>Stable or maximum growth?
Most economists and politicians argue for growth to be treated as the primary goal. Practically all people agree that growth is desirable. But what sort of growth should it be? Assuming we will always have economic slumps, should we try and stabilise growth so that we don’t suffer huge depressions, or should we just aim to achieve the highest possible rate of growth over a hundred year period?
>Sorry for the graph. I know it sucks.
>There are huge problems with stabilisation policies, but in theory I have to stand with a stable model of progression. Happiness is relative. If we are continually losing what we worked so hard to gain in the previous years then we will not be happy, irelevent of the level of economic productivity that exists when we become grandparents.