Re. productivity, I like economists’ speculation on causes for productivity changes best, particularly vs. CEOs who, at least the celebrity ones reported on in the press, seem often to latch on to the most façile explanations.
Here’s part of Dean Baker’s take, for instance…
"To see this story, we can look at an ad hoc measure of productivity growth in the construction industry. …
This would imply roughly a 7.8 percent decline in productivity over this ten-quarter period.
It doesn’t seem plausible that either construction technology or the quality of labor in the industry could have deteriorated so much in such a short period of time. The more obvious explanation for a decline in productivity in construction is that many workers were effectively wasting their time waiting for parts or materials that were needed for them to do their jobs."
https://cepr.net/productivity-growth-what-happened-to-the-upturn/
Having had this exact conversation quite often, I think this is multifaceted. There is for sure the aspect you mention of waiting on supplies, but we also have an employee issue where I am. Many of the older workers where I am, the ones that haven’t missed a day of work in 40 years, took early retirement when covid hit, and effectively removed themselves, their dedication, and their skills from the work force. Many of the young workers seem plagued with issues that limit them to shorter days, and in many cases, fewer days. And then there are the ones that have covid every second month now, and this isn’t necessarily on them, because many people can’t go to work if they have cold or flu like symptoms anymore. So when you add all these things together, a 7.8% decline seems quite feasible.
Hi. I wanted to point out a mis-attribution problem. The blurb about supply chain problems are the words of the American left leaning economist Dean Baker not one of your readers (mine). Not meaning to pick on Steve, but I think my quotes somehow got lost in the thread. You can find similar quotes from other U.S. Keynesians like Paul Krugman and Larry Summers. If someone can suggest economists of other schools of thought or from other countries who are writing popular articles, let me know. My efforts to learn more about economics maybe have settled into a certain kind of bubble.
Also, this newsletter email was very well written. I also really appreciated your response to my feedback, where you and Matt Taibbi are coming from, in the most recent feedback episode. It presents a problem for me as simply a reader (as a simple reader? 
) of journalism that I have to trust you and Taibbi or Glenn Greenwald, but at least with you I’ve seen you in action over time, so though I’m not accepting the premise entirely I’m not dismissing it either.
Now I wanted to express that as end of year appreciation but also because I feel a need to step back from online participation here and elsewhere for awhile. I don’t want the latter to be interpreted as a lefty having had it with disparate views or my not enjoying online interactions with you and Steve. I don’t want to get into it (as my own exhibitionism is one of the things I’m detecting and suspicious of) but I’ve come lately to a suspicion of my mental state and think limiting online interaction to be needed for mental hygiene. It’s nothing very serious, but I’ll feel regret later if I don’t contain it (been there before). No doubt I’ll be back when there is more sun and when it’s possible to walk in the woods again without freezing my ass off. (Or like as not I’ll post again tomorrow, but stating this here is also one of those tricks to try to hold myself to a plan with which you seem to be familiar.)
I remain an avid listener and reader.
No offense taken, and I did not mean to imply that those were your words, I was only trying to build on what you had already linked into the conversation.
I completely understand and respect how people can feel this way. I have no problem admitting that although we often have differing view points, I have always enjoyed reading your posts and have more often than not learned something from them. I have great respect for your ability to link in supporting resources and hope that you will return at some point and I can continue that journey of learning.
I know that. And I think you misunderstood my editorialising as misattribution. I simply referred to the fact that I got input from readers. I wanted to avoid confusion for readers by introducing two levels of attribution (you plus the source you quoted). Which is why I didn’t mention you by name. You will also note that I did not say this quote came from a reader. In any case, I linked this thread, so people interested in where the quote come from can discover all of this for themselves.
I wish you all the best in this endeavour. Thanks for the important input you have provided on this forum so far!
I’m still reading every one of these. I have a bit of a network setup here with some older friends that are now retired. They subscribe to a bunch of mailing lists, and forward the good emails to me to read. It works good for me, as I only get the ones that they know will be of interest to me. I’m not sure if you keep track of your readership, but I have been forwarding all of your emails to the 5 of them. Yes, even the gaming politburo transitions nicely to critical thinkers that are of retirement age.
Nice! Thank you for that! I need to get back to writing this newsletter badly. It’s just been very busy here.
I really appreciate you sharing it. It’s also nice to have a network like that with people who keep each other sane. Stuff like that is badly needed in times like these, I feel…