Has the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

[Maximus Zeebra]

Compared with the world economic growth both Europe and America has declined the last decade, adding then the developing worlds growth and comaring this with European and American growth, its not only clear that our growth is slow, but that we are maybe actually declining.
Our economies have grown about 2.5% every year compared with itself the previous year, but considering that the population have increased almost AS much, that growth isnt really anything to e happy about like growth in the 90s for example..

In the 90s especially America but also Europe developed massivly, new technologies popped up everywhere, and we can easily classify the 90s as the decade of information technology. Compared with that the 80s was a decade of electronics, and viewing back, all decades have been of great progress.. But what kind of progress have we had in the 00 decade?

In my opinion it SHOULD have been a decade with great breakthoughs in biotech and medical technologies, followed by the 10 decade that should have been a decade(and can still) be a decade of nanotechnologies.. In my opinion, none of these have come through or is going to happen anytime soon, if we continue like we do now. So, the last decade, have we really been in decline and had no actual progress?

With progress I do not mean further improvement of the 90s technology and IT boom.. The Ipod doesnt account for progress for example.. Yes, Europe had a great end of the 90s with mobile technology which somewhat also spread to the US.. But since that we have had nothing, or have we?

 

[Iriemon]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Compared with the world economic growth both Europe and America has declined the last decade, adding then the developing worlds growth and comaring this with European and American growth, its not only clear that our growth is slow, but that we are maybe actually declining.
Our economies have grown about 2.5% every year compared with itself the previous year, but considering that the population have increased almost AS much, that growth isnt really anything to e happy about like growth in the 90s for example..

In the 90s especially America but also Europe developed massivly, new technologies popped up everywhere, and we can easily classify the 90s as the decade of information technology. Compared with that the 80s was a decade of electronics, and viewing back, all decades have been of great progress.. But what kind of progress have we had in the 00 decade?

In my opinion it SHOULD have been a decade with great breakthoughs in biotech and medical technologies, followed by the 10 decade that should have been a decade(and can still) be a decade of nanotechnologies.. In my opinion, none of these have come through or is going to happen anytime soon, if we continue like we do now. So, the last decade, have we really been in decline and had no actual progress?

With progress I do not mean further improvement of the 90s technology and IT boom.. The Ipod doesnt account for progress for example.. Yes, Europe had a great end of the 90s with mobile technology which somewhat also spread to the US.. But since that we have had nothing, or have we?

How do you figure there has been no actual progress? Measured by what?

 

[DarkWizard12]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Hte IRaq and Afghan war. Thats what stopped it all

 

[DarkWizard12]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

How do you figure there has been no actual progress? Measured by what?

I don't know why but, I think, from reading his post, maybe its the lack of breakthroughs in technology?

 

[Iriemon]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

I don't know why but, I think, from reading his post, maybe its the lack of breakthroughs in technology?

Hard to say. This decade may not be a stellar one, but we've had real economic growth and there have certainly been technological improvements during the decade.

 

[Tashah]

Your title asks of recession but your poll asks about decline? The two are not always mutually inclusive.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Hard to say. This decade may not be a stellar one, but we've had real economic growth and there have certainly been technological improvements during the decade.

but not any breakthroughs. Where has our next Edison, our next Graham Bell, our next Bill Gates, been? Where has our next Benjamin Franklin gone?

 

[earthworm]

During war-time the nations money and resources are destroyed, wasted, burned..
After the war, when things are built, man benefits.
The wars must stop, but will not, as long as radical Islam exists..

Also, I suspect a bit of a cover-up by allowing too many mortgages with too little colateral...

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

How do you figure there has been no actual progress? Measured by what?

Measured and compared with previous decades which all saw astonishing breakthroughs in some sector..

Take for example electronics.. In the 80s they developed from junk to high tech.. Take the 90s, when computers developed from crap into great things. Take the 70s when drugs.. no.. lol.. Every decade has had great development in something, in the year 2000 we stood on the edge of greatness in medical technology and biotechnology, but none of them came through.. They may in the 2010 decade, but only if things change.. Take the 70s for example, great mechanical advancement.. Take the 60s, great advancement in housing..

