Anything that is meant to be consumed should not be an investment, anything that in an ideal society should be cheaper to purchase for the betterment of that society, should not be an investment.
Companies that produce those things, ideally better or more efficient every year for various reasons, those should be investments.
We should invest in banana farmers, not bananas. Likewise we should invest in construction companies, not houses.
I moved to Germany right when the D-ticket went into effect. I can't imagine a more complicated solution that also costs more money. I commute to work a city over, I travel to small towns all the time to visit and explore.
I want to stay in Germany long term, and I hope the country continues to value public transit. Cars are a plague. I'm not thoroughly versed in the German train history but public transit should be free for everyone, a public utility, and paid for via taxes.
Our list of priorities should be public transit, ecological and healthy personal options like bikes, and then electric cars. Removing the D-ticket would be a step backwards.
I think that's a fair question. Do we need to be producing as much as we are. Clearly in some industries we don't need to be, they have a lot of waste - food without better infrastructure, clothing by and large, poor quality electronics, etc.
But I think I'm equating productivity with efficiency and in that perspective I would say efficiency is king. We should work towards automation while ensuring it's benefits don't go purely to capitalists.
Why do you think the equipment continues to go up in price? Is there a chance that the majority of trucking equipment is produced by a publicly traded set of companies also demanding infinite growth?
Do you think fuel will always go up in cost? What happens when trucks, like most transportation, converts to electric and most electric converts to renewable?
To be clear, your comment almost feels unrelated to my original point. If we increase the price of transportation by giving thriving wages instead of surviving wages it does not necessarily mean it has to be passed on. It can and should come from profit margins which have only gotten larger with time as every industry gets more efficient and productive. I never said that if the price of transportation goes up that it's solely profit based, or that fuel and equipment can't also in turn go up in price.
The cost does not have to be passed on to the consumer, profits can take a hit, and as infinite growth will inevitably show us that profits MUST take a hit eventually.
Everyone should want everyone to get a raise. Automation is great but if labor is involved it should be paid at a thriving wage.
I really hate all the replies attempting to poke holes with minimal effort. Thanks for this comment and your robust set of examples.
Housing shouldn't be a vehicle for interest or making a living, I'd take it more extreme than what you have if I'm being honest. You can own the buildings you use 60% of the year for work or for housing but nothing else. We don't sell stocks in bananas, we sell stocks in farms. Housing should be a consumable commodity not a line item in a corp's assets sheet.
You guys are forgetting the increased scarcity of food and the loss of Wildlife. There's the chance it's a cascading run away effect and it only increases from now on.
But yes also hundreds of millions of people will have to migrate, temperature extremes will cause problems everywhere, and the world will become less habitable for a very long time.
Well don't let me down play what you enjoyed. I'm happy you got your money's worth and had fun.
It was worth it for me on these discussions alone, not even mentioning the beautiful visuals.
I mean sure, I enjoy the US as bad guys too. But they were cartoonish, one-note, and their decisions made no sense. I mean the whole premise, as executed, didn't make any sense.
The US's war winning weapon was... Guided missiles; that they used to strike the enemy indiscriminately and generally didn't really care where they landed? They were afraid of AI because they hooked it up sky net style and it nuked LA, but later on that's revealed to be a human's fault? They supposedly hate AI but they use what seemed to be low level AI running robot bombs to attack the enemy? Their soldiers were happy to kill a dog to get the access to the secret base and cut off the face of an enemy to bypass a door but they're shown to have hacking devices for doors and in this hightech world we're supposed to believe they can't find a metal hatch in the ground going to a fuckin mass production factory?
The main antagonist to the US is... A father/daughter pair who make AI in seemingly their free time? Not the actual factories or research facilities with hundreds of scientists but the pregnant "god" creator who's trying to raise a kid with her husband on the beach.
Idk man. Slap a big US Army on the tanks that are destroying a village to kill a kid and that's an evocative painting, a real striking visual I guess. But a good 2.5 hour movie that does not make.
My last Japan trip was 4 or 5 years back and spent time in multiple big cities with an express train pass. I think I budgeted a grand for the flight, a grand in food and hotel and spending a week. But with inflation being what it is I'd want to rerun the numbers based off of what flights and hotel/hostels I could find and assume 1k for just food and fun per week. I think there are active data sheets online that talk about the average cost of eating out in Japan right now.
You want to visit for "a few weeks" so I'd say plan for 2k + flight + hotel/hostel + train tickets/pass. I'd bet you spend less than 4k total for that time.
I like to visit 1 major city every 4-7 days, I normally do travel in, 5 days, travel out. So two weeks would let me see 2 major cities and a couple day trips or 3 shorter stays at 3 major places. Some cities are cheaper than others which is something to consider and how you eat out also dictates your budget more than anything. You could eat in Tokyo for dollars a day at gas stations or you could splurge on sashimi every night and find yourself burning money by the fist full.
I'm a big foodie so that's where the 1k per week comes from.
Which is a silly conclusion... What's the point? The better question would be why isn't more housing being built? And I suspect the answer to that question is there is a vested interest in increasing that deficit.
Whenever someone starts to conclude that housing is so expensive purely because there aren't enough homes, they often follow that up with pointing to construction costs. Which to me screams deregulation and wage complaints, two things an improving society should not be encouraging.