Population – Wealth Equations

Date Published:

Formulae | Terms | Implications | Finite World

The formulae:

Annual-wealth-created = total-work-done + asset-wealth-accessed

Total-work-done = average-personal-productivity * population

Per-capita-wealth  =  average-personal-productivity  + (asset-wealth-accessed / population)

Asset-wealth-accessed = accrued-wealth + natural wealth-accessed

The Terms

Total Wealth.

The total wealth is simply the wealth of the society overall.  The sum of the wealth that is available for the total society to enjoy.  This wealth is available to be share evenly or not, but it represents that which is available to share.

Asset-wealth.

Asset wealth is the sum of durable wealth which remains from year to year such as housing and infrastructure as opposed to wealth which is consumed such as food and holidays.

Assets can be man made such as housing, or natural, such as the land under the housing, fertile farm land and water to grow crops or mines as a source of mineral wealth.  For natural wealth,  only those natural resources which are being utilised add to the wealth of the community at the time being considered.  Unused land or undiscovered minerals which may potentially be part of future wealth, do not add to current wealth.

Per Capita Wealth.

Simply the total wealth divided by the number of people.  In a society with perfectly even distribution of wealth, each individual would hold the per capita share of wealth.  Raising the Per Capita wealth would raise the wealth of all in the society.  However, simply adding to the wealth of one individual will still raise per capita wealth, even though there is no distribution of the increase in wealth.  Per capita wealth only is a sound indicator of overall wealth if wealth distribution remains static, and the rich remain in the same ratio of wealth to the poor.

Per capita wealth creation follow the formula above and combines individual wealth creation with the share of natural resource wealth.  Growing population should allow specialisation which can have a positive impact on the ability of an individual to produce wealth, but as the population grows this effect reaches a limit.  While there are untapped resources, growing the population can also allow accessing more resources,  but eventually all resources are already leveraged.  The result is that there is a phase where as population increases per capital wealth should increase, followed by a tipping point when all resources are fully exploited after which per capita wealth will be driven to decrease by further population grown.

The Implications: Pre-Finite world

Logically, total work done should increase in proportion to population. However, increased opportunities for specialisation and economies of scale can result in an increase in total work done slightly beyond the logical proportional increase. Simplistically, it is feasible for a team of 200 to do more than 10x the work of a team of 20 because of economies of scale and ability to specialise.  But a team of 200 trying to dig the same 3meter diameter hole in the ground may not be 10x as fast as team of 20.

Pre-finite world, natural asset wealth could never fully utilised, as there was always new natural assets to be found and utilised.  As population expands, more land can be utilised, more minerals discovered and the accessible total natural wealth expands as the population expands.  The result is that increase in population has the potential to increase per-capita wealth.

Finite World Implications

Once we reach ‘finite world’ where all new land has been found, and there is already sufficient people to exploit all available resources, more people simply means a smaller share of available land and resources per person.

Like digging the hole in the ground, there is an optimum number of people on the team.  Less than the number the work takes longer,  but past a certain point adding more becomes counter productive… or a least results in no further increase in production and the proceeds of the work on a per person basis start to decrease.

Once finite world is reached, further increases in population simple mean less wealth per person.  This is the same with any creatures in nature, within a given habitat, there is a maximum population of each creature which can be sustained by the habitat before living conditions start to decline.

[TheChamp-Sharing]
[TheChamp-FB-Comments]

Table of Contents

Categories

Why do so many Americans support Trump in 2024: They’re not all crazy or weird, many fear being disenfranchised.

To many people, both those within the US as well as perhaps most outside the US, a vote for Trump is seen as something hard to understand and even seen as the uneducated or the domain “others”: people seen as are very different from “normal people”. Yet 50% Americans are not radically different “others”, nor uneducated, nor stupid, even though around 50% will vote for trump.

With around 80% of Americans believing the country is on the “wrong track”, is it any surprise a large number feel if trends continue, they risk being disenfranchised by that “wrong track” and are desperate to believe only a big change can protect their rights?

Read More »

Mechanics of US Presidential Elections: A warts and all outsider’s primer.

George Washington was elected unanimously by the 69 electors from the 10 participating states in the in augural election of a US president in 1788. In practice how the system works in the 21st century’s USA of over 330 million people is very different from in the USA of 1788 with less than 4 million people, the underlying principle is still that the states each choose electors to an electoral college who together determine who is to be the president, but in practice today the people of each state get to vote for how their states electors will vote.

This is how it works, and a look at what could possibly stop it working as expected.

Read More »

Biden-Harris the sequel: No choice for US voters?

Like many others, back in February 2024 I wrote that A Biden-Harris ticket would not cut it for the 2024 election. The debate highlighted the problems of US voters again being faced with Biden and Trump: almost no one sees this as a choice between two good options.

The Biden problem will be resolved, but no, it was not just about losing a debate, it was about his inability to maintain his train of thought during the debate, and the risk that presents for another full term in office. Arguably, the focus has all along been only on polarisation and wins for political parties, rather than visions for the future.

Democracy should offer the people choices of a say in their future, but under current systems becomes more about personalities. Looking deeper reveals even without the current issues, it is unclear the US voters get a real choice and real say in what elections should determine.

Read More »

The economy is about consumer spending not production: Confirmed by Swiftonomics.

All economics seem to agree that the Taylor Swift Eras tour boosted the economy everywhere she went, but while it is clear that there was a boost to spending, it is not so clear people benefit beyond getting to enjoy a concert.

This is a look at whether, at least in some cases, factors that boost an economy may do nothing to increase wealth within that economy and could even reduce wealth within that economy.

Read More »

Biden-Harris, won’t cut it, but will they both take a step back for democracy and the Trump Biden rematch?

A step back for Biden would be to run for vice-president in 2024, and for Harris it would be off the ticket.

From this point on, it seems hard to argue that age will not hinder Biden’s chances of defeating Trump in 2024, and without Harris having generated sufficient enthusiasm, the Democrats really need a team refresh to take the polls.

While technically they have plenty of time, in practice to make a smooth change they are running out of time and would need the support of both Biden and Harris.

Read More »

Pressing problem: Perspective on immigration in America & other developed countries.

I just watched a video I found disturbing on CNN arguing the case that America is a better place than most American’s believe.

It was disturbing not because like everywhere else, the US has imperfections, or that America is a bad place, but because it felt like the commentor, and member of the press, was not focused on interests of the people of America but considered only commercial interests when evaluating the direction in which the country should be headed.

In looking at the instincts of the free press even in a leading country like America, there may be valuable insights is to what is wrong across the planet.

Read More »

Discover more from One Finite Planet

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading