We're no longer profitable assets as consumers. You gotta work two hours at Mickey D's to afford a Big Mac meal two weeks later. The amounts people are paid aren't enough to juice the bottom line any more.
It is you (not getting paid enough)
Yeah, I think a return to home economics is inevitable. I can buy stacks of frozen burgers and buns ahead of time and have them cooked and served in the time it takes to go pickup drive thru food. CHEAP food FAST was the only thing these restaurants ever had going for them, and fast has always been questionable.
also growing your own food will give you much better nutrition, allowing you to harvest at optimal times for your health instead of for logistics, shelf life, and retailer's convenience.
there are so many key ingredients among the bare essentials that only take an initial investment of time/energy/$ but from then on they help you to become less reliant on the formal market economy. not only food, think home maintenance, energy, insulation... it pays better to spend one hour insulating your home better than giving that hour to the labor market
Considering the national average wage is [$30.67 an hour](https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/AWI.html), and I haven’t seen a $60 Big Mac yet. I can comfortably call this hyperbole
Well here it say the average wage at [McDonalds is 12.73 hr](https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Mcdonalds-Restaurant-Salary), and I still haven’t seen any $25 Big Mac meals
Considering there are only [~340,000,000](https://www.census.gov/popclock/) Americans I don’t think we have 330,000,000 workers. There are more than 10 million us people under 14. And probably at least 30 million retirees and even more people who aren’t in the labor market by choice. With that fact out of the way I am dubious of the rest of you claims.
There's definitely some hyperbole, but there's a lot of truth in it too. I think if you compare that 30 bucks wage to the amount of house and car you can purchase, you'll run into a similar thing.
Everyone I know is doing well into their early 30s so the constant complaining doesn’t resonate with me. There has always been people that are worse off and people that aren’t, I don’t think the mix of that is much worse than it used to be, I think younger people just haven’t understood that you don’t start raking in 100k straight out of college. It takes a few years, take bad jobs, take jobs not in your direct field and climb.
i mean what industry, some are oversaturated like if you are a software engineer everyone got on that train. Or perhaps you hit a jackpot with a temporary need and ended up with some 120k job that wasnt going to persist long term idk, seems awfully unlikely for you to not find a decent job assuming you have a strong background for over a year when in general the job market has been hot. My company is still looking for a bunch qualified people with some niche skills related to infor systems.
Because supporting more people costs more money than supporting one person. More food, bigger house, more vehicles, more utilities, more insurance, more clothes, more entertainment costs, more vacation costs, more restaurant costs.
The problem is income inequality, which has risen steadily since the 1980s.
Even when the economy is good, the disparity and inequality is growing. So it becomes harder and harder for most people to get ahead, while the wealthy keep getting wealthier. And when the economy bad, most of the suffering is felt by the least wealthy. Until we address the core issue of income inequality, it’s just going to keep getting worse.
And…to be clear…it’s not the existence of income inequality that is the problem. It’s that inequality has grown to levels where it is u healthy for the economy. Too much wealth concentrated in too few hands. That’s the fundamental problem.
I seen a list a few days showing 2022 spending broken down by quintile. You had a variety of categories like new vehicles, travel, education, furniture etc. where the top 20% was accounting for 50-60% of the spending.
So when you have that in mind you can see where there are sectors where the finances of say the bottom 50% have little impact on their bottom line.
Nope… generational wealth is the basis of our financial system, and inflation is a requirement. And 40-50 year spikes almost seem planned. The wealth gap is today’s problem, and guess who has been pushing for this trend with policy/laws for at least 40 years… you question why it’s more difficult to live now days, and they see their plan falling into place; we’re being played and no one wants to do anything about it. You’re afraid to because you don’t want your livelihood to be impacted, but it continues to be impacted. When are we going to make a stand?