Take the 00 decade. Nothing memorable, just SMALL continued development in IT... It wa a decade of nothing..


Its hard to explain in a proper way, but for the west this decade has really sucked big time, especially compared with all other decades after ww2 where the world has seen great progress in all, and especially in 1 sector which was revolutionized.

I hope the 2010 decade will bring about massive change in either biotech, medical tech or nanotech, preferably all.. But like we are going on in Europe and the US now, we could just as well hand these responsibilities to China.


edit. last wave in Europe was mobile technology which came after the last wave in the US which was computer tech and the internet(ITC)..

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

I don't know why but, I think, from reading his post, maybe its the lack of breakthroughs in technology?

Didnt you before this decade started expect great break though in for example biotechnology? World changing advancements in medicine or the start of nanotechnology revolution?

None of these happend.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Hard to say. This decade may not be a stellar one, but we've had real economic growth and there have certainly been technological improvements during the decade.

Not really.. America and Europe has declined economically compared with the rest of the world.. Technological advancement have been quite small and just a continuation of the boom of the 90s..

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Your title asks of recession but your poll asks about decline? The two are not always mutually inclusive.

Decline should be the right word in both cases..

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

During war-time the nations money and resources are destroyed, wasted, burned..

This is actually wrong.. The world has never progressed as fast as it did during world war 2.. And after ofcourse(as a result)..

Also, I suspect a bit of a cover-up by allowing too many mortgages with too little colateral...

Real estate needs an overhault.. Prices are driven up by mortages and debt levels are driven up by prices. It is right as you say, values have been created in thin air.. Aside from that the system shouldnt be so that people have so slave 20-40 years for a house(in the same place).. Horrible system..

 

[obvious Child]

The problem with the argument is that it assumes the pie is being shared among the growing populations. At least in the US, it's not as huge amounts of illegals contribute and don't get their 'fair' share.

I don't think we're in a economic Malthusian trap.

 

[DarkWizard12]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Didnt you before this decade started expect great break though in for example biotechnology? World changing advancements in medicine or the start of nanotechnology revolution?

None of these happend.

Actually, in biotechnology, about a month ago Dan posted something on being able to extract oil from bugs and algae and, hopefully we can be energy independent in 10-20 years...

But yea, not major enough to give this decade anything good.

 

[Kandahar]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

but not any breakthroughs. Where has our next Edison, our next Graham Bell, our next Bill Gates, been? Where has our next Benjamin Franklin gone?

The world doesn't work like that anymore. The traditional image of the lone inventor simply is not accurate in modern times. It's very rare that an individual person gets credit for an invention because very few individuals have the capital; it's almost always corporations or foundations.

People like that still exist...you just haven't heard of them. They work for Apple, Cisco, Microsoft, Google, Dell, Merck, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, and lots of other high-tech companies.

There has been plenty of progress this decade. You can't expect something revolutionary like the internet to come along every single decade (although every 25 years or so isn't unreasonable). Although really, "revolutionary" is relative. The 2000s have looked pretty damn revolutionary compared to any decade in the last hundred years EXCEPT for the 1990s (and maybe the 1920s).

The 90s were the decade of information technology, yes...but the 2000s were also the decade of information technology (and some important medical developments too). Think about the world just ten years ago, at the end of 1998:

• Cell phones were very rare.
• HIV was a death sentence.
• Polio still afflicted tens of thousands of people every year.
• The average computer could store no more than 10-20 MP3s.
• Downloading a movie was unthinkable for the average user.
• There was no Wikipedia, YouTube, Facebook, MySpace, or Twitter.
• The idea of getting a map (for free!) on your computer was unthinkable, let alone a computer mapping program in your car.
• Most search engines were in their infancy and they sucked bigtime.
• Alternative energy was merely a pipe dream of aging hippies.

Those are just some of the things I can think of off the top of my head. Certainly very significant developments. The biggest change from the 1990s, IMO, has been the ability of people to get (and share) any information they want, at anytime, from anywhere in the world.

 

[earthworm]

This is actually wrong.. The world has never progressed as fast as it did during world war 2.. And after ofcourse(as a result)..
But, one must agree that the end result of destruction is a pile if trash, and what good does that do anyone, other the United Refuse ?? The progress begins, for the survivors, when creation and construction begin..


Real estate needs an overhault.. Prices are driven up by mortgages and debt levels are driven up by prices. It is right as you say, values have been created in thin air.. Aside from that the system shouldn't be so that people have so slave 20-40 years for a house(in the same place).. Horrible system..

Land prices are inflated, as the rich are slow to sell their land...
A separate debate is "should a few wealthy control or even own the land ?".

As it is now, a man can easily pay 100 to 200,000 dollars in interest alone, over a life time..

Back on topic; I do think that conditions are improving, slowly.
Edison, Einstein, Tesla , and Ford are working in team efforts, the outstanding teams may be known, but not the individuals...

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Actually, in biotechnology, about a month ago Dan posted something on being able to extract oil from bugs and algae and, hopefully we can be energy independent in 10-20 years...

But yea, not major enough to give this decade anything good.

:rofl

What is the US obsession with oil?
I will take a half minute to answer that...

You are dependent on cars, because your infrastructure sucks.. I know this because I had to have a car when I was in the US, or I couldnt have got around anywhere, even in the city I lived in.. Everything is spread across great distances and only the largest cities have proper infrastructure(metro+tram+bus+more).. In Europe we think different in this regard because our infrastructure is denser and more dependent on electricity rather than oil to fuel cars..

In the US, what is the most reasonable investment then? new infrastructure or investment in new car technology to switch out all current cars with new modern ones that run on water or air.. The problem with this is that water will become more and more precious in the future.. What are you then to do?
I think the only solution is electric.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

There has been plenty of progress this decade. You can't expect something revolutionary like the internet to come along every single decade (although every 25 years or so isn't unreasonable). Although really, "revolutionary" is relative. The 2000s have looked pretty damn revolutionary compared to any decade in the last hundred years EXCEPT for the 1990s (and maybe the 1920s).

Yes you can.. Electronic devices was revolutionized in the 80s.. Then there was the 70s which was maybe actually the drug decade and so on, mechanical improvements in the 60s was vast..

The 90s were the decade of information technology, yes...but the 2000s were also the decade of information technology (and some important medical developments too). Think about the world just ten years ago, at the end of 1998:

The end of the 90s there was a mobile revolution in Europe at least, where everything turned small and mobiles became normal, way before the turn of the millennium. But this is part of the computing and IT thing of the 90s, not a seperate event..

The continuation of those developments is not something ti be proud of and live of as great achievements, and certainly the trend has slowed enourmously.. All we see now is false marketing.. My computer that I had in 2001 was as good as the statonary computers they sell nowadays, my laptop was almost equally good as my current.. The Iphone for example is a device that lives from marketing. The product isnt that good compared to other telephones, but enourmously popular. The IPOD was introduced and made popular something that already existed, as such did nothing extraordinary.. Maybe this decade is the decade of great improvment in propaganda and false marketing?

• Cell phones were very rare.

• Even I had one in 1998, at the time I was just a kid..
  
  

  [*]HIV was a death sentence.

  
  Still is..
  
  

  [*]The average computer could store no more than 10-20 MP3s.

  
  I had a 400mhz, 60gb, 256mb ram machine at that time.. Then I switched just before the millennium to a 2.6ghz single processor 512mb x2 machine with about 400gb of harddrive space.. That is about the same specs they sell nowadays, just dual processors.. Nothing is faster because the Vista system drags those machine down.. Those machine have marginally better performance on Linux systems than the 2000 computer, but hardly any revolution that we now have 1tb disks easily available.
  
