What are some not so obvious things that damage a country's economy?

[Betwrong]

You just named a thing that mostly responsible for health problems in the modern world, and I bet it is not so obvious for many people that it damages any country's economy. Lack of physical activity wasn't such a problem a century ago, but in today's world it's a major one

And what should we do with that?

And should we actually do anything? I agree with the assumption that the lack of physical activity is likely a major contributing factor to poor health later in life as I see my classmates getting weight and bellies because they don't walk but mostly prefer to drive. You can't force them to take care of their health until it is too late and the damage is done. But we can look at it as a kind of natural selection, so if you stay slim and fit (or slim fit), you may get a competitive advantage later on in life

Economically speaking, we would hardly gain from a situation when hundreds of millions of people around the world found themselves in a bad health condition. Besides, natural selection doesn't work the way you described. Our genus, Homo, evolved from ape due to natural selection, but it took millions of years. Today, if other people die because of poor health during our lifetime, it's not natural selection, it's just death, and it's not advantageous for any human on Earth.

[1715108637]

1715108637

[1715108637]

1715108637

[1715108637]

1715108637

[deisik]

You just named a thing that mostly responsible for health problems in the modern world, and I bet it is not so obvious for many people that it damages any country's economy. Lack of physical activity wasn't such a problem a century ago, but in today's world it's a major one

And what should we do with that?

And should we actually do anything? I agree with the assumption that the lack of physical activity is likely a major contributing factor to poor health later in life as I see my classmates getting weight and bellies because they don't walk but mostly prefer to drive. You can't force them to take care of their health until it is too late and the damage is done. But we can look at it as a kind of natural selection, so if you stay slim and fit (or slim fit), you may get a competitive advantage later on in life

Economically speaking, we would hardly gain from a situation when hundreds of millions of people around the world found themselves in a bad health condition. Besides, natural selection doesn't work the way you described. Our genus, Homo, evolved from ape due to natural selection, but it took millions of years. Today, if other people die because of poor health during our lifetime, it's not natural selection, it's just death, and it's not advantageous for any human on Earth

Well, I can't say I'm fluent on how natural selection in particular and evolution in general work

And yes, I generally agree that from an economic point of view being healthy and motivated is better than ill and depressed. That goes without saying. However, death itself is actually an indispensable tool that evolution created as a way of getting rid of those who aren't of any use to it anymore (thereby freeing resources for those who are)

Note that I don't say whether it is right or wrong as the idea of righteousness simply doesn't belong here (only fitness and procreation reign supreme). Further, that was not actually my point. I meant you could look at it in a more personalized sort of natural selection. If your buddies don't care about their health, look at it as your advantage if you do

[Vispilio]

A country where the checks & balances system is not in effect, so a small group of people currently holding power can become dictatorial by
installing their own nepotist lackeys to the strategic branches of the state to effectively enact a totalitarian takeover of the nation.

The most recent example is Turkei, where a medieval-minded fundamentalist group, with the help foreign intelligence agencies,
led the country to cultural and economic bankruptcy by ruining ALL of the meritocratic institutions of the state (namely, most officers of the the Army, Navy, Air Force, Judiciary, Foreign Service and all the ministries are now incompetent yes men slave to the grossly backwards regime of Erdogan...)

[Reid]

Social media and other addictive Internet sites - people are constantly glued to them, even on their work, which decreases their productivity. Social media also cause depression in many people, because they not only procrastinate, but also constantly compare their life to others, which leads to dissatisfaction. Also social media are good at spreading lies and fakes, which can have negative effects on the economy - anti-vax panic, anti-GMO, political manipulation and so on.

First time I came to this thread and thankfully I read a lot of positive ways on how we can help even in just small ways for our economy to grow.

Thank you hatsheput for making me remember that.
Social media. When you look at it, most that are using it are kids. Why? Their Mom and Dad will give them a smartphone in their younger years just by accomplishing a little thing.
Some parents would do this to escape from giving disciplines for their kids. They will stay silent just using their smartphones the whole day.

Not a good view. I still prefer kids playing in dirt, rain or mud. Let them grow with a healthy body.
Yes, that could change the economy once they grew.

[blackhawkeye1912]

Social media and other addictive Internet sites

Good answer! I also despise social media like Instagram that encourage bragging about social status, e.g., photos of food at restaurants, luxury cars, vacations, etc. It severely affects inexperienced people, who think that it is the truth (and that's how we should live our life). What most people don't understand is that the "true" rich people seldom brag about their wealth in social media.