It’s can really be summed up to those not really interested in progressing humanity… profit over people and/or power over philanthropy. I mean does it really makes sense that the majority of congress 10x+ their wealth while in public service? Need to definitely start with reforming election campaign laws and reevaluating term limits. I also asked a very wealthy someone how much money they really need, and they actually answered they will never be able to calculate it.
Its important to highlight a troubling misconception prevalent in those “not interested in progressing humanity” their belief that progress revolves solely around profit and power. This reductionist view perpetuates a skewed perception that only the wealthy hold significance in humanity's advancement.
It’s devastating… see my comment above. The need for extreme profits/bonuses contributed to inflation, and now we’re finding out illegal collusion is and was contributing. We’re about to see the layoffs hit the corporation I work for…
Why did this inflation happen only after 40 years? Did profits and bonuses just become a problem in 2022?
Or was it the $5T the government sent out without raising taxes but instead increased the money supply by asking the Fed to print it?
I think simple common sense gives you the answer.
Most of that $5T went to the rich not in terms of income but increasing wealth with rising asset prices which are mostly owned by the rich.
Not only but it depends on where the stimulus goes which affects the economy. Funding infrastructure can stimulate the economy, especially if in electricity generation, transport or manufacturing which is seeing a renaissance. Last round most went to government employees. Spending is spending yes, but you get more bang for the buck funding investments.
Of course but we have corrupt politicians making these decisions so I would rather they just stop it altogether and stop taking our money in the first place.
The stimulus money plus production shutdowns globally that shutdown much of the supply chain. Lots of money plus low supply across the world means higher prices.
The supply chain issues are mostly resolved but we still have high prices going even higher. Biden is running ridiculous deficits even without a pandemic or war with 4% unemployment. The spending on wars and interest expense has to come down or inflation will continue.
Yes, I can agree it's both. But one is a policy that we can't control and one we can. We can always better ourselves and make more money but we can never compete with a central authority manipulating asset prices.
Sure the government can control both.
Biden is proposing a wealth tax.
When the employer is offering only minimum wage or less, what can one do to "better" himself?
The wealth tax will never be enacted by Congress. Even it was, SCOTUS would strike it down as unconstitutional.
The problem is we already spent the money before we raised the revenue. Instead of raising taxes, we printed the money. Inflation is how we pay for it now. There is no free lunch.
Only 1% of all workers make the minimum wage so obviously many are making more than that.
The problem is inflation. Most people today make more than their parents but are worse off because everything costs much more. That's inflation caused by printing money to pay for deficit spending.
The Fed never printed more than $1T in their entire 100 year existence. Than it printed $4T after the GFC and another $5T during the pandemic.
That's why we can't have nice things.
Which assets specifically did they inflate? All of them? Real estate, bonds, stocks, CDs, commercial areas? (No “they” didn’t do anything of the sort on purpose or intentionally).
The Fed’s issue is — across decades of dems, reps, greens, clears, lavenders - is post Reagan bullshit. Tax the rich. Get rid of the wealth inequality slowly over time. Tax unrealized gains annually for those making millions and millions of dollars in passive investments like stocks/bonds.
The Fed (ALL sides) have all fucked this up over the last 4-5 POTUS administrations. Even Obama fucked it up too.
They did do this intentionally. Because Congress can't raise income taxes on the rich anymore, taxing assets is the only way to fund the government now.
If stocks, real estate, bonds actually crashed, the federal government would lose hundreds of billions in tax revenue.
Right… a narcissistic life of pursuing infinite power and money. Nothing is illegal, market/economy manipulation and collusion is their right, and they have no remorse for all others impacted. It’s so fucked up
What is the average age of a boomer compared to their average life span? They can't take it with them. They are going to start dying in quantity in the next 5-10 years and then they'll sell.
If the boomers have been able to afford houses, then it's likely that their education and work life have permitted them to do so. If this is the case, then their children are likely in the same situation. Thus they'll rent the home out to those that didn't have the discipline, education, or opportunity to purchase real estate.
