1. Part of this article reminded me of Jacque Fresco talks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacque_Fresco). Well at least the part about efficiency and the effect on jobs. I am probably just being an annoying futurist but honestly, I don't see employment problems going away. Manned toll plaza's -hah. Self checkout - more and more common. Vending-machine-like fast food chains - not yet but wouldn't be a surprise. Self stocking shelves....blah blah blah. This will take a while but what are we going to do when low to mid skill jobs are less and less needed?
2. I hate to be the consumerism party pooper but I think pointing out that it has been 60 months and we still are not at prerecession levels to be a good thing (ducking for cover). The reason we were at those levels is partly because we were operating unsustainably - spending more than we had (or at least more than we should if we want retirement savings) and giving out mortgages and loans to people that couldn't afford them (obviously there are many more reasons...).
There is no such thing as spending more than we had. The housing boom didn't consist of houses borrowed from a cosmic banker, whom we now have to pay. A nation cannot spend anything it doesn't "have" except by trading with other nations, and trade does not remotely explain the deficit.
As Friedman might say, monetary unsustainability is purely a monetary phenomenon. Even Keynesians know this and in fact that is why they tend to call for higher inflation.
"The housing boom didn't consist of houses borrowed from a cosmic banker, whom we now have to pay. "
We don't have to pay because people foreclosed and filed for bankruptcy protection.
A nation cannot spend anything it doesn't "have" except by trading with other nations, and trade does not remotely explain the deficit.
When did we start talking about the deficit and why are you suggesting the deficit is related to the economy collapsing/recovering (not saying it isn't)? To be fair, when I mentioned retirement savings I wasn't really thinking public programs, probably should have been more specific.
I think many would agree that irresponsible loans were given to people that didn't have the means to pay them off, especially if (when) the adjustable rates adjusted. If housing prices don't get back to prerecession levels for instance - well I think thats a good thing. People where inflating the markets that they really had no business being in and banks gave them mortgages for these markets wearing a grin...
2. I hate to be the consumerism party pooper but I think pointing out that it has been 60 months and we still are not at prerecession levels to be a good thing (ducking for cover). The reason we were at those levels is partly because we were operating unsustainably - spending more than we had (or at least more than we should if we want retirement savings) and giving out mortgages and loans to people that couldn't afford them (obviously there are many more reasons...).