Social media waste our time and encourage unnecessary consumption.

Agree! Social media becomes now the basis of happiness. They are comparing their life to others that makes them uncontented on what they have. People are being obsessed with what they see in social media that they cannot see that there is no such a perfect life. It is just about being contented on what you have and be happy about it.

[dengpei]

Things that damage the economy indirectly.

For example I feel that fast food and an unhealthy lifestyle leads chronic health problems that probably affects the economy not just monetarily.

Of course we can't just deny these people care, just promote a healthier lifestyle.

What are other things that we can change that will affect the economy in a positive way?

“A nation is born stoic, and dies epicurean” – Will Durant
I thought of this quote then I saw this thread, A stoic believes in going through hardships without complaints. An epicurean believed that pleasure is the greater good. In this case, stuffing on unhealthy foods because they are an easier option and shunning exercise and healthy foods because these are hard and less glamourous. So the quote implies that a nation is born of people willing to endure hardship, but fails as it's population places personal pleasure above everything else.

Besides health options, here are other obvious things that I also think that they may damage a country's economy
1. Corruption and greed
2. War - because it's costly and time-consuming
3. Intolerance - segregation of people according to race, religion, politics etc.
4. Unreasonable government policies that stifle investment and innovation
5. Lack of unity, national vision and social cohesion.

[Vispilio]

“A nation is born stoic, and dies epicurean” – Will Durant

Impressive quote, echoes the central sentiments in the theories of Ibn'i Haldun (Ibn Khaldun), considered by many to be the original founder of sociology.

He believed in an "instinctive model" of state formation, and noted that a rich nation who falls into complacency and luxurious laziness would be inevitably conquered and replaced by the hungry warriors from the peripheries who are naturally strengthened (and cohesive) by the much harsher conditions of their savage habitat...

[Coyster]

I think poor educational system is another factor or determinant that can reduce economic vibrancy of a nation, education plays a very indispensable role on the youths of a particular nation, it trains and builds them up in order to be productive in diverse fields in the future.

But when the educational system suffers, then the economy of the nation will suffer when it eventually gets into the hands of the youths, I think proper education is very important for a future with a great economy, if the system(educational)is not capable of producing well bred graduates, then the economy would definitely suffer.

[deisik]

He believed in an "instinctive model" of state formation, and noted that a rich nation who falls into complacency and luxurious laziness would be inevitably conquered and replaced by the hungry warriors from the peripheries who are naturally strengthened (and cohesive) by the much harsher conditions of their savage habitat

We have seen many historical examples of that

With the Roman Empire probably being the most conspicuous one of this kind. More importantly, the decline of ancient Rome started soon after its Republican period ended, when the Roman nobility became lazy, corrupt and overall wicked. So there is a certain truth to Will Durant's quote. But can Bitcoin and its "ideology" really help us in this department? This is the question which should be asked

[dengpei]

“A nation is born stoic, and dies epicurean” – Will Durant

Impressive quote, echoes the central sentiments in the theories of Ibn'i Haldun (Ibn Khaldun), considered by many to be the original founder of sociology.

He believed in an "instinctive model" of state formation, and noted that a rich nation who falls into complacency and luxurious laziness would be inevitably conquered and replaced by the hungry warriors from the peripheries who are naturally strengthened (and cohesive) by the much harsher conditions of their savage habitat...

Yes true, Ibn Khaldun was a forerunner of most modern disciplines such as economics, history and sociology. It is a pity that today's world rarely acknowledges the impact of his contributions to the shaping of the way the world works and reasons. His works and writings on supply-side economics are classics and timeless. I remember reading elsewhere that at one time, the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, cited Ibn Khaldun as an influence on his supply-side economic policies, also known as Reaganomics!

[Janation]

First of all, you need a really professional government that will not abuse its capabilities and will correctly lead a country in which people are not labor and slaves, but a real engine of economy and progress.  Citizens of the state are not only working hands, but also smart heads, thanks to which the state exists.  It seems to me that in the first place, unprofessional governments harm the state and the economy.

I don't get that, at all..

I mean the government most of the time requires a lot of things from a certain person, before the person was even elected and I think that makes them a professional. Most of them are one but the thing is that what they learned, what they know, they are not using to help the country they are serving in but they are just helping themselves. That is why there are a lot of corrupt officials that don't really help the country but make the country more worse.