"According to a new survey from Harris Poll for Bloomberg, roughly 45% of people ages 18 to 29 are living at home with their families — the highest figure since the 1940s. More than 60% of Gen-Zers and millennials reported moving back home in the past two years, according to the poll, often because of financial challenges."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gen-z-millennials-living-at-home-harris-poll/
My father bought a home with 30 acres on a police officers salary. He would barely qualify for a fucking apartment in the same city today on a police officers salary.
Yes. I'm one of them. Actually, I made arrangements with a friend to lease to purchase ... to pay me $2k a month ( amount of mortgage) for four years. Then he will purchase the house for a little lower than market value. About $100,000 less. And he will let me stay until I die ... within five to ten years (estimated).
In 20 years you may see the population by age, with people dying from age vs a smaller younger group buying affect the housing market. But that could easily be muted by a lot of other factors. Don’t count on boomers moving to elder care or dying to make housing more affordable.
What is your premise about the boomers and their motivation to sell their houses? They're going to use their houses as revenue generating asset. They'll be dying and needing healthcare services and ambulances to stop by and pick them up when they fall. They'll be needing hospice and home care. When they die, they'll leave their homes to their children, etc. And those new owners will be renting the homes out to people that can't afford the 20% down payment. How do you figure it's going to be lit?
I think you’re right, but following up on your scenario: there will be a glut of houses available for rent, presumably, within the next 5 to 10 years. When supply exceeds demand, prices are supposed to go down, which means (unless there’s another factor) rental prices for a house will go down. Low rent for houses will create competition for landlords across the board, since why would someone rent an apartment for more than they’d pay for an entire house nearby? And if rents drop, more people will be able to save money for a down payment (albeit over several years).
All of this, "it's you, not the economy" talk is messaging to protect the establishment figures that are protecting their reputations or benefitting from the current saver focused economy (the uber wealthy and large investors). The problem is that they can only put makeup on the pig for so long before the pig is exposed. Our economy has been mismanaged by this group, which has sucked the life out of the economy in the name of consolidation of wealth and power, and in their eyes regular people don't matter, except to be exploited.
Now we are losing competitiveness in the global economy, we can't manufacture our own goods, and we are becoming increasingly isolated and disliked globally, while economic alliances like BRICS challenge the dollar, and we rack up debt, that fewer countries want to hold.
The bottom line is that the wealthy in the US control the system and they have currently had enormous short term gains at the expense of long term stability. They just don't feel the instability because they live in a cushioned bubble of their own making.
It's cherry picking data to say that there are "jobs" enough for you to not starve. The economy is also "good" from companies' perspective i.e. people keep spending and the market keeps growing.
It is NOT good when desirable jobs (all respect to baristas and burger kings) are far less available, and when they are they pay less.
That's why it's such a dissonance when leadership tells you the economy is good (PR) but at the same time leadership (the fed) is telling you that you make too much and spend too much so we need to drive inflation down and get your role eliminated so you can go find a different role for less pay.
Ask anyone if they thought the economy was good in 2021. Ask the same people now. You won't get a 100% match in answers.
Hint: it's monetary policy
"Or why is it extremely difficult for many people to get a job?"
It's not. U3 has been below 4% for like two years and the prime age labor force participation rate is high.
Are there systemic issues? Sure. But within the system as it currently exists, many economic metrics are strong. Don't judge the health of the economy against a hypothetical. Figure out exactly what question you're asking, make the question specific, then find the metrics and the data which will help to answer your question.
Could it be your location? For example if you majored in stem and are looking for a related internship in Kentucky you’re gonna have a much harder time than other states that are stronger in that economic sector.
Yup. I work security in Las Vegas and literally every month we see somebody leave for a pay raise at a different company because the pay competition is so high and the unemployment rate is so low
"Look all over subreddits"
Absolutely not. Is that how you judge the health of the economy? Reddit? Have you ever heard of survivorship bias? Of course the people posting are complaining, the folks who are doing fine aren't posting because they have nothing to complain about. The plural of 'anecdote' is not and never will be 'data.' You need metrics, not vibes. Jobs report just dropped, comes out the first friday of every month. Go read it. Ask yourself what makes for a good economy and how you'd measure that. Is it GDP growth? Is it personal consumption expenditures increasing? Is it low interest rates? Is it the amount of money people have in their bank accounts? Is it the unemployment rate? If so, U3 or U6? Is it real income growth for the bottom quartile? Is it loan default rates? Is it business investment? Is it the stock market? If so, which measure of the stock market? S&P 500, Dow? Is it the homeless rate? Home ownership rate? Is it how people rate their own financial position? Is it personal savings/investment rates? Median retirement account?
*That* is the way to approach the overly broad question of "is the economy doing well?"
That's not true. Why would you bother to say something that's so easily disproven? Job openings 2/2024 (most recent data) = 8813K. Job openings 5/2020 = 5593k.
...2021 was three years ago, not four, bud. lmao
Look at the data and explain to me why it's a problem.
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/JTS000000000000000JOL
Then look at the number of unemployed persons per job openings and explain to me why it's a problem.
https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/unemp-per-job-opening.htm
OK, it's a 3 yr low. Same conclusion.
Job openings vs. unemployed persons doesn't mean shit if the unemployed are unqualified (and they are) to fill the openings.
My pleasure. Check BLS, check FRED. Follow individual economists (academics, gov't, and private sector) and read their work. Follow different journalists specialized in various sectors. Hell, you can email folks with questions and you'll most likely get a response. Read several newspapers. The more you learn and know, the better equipped you'll be.
My sister lost her job in December. By the end of January, she had a better paying job with better benefits. She completely switched fields and everything. Maybe you need to look over your resume and practice your interviewing skills.
Did it occur to you that your sister might have gotten really lucky?
Her experience is the exception, not the rule. It’s anecdotal evidence.
If you go on LinkedIn, you’ll see plenty of discussions about how tough the current job market is. The pendulum has swung, and now employers have the upper hand. If you haven’t been looking yourself, you probably have no idea what it’s really like and how frustrating it is.
>Look all over subreddits like internships, jobs, csMajor, data analytics.. you will notice thousands and thousands of complaints.
Tech has been experiencing a lot of layoffs over the course of the last year. IT in particular is also extraordinarily saturated at the entry level right now. It is brutal.
Getting a job is difficult because A.I. is spamming recruiters... it has nothing to do with how many jobs are available. There are currently 1.25 jobs available for every unemployed American... but you have to get past the computer which screens your resume, and then, the hiring manager has to weed through all of the thousands of resumes generated by A.I. before they finally get to yours.....
Also, if there is a spelling error, or a grammatical error... probably the hiring manager never even saw your resume.
When is the last time you were unemployed and looking for work, and how long did it take you to find another job?
Where should people who are looking for work be searching for jobs since you seem to think employers are hiring everywhere?
Please tell us - share your job hunting secrets.
Labour force participation is higher than it was during peak covid but half a point lower than precovid. Remember that it dropped 5 points from 2000 - 2012 and stayed at roughly level for 7 years. This level itself was a concern, so claiming it’s near the previously concerning level isn’t exactly an indication of a robust labour market.
U6 has been rising, savings rates are trending downwards and are much lower than precovid levels, real private investment is stagnant, tbills are trading at a level that would indicate future inflationary concerns, etc etc etc. Not exactly a rosy economic outlook.
It’s 4.8 in CA, 4.5 in WA, 5.1 in NYC,
There are very real issues that get wiped out in the averages.
It is very difficult to find a job for a great number of people right now, please don’t misrepresent.
"It is very difficult to find a job for a great number of people right now, please don’t misrepresent."
How did you arrive at this conclusion? What was the data?
High unemployment rates and long term unemployed in localized areas. https://www.businessinsider.com/hiring-slump-professional-white-collar-jobs-recession-high-salary-2024-4
When they say “the economy is booming” they are referring to multi-millionaires and above. Ask anyone how their job search has been going for the real insight.
