The counter would be that technology has created and is continuing to create significant economic changes that make investment predictions more difficult.<p>Improved transport and communications for a start have had, and will continue to have, massive impacts on both labour and assets by facilitating a more distributed workforce and changing the value of real estate (currently 60% of global assets). Those changes will definitely decrease the ROI of real estate investment, but don&#x27;t necessarily reflect a decrease in production.<p>Meanwhile, disruptive technologies challenge traditional protected market sectors as regulatory barriers fail to catch-up with new threats to existing businesses (e.g. Uber, Airbnb). Again, those changes will decrease ROI in traditional sectors, and due to efficiencies in the new model the overall money spent in these sectors may decrease.<p>In effect we could be revisiting the arguments around Marx&#x27;s &quot;tendency of the rate of profit to fall&quot; (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Tendency_of_the_rate_of_profit_to_fall" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Tendency_of_the_rate_of_profit...</a>).<p>The flip side to these impacts is that the rapid change to the economy hasn&#x27;t yet been fully appreciated or addressed by current government policy.<p>For example, improvements in health technology have extended the age to which the Baby Boomer generation has been able to remain in the workforce, as well as overall life expectancy, placing far greater strain on social services and health planning than expected.<p>At the same time, &quot;entry&quot; jobs have far greater expectations than 30 years ago as automation has reduced the need for unskilled&#x2F;entry labour, while increasing the demand for highly-skilled specialisations. This has delayed the entry of Gen Y into the workplace (with many workplaces unwilling to invest in training entry-level workers and at best offering unpaid internships) which has meant far reduced consumption and tax revenue than might otherwise be expected demographically. This has created a bit of a &quot;chicken and egg&quot; problem as reduced consumption doesn&#x27;t justify increased hiring, but the lack of jobs prevents consumption (and experience required to add greater wealth).<p>Finally, effects on the value of labour have increased inequality (for better or worse as the pg essay controversy demonstrates). In effect, if there is less value for unskilled labour there is the potential for increased demand on social services (see the whole Basic Income debate). Meanwhile the scarcity of high-demand labour increases the wealth accumulated by the educated and talented. How this plays out over time is an interesting question.<p>This problem has been exacerbated in recent times by monetary policy that has seen far more money flow into the economy only to be captured by well-placed rent-seekers (see Occupy Wall Street etc.).<p>Add in the historical increases in global debt and recent geopolitical pressure on energy production and you have a perfect recipe for current economic troubles.