nostrich on nostr

Maybe we're discussing this incorrectly. Energy IS wealth. If you have energy, you are rich. If you are rich, you have energy.

armstrys 1720530911

I was about to my own comment to say that in this instance the correlation probably does mean something, but what we interpret from the chart can be ambiguous based on the assumed “causation”.

I think I agree with your above comment. Ability to harness (and consume) energy is a form of wealth.

Name · 116w

I think there can be other variables that impact it and other forms of wealth. But even money is store energy. You applied energy (labor), you traded it for money, and that money represents a proof of work that you can then exchange for someone else's energy (labor). Through our work and innovatio...

calle · 116w

The causality is very likely inverted but everyone who posts this plot gets it the wrong way. Higher energy consumption does not lead to wealth. Have you gotten richer by turning on your stove? That's implausible. It's the other way round. The wealthier you are, the more stoves you'll turn on.