and OBOR re: resources, but if you look at China's own market there's already quite a lot of innovation, and it would be foolish to think such a big market will be otherwise. Some of it may be linked to IP theft, which is a separate issue, but there's undeniable innovation there too.
@@Joe-jh8po IP theft isn't rampant it's normalized. To understand why they don't see this as a problem you need to understand Chinese culture. Their value system is different from the West. Lastly, the CCP. This regime would never allow FAANG or any company that could threaten their power. Sorry, but I don't want to invest or do business in a country where you can be imprisoned for criticizing the government.
Every country copied until they started leading. Look at 1880s Europe and US, stealing ideas from each other left and right. And China has massive innovation going on now. Think bigger and longer term.
@pple is blah blah
Night off the bat I have to disagree with him. We are not constantly finding new ways to use the things we take out of the ground, especially in relation to metals. When was the last major breakthrough in metallurgy? I think we have reached pretty darn near the peak of what we can do in the realm of structural materials.
Come on... Its a metaphore. Hes just saying that when you hit a ceiling on a particular resource or tool, you have to innovate to break through that ceiling. The bronze/copper thing isnt supposed to be a real argument. Hes just trying to paint you a picture.
@@ftlpunk right, but I worry a lot about economists projecting technological innovation as some sort of inevitable trek forward. In my view, we have hit plateaus in a shocking number of fields, and may have reached the limits of what is physically possible.
@@Wltrwllyngaeiou its a lot easier to just assume we've reached the limits of whats humanly possible than to show that we have not. No offense to your logic, you may be right... but If everyone had that mindset we never would have been able to get out of the earths atmosphere, clone a sheep, or create carbon nanotubes. Your mindset is essentially an excuse to not try and innovate. Innovation isnt always needed, but when it is needed, it will always be a mistake to assume we've "reached the limits of whats physically possible."
@@ftlpunk don't get me wrong, I currently work in materials R&D, and I think there are still plenty of advances to be made, but I think they just keep getting more and more incremental as time goes on. I dont doubt that there will be enormous leaps and bounds in fields like biology, but I doubt that we will ever make any significant improvements in other areas of technology, particularly in regards to metals and alloys, which is why the initial statement kind of irked me.
what a bunch os platitudes. "you need to be connected to become more productive". wow. who would guess that. i'm glad we have a nobel prize winner to share this gem with us. I wish they had deepened the conversation
"I hoped they could went deeper" yeah, dont listen to the economics professor, listen to this guy. Hes the real expert. He even knows basic grammar.
How about you read his books and papers, dipshit? This is just a simple overview of his work, which you now know focuses on indigenous growth (through technological progress with increased interconnectedness).
It's his life's work and you expect him to explain it to you like THAT in six minutes?
Nice get Scott, a resounding Harrumph for his second appearance. "Everyone wants growth, no one wants change". Amen brother. Oh, and Scott, "Europe as a moral leader"?!? I hope that was just lousy faculty-lounge humor...
Should have been called sesame Street economics in 6 min. The man may be smart, but his points were obvious. Waste of 6 min