[Betwrong]

~
Note that I don't say whether it is right or wrong as the idea of righteousness simply doesn't belong here (only fitness and procreation reign supreme). Further, that was not actually my point. I meant you could look at it in a more personalized sort of natural selection. If your buddies don't care about their health, look at it as your advantage if you do

Same as you, I didn't mean to bring up the moral side of the possible outcomes here. After all we are in the Economy section on bitcointalk, and not on some religious forum talking about what is right or wrong. I literally meant that, unlike in prehistoric times, there is no advantage in fails of others now. In today's world, the more people around you prosper, the more chances for you to prosper too, and vice versa.

[deisik]

~
Note that I don't say whether it is right or wrong as the idea of righteousness simply doesn't belong here (only fitness and procreation reign supreme). Further, that was not actually my point. I meant you could look at it in a more personalized sort of natural selection. If your buddies don't care about their health, look at it as your advantage if you do

Same as you, I didn't mean to bring up the moral side of the possible outcomes here. After all we are in the Economy section on bitcointalk, and not on some religious forum talking about what is right or wrong. I literally meant that, unlike in prehistoric times, there is no advantage in fails of others now. In today's world, the more people around you prosper, the more chances for you to prosper too, and vice versa

Do you really think today's world is different from prehistoric times?

I don't think that much as far as social relations and interactions are concerned. Essentially, we are still the same folks as early hunter-gatherers from the stone age, and we quickly return to that state of mind as soon as there are no more authorities and law enforcement (which technically proves my point)

But I don't necessarily disagree with your point that the more people around you prosper the better it may be for you personally (and it works in reverse as well, of course). This just shows how complicated things are in social interactions and relationships, where both competition and cooperation can very well coexist (which this forum proves)

[TrueColorsBby]

High taxes -- people will be less likely to innovate, and the smart people move their money and businesses out of the country.
Too much regulations -- makes it hard and expensive to start and run businesses.

[Dannaey]

The technology itself. We have seen how technology helps and change our lives. But on the other side, we do not see the disadvantage of this. Like the on-going development of AI today. Some experts believed that one day, 40% of jobs will be replaced by AI. This will affect the economy because it will have massive unemployment.

[beerlover]

I think if you are not careful about your bottom line then you are not going to be happy with the high tech as well.

A country can't survive on just high tech without having farms for example, if your farming and food production is insanely low then what matters if you are building apple or Samsung or have google, look at USA for example, dudes have the biggest technological companies in their country but they are also building the biggest farms as well, there are farms as big as some islands for example.

Hence, if you don't take care of your bottom line then you are going to have hard time with your upper levels as well, take care of small stuff first then move to big stuff. Some countries do not take the needed steps in the right direction for small stuff so they just keep failing at the big stuff as well.

[Muffinmanlet]

Child labor. Yes child labor leads to lower prices but in the long term it's bad since the kids miss the chance of getting education which lowers the total pool of the educated population which in turn means less people to innovate new tech to increase the economic output.

[acroman08]

Things that damage the economy indirectly.

For example I feel that fast food and an unhealthy lifestyle leads chronic health problems that probably affects the economy not just monetarily.

Of course we can't just deny these people care, just promote a healthier lifestyle.

What are other things that we can change that will affect the economy in a positive way?

fake news, biased news and news that push a certain propaganda etc... it can cause division to the citizen, can affect certain company
and may lose investors and other stuff. theses things can affect the economy. the effects may not be big but it is still able to affect the economy
in a bad way.

[Ningish]

The problem is very complex and varies from country to country.
Surely an unhealthy lifestyle, with little physical activity and an unbalanced diet, in the long run will lead to unsustainable economic burdens on public health, as will eventually lead to major problems in the abuse of smartphones and PCs with postural problems to load of the spine especially in adolescents, continually bent over the smartphone, marginalized by reality, uninterested in what is happening around them, an army of robots that will hardly really work. They are distracted from reality to the point of endangering one's life and that of others by driving cars and motorcycles with the smartphone in hand. In such cases the solution could be the immediate withdrawal of the license for life and a very heavy fine. Too many young people lose their lives for the distractions of others.

[Betwrong]

~
But I don't necessarily disagree with your point that the more people around you prosper the better it may be for you personally (and it works in reverse as well, of course). This just shows how complicated things are in social interactions and relationships, where both competition and cooperation can very well coexist (which this forum proves)

With the help of your reply, I maybe found yet another thing that damages a country's economy. This thing is called “unfair competition”, when business rivals are trying to do economic injury to each other instead of trying to peacefully compete or even cooperate. Both parties can benefit from cooperation, as well as both parties can suffer from an economic war against each other.