  

  [*]Downloading a movie was unthinkable for the average user.

  My friends in elementary school was PC savvy, they downloaded in 1995, music and movies.. I started sometime around 2000, it was easy and available for everyone through NAPSTER:.
  
  

  [*]There was no Wikipedia, YouTube, Facebook, MySpace, or Twitter

  None of these are revolutionary in ANY way... Wikipedia and youtube is great but not a revolution..
  
  

  [*]The idea of getting a map (for free!) on your computer was unthinkable, let alone a computer mapping program in your car.

  
  True, but not revolution.. Paper maps was easily usable..
  
  

  [*]Most search engines were in their infancy and they sucked bigtime.

  They didnt actually, they havent developed much the last 10 years.. I remember altavista was the first one that I used.. It was slower because I was on modem, but aside from that I havent seen great change in search technology except more results(which in the end is worse)..
  
  

  [*]Alternative energy was merely a pipe dream of aging hippies.

ah, alternative energy has been used for decades. It was made popular by the EU, but hardly a revolution YET.

Those are just some of the things I can think of off the top of my head. Certainly very significant developments. The biggest change from the 1990s, IMO, has been the ability of people to get (and share) any information they want, at anytime, from anywhere in the world.

I dont think things look that different, of course we have had further development of things and popuralized things that already existed, but thats not really so great. The sharing of information you are talking about came in the 90s with the internet, but maybe YOU were just a slow adopter?


The most surprising progress I have heard of is the transplant of a face(France) and whole arms which will actually function(Germany)... That is real progress, but in infacy still..


Lets hope the 10 decade can be a decade of great revolution in bio and medical technology! Can we agree on that?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Land prices are inflated, as the rich are slow to sell their land...
A separate debate is "should a few wealthy control or even own the land ?".

As it is now, a man can easily pay 100 to 200,000 dollars in interest alone, over a life time..

Back on topic; I do think that conditions are improving, slowly.
Edison, Einstein, Tesla , and Ford are working in team efforts, the outstanding teams may be known, but not the individuals...

Tesla, yes, one of the best but most underestimated scientists of the early revolutions.. I hope some of what he was talking about can come true now "modernity" and all. We do for example have a need for storage of electric power if we are to get beyond the oil age..

Conditions always imrpove slowly.. What it is all about is improving them fast instead of slowly.. We certainly could if we wanted.

edit.. but like things are its all about inventing rather than implementing..

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

...be careful to not vote in the poll..

 

[Kandahar]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Yes you can.. Electronic devices was revolutionized in the 80s.. Then there was the 70s which was maybe actually the drug decade and so on, mechanical improvements in the 60s was vast..

The end of the 90s there was a mobile revolution in Europe at least, where everything turned small and mobiles became normal, way before the turn of the millennium. But this is part of the computing and IT thing of the 90s, not a seperate event..

You can't just compartmentalize every decade as "The Drug Decade" or "The Mechanical Decade" or "The Electronics Decade." Technology doesn't work like that. There have been lots of very important improvements in our technology in the past 10 years...the fact that they don't easily lend themselves to a single name like The Whatever Decade doesn't mean that they aren't important.

The continuation of those developments is not something ti be proud of and live of as great achievements, and certainly the trend has slowed enourmously.. All we see now is false marketing..

Why is the continuation of developments not important? That is the most important part. It's impossible to identify revolutionary technologies until after they're improved. All technologies start out as expensive, rare, and inconvenient...it's only after the improvements that they become more popular.

You have the advantage of looking at previous decades from several years removed, so it's easy to point at the World Wide Web or the personal computer and say "Obviously that was revolutionary. Why don't we have developments like that anymore?" But the fact is that this decade's revolutions won't become apparent until after they're improved and popularized.

My computer that I had in 2001 was as good as the statonary computers they sell nowadays, my laptop was almost equally good as my current..

If that is true, it's only because you had a top-of-the-line computer in 2001 and you have a piece of junk today. Moore's Law has been fairly consistent this decade: For any given cost, the number of transistors on a circuit doubles every 18-24 months.

The Iphone for example is a device that lives from marketing. The product isnt that good compared to other telephones, but enourmously popular. The IPOD was introduced and made popular something that already existed, as such did nothing extraordinary.. Maybe this decade is the decade of great improvment in propaganda and false marketing?

Again, you have the luxury of viewing past developments through the prism of history. You do not have that luxury with today's technology, so it's impossible to tell what is revolutionary and what is merely interesting.

Even I had one in 1998, at the time I was just a kid..

Well perhaps Europe was a few years ahead of us on that one. Over here, cell phones didn't really become popular until 2000-2002, and they didn't really become ubiquitous until about 2004. Sure, they existed before that...but they were enormous, expensive, inconvenient, and the service sucked.

Still is..

No it's not. At least not in most Western nations. If one has access to the proper medical treatment, one can live for years or decades with HIV. Over the past 10 years, it's become much more of a chronic condition than a universally fatal disease...at least in the developed world.

I had a 400mhz, 60gb, 256mb ram machine at that time.. Then I switched just before the millennium to a 2.6ghz single processor 512mb x2 machine with about 400gb of harddrive space.. That is about the same specs they sell nowadays, just dual processors.. Nothing is faster because the Vista system drags those machine down.. Those machine have marginally better performance on Linux systems than the 2000 computer, but hardly any revolution that we now have 1tb disks easily available.

If you had a 60gb hard drive in 1998, then you had a truly gargantuan hard drive and you must've shelled out an enormous amount of money for it.

I had a run-of-the-mill computer in 1998. I don't remember exactly how big the hard drive was...but I know that it would be a stretch to say that it had 5gb.

Here's a cool website that lists some common hard drives and their price, by year. As you can see, the average size in 1998 appears to be around 4-8 gb...and they cost several hundred dollars.

Cost of Hard Drive Space

My friends in elementary school was PC savvy, they downloaded in 1995, music and movies.. I started sometime around 2000, it was easy and available for everyone through NAPSTER:.

Ya I started downloading music from Napster in 1999-2000 as well. Took about 30-60 minutes apiece to download them. I remember that after I had a handful of songs, I had to start deleting them to make room for new ones. Downloading a movie was completely out of the question.

None of these are revolutionary in ANY way... Wikipedia and youtube is great but not a revolution..

See above about viewing things through the prism of history. And I would argue that those things are ALREADY revolutionary, because they allow random people to share their knowledge with people all over the world. That was not the case in the 1990s. There were websites devoted to educating people on various topics, but individual users couldn't really share information.

If you had a cool video, your best bet was to send it to the webmaster of some popular website and hope that they also thought it was cool. If you had some valuable information on a specific topic, you could email the webmaster of some popular website on that topic and hope that they also thought it was popular.

True, but not revolution.. Paper maps was easily usable..

This is a good candidate to be a revolutionary technology. Computerized maps are already more accurate than paper maps. In another few years, paper maps will be completely obsolete.

They didnt actually, they havent developed much the last 10 years.. I remember altavista was the first one that I used.. It was slower because I was on modem, but aside from that I havent seen great change in search technology except more results(which in the end is worse)..

Their algorithms are much better now as far as giving you relevant search information that other people have also found helpful.

ah, alternative energy has been used for decades. It was made popular by the EU, but hardly a revolution YET.

This decade's technology kickstarted it. If you don't think that improving existing technology is important, and you won't call new technology revolutionary until after it's already revolutionized things, then I don't see how any present-day technology can ever meet your standards. The world almost never sees "Eureka" moments where a new technology suddenly bursts on the stage and is instantly universally adopted without any improvements.

I dont think things look that different, of course we have had further development of things and popuralized things that already existed, but thats not really so great. The sharing of information you are talking about came in the 90s with the internet, but maybe YOU were just a slow adopter?

We had the sharing of information with the internet, yes. But that usually meant that a single webmaster imparted his knowledge to thousands of viewers. There was very little P2P content (YouTube, Wikipedia, etc) on the internet ten years ago.

The most surprising progress I have heard of is the transplant of a face(France) and whole arms which will actually function(Germany)... That is real progress, but in infacy still..

Those are certainly important developments too. I agree with you that we're due for a decade of important biotechnology developments, followed by (or partially concurrent with) a decade of important nanotechnology developments. I think we'll see those in the 2010s and 2020s.

Lets hope the 10 decade can be a decade of great revolution in bio and medical technology! Can we agree on that?

Certainly. With genetics, stem cells, artificial organs, and information technology all picking up pace, I think the world will look very different in 2020 than it looks now. I don't think it's unreasonable to predict all of the following for 2020:

• Sleep will be completely optional.
• People can get a "genetic profile" of themselves at hospitals, to learn what conditions they're at risk for.
• People can get artificial organs to replace perfectly healthy ones, because the artificials are better.
• Gold particles will be able to effectively destroy any cancer cells.
• There will be a vaccine for HIV.
• Polio and leprosy will become the second and third diseases to be completely eradicated.
• The human lifespan will be increasing at a rate faster than one year per year.
• We will be able to halt and reverse bodily aging.

 

[Iriemon]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

Not really.. America and Europe has declined economically compared with the rest of the world.. Technological advancement have been quite small and just a continuation of the boom of the 90s..

How do you figure. There have been real economic gains in the 00s, and America and Europe stand head and shoulders above the rest of the world.

Places like China and India and parts of Asia have made larger percentage gains perhaps, but started from much smaller bases.

That does not equate to a decline in America/Europe.

 

[dragonslayer]

Electing Bush and Cheney started the recession.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Re: Have the west really been in "recession" the last decade?

How do you figure. There have been real economic gains in the 00s, and America and Europe stand head and shoulders above the rest of the world.

Places like China and India and parts of Asia have made larger percentage gains perhaps, but started from much smaller bases.

That does not equate to a decline in America/Europe.

Lets for starters just SAY the average growth in Europe and the US has been around 2.5-3% the last 8 years(2000-2008), its about accurate, then the world growth has been averaged around 5% while places like China and the highly developing world has been around 9-13% on average.. Certainly our economies are bigger, but if this trend continues they will all catch up eventually.. Comparing to the rest of the world our economies are growing enourmously slow and considering that its better to grow 10% in 2008 than it was in 1978 then we are in actual decline compared to the rest of the world.

Look at the space programs for example which is the "ultimate" technology test to test this theory..

Surely the US was ahead of China greatly in 1970, the US had a well develop program, China nothing. Take then 1995 when the Chinese started their space program, miles behind the US, still nothing compared with the US.. But the base they had to develop on and the knowledge they had before they started compared to the US in 1960s makes it easier for China to swiftly catch up with the US. Base technologies and knowledge was then in place around 2000 in the Chinese program, still stone age compared to the US, and then they really started thinking about investing effort into it.. It took them only 5 years to do what the US had done in about 30 years, and from that time it has taken them just 3 more to just about equal the US space program, the fun thing about this principle is that China is going to be far ahead of teh US space program already by 2015 because they had the advantage of starting in 2000 instead of 1965.

This is why it is easily possible to foresee that China will be the first to plant a station on the moon and mars, both European and American programs are stagnant in comparison and for the same funding as China gets almost nowhere.. The same principle is true about the economy, China had the advantage of starting late and will catch up and surpass us faster than we ever expected. Possibly already in 2030 the Chinese society will be more developed and superior to both Europe and America because the standards and technology they had during their time of rapid development was far greater, and then we will look underdeveloped.. And so it goes, at least in theory, and we must change a lot of things and our whole mind sets in the west to avoid this happening. Currently I see that POSSIBLY happening in Europe, but not in the US, mainly because of the lack of governmental progress and stagnation of politics, this we have not in Europe.

I know the US can change this, the question is, will they? Washington will have to change completely.