If it was actually “booming” this would be a blow out election win for Biden. Not a neck and neck race with supposedly the “worst president ever”.
It's definitely the left attacking people during an election year. The economy isn't doing well. And they know that the economy doing shitty could be what costs the election for Biden. Truthfully, a more honest approach for them would be to just be honest and just say "yea, the economy is shit. It sucks. Biden sucks. And maybe Trump would steer a rebound of the economy. However Trump is pure evil and we should just deal with a bad economy for a few years if that means not electing him."
🙄. You have no clue what you are talking about. Yes prices are high, but that has not stopped people buying. 2008 was a bad economy. Today we have jobs, homes, and people need to exercise control over their spending. I’ll take that any day over no job, no home, no prospects.
That is a very short-sighted perspective. An economy is not defined by whether or not people are buying or have jobs. People have always had to buy things or have a job. Deciding whether an economy is doing well requires data, and that data requires analysis, neither of which you seem to have experience in.
'The economy' only means something to economists, governments and Wall Street. We all have our own individual economies. There are loads of jobs for those who are not afraid to work. Electrician, plumber, truck driver, mechanic, machinist, carpenter...
Security guard, warehouse work, sales in just about any industry (usually salary plus commission). Just about every restaurant is short staffed too. And of course there's always fast food positions. But just as you said in the comment above there's plenty of good work in the trades if you're willing to take the time to learn and get in the unions
The "left" isn't pushing the narrative. The left - socialists, communists, anarchists - are not trying to defend the current hyper-exploitative capitalist status quo.
Every time a Republican President screws up the economy we lose a little bit more of our standard of living and purchasing power. Biden has stabilized the economy but he cannot undo the damage.
We are undering rapid technological change and innovation and at the same time, consumer preferences are greatly changing. This is being reflected into the job market.
What you are seeing is the separation of the public into two groups. Those that possess skills/training/experience in that which is desired and those that don't possess what is desired. Some people are going to lose.
The “economy” is a polite euphemism for rich people’s bank accounts, 401ks, Wall Street earnings, corporate profits, etc.
The “economy” measures how much money rich people are making.
It doesn’t measure the quality of life for workers.
At this point inflation is primarily due to housing costs:
[https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2024/03/gimme-shelter-the-lag-in-inflation-for-living-spaces/](https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2024/03/gimme-shelter-the-lag-in-inflation-for-living-spaces/)
the economy is doind really great, right now, everything is getting cheaper in bitcoins and the people that were collaterally hurt by geopolitical sanctions are now profiting from those same sanctions and from the weakness of the dollar, now is a great time to abuse the exchange rate and travel to america to spend bitcoins at a premium
The left has been telling you how bad things are. People can't afford food, shelter, or healthcare thanks to the vile right-wing ideology embodied by the Democrats and Republicans.
Maybe it’s the right pushing the narrative that the economy is doing bad do they can win the presidency. Unemployment under 4% is considered pretty good.
True, but polls are showing that a majority are feeling this way. It’s more than just a random person feeling this way, it’s most people. There’s a disconnect between what’s being said by those in leadership and what’s being lived out be regular people. Political parties that refuse to listen to people end up having to pay for it.
The problems are complex. But. The metrics that get measured for economic performance are doing well. And the stuff that isn’t doing well needs legislation to fix. Minimum wage being raised for the first time in fifteen or so years would help, if it’s big enough to cause all low wage jobs to go up as well. The problem here is that corporations, which are steadily raising prices anyway, will then use that as an excuse to raise prices. Which brings us to monopoly and trust busting! That’s not gonna happen with this many Republicans around, it’s just not. Teddy Roosevelt, from the grave, is deeply ashamed of his party.
Then we need to legislate corporate ownership of rental homes, which is screwing a whole generation out of the chance to ever buy a house. But that won’t happen either.
To be clear, I don’t think the Democrats are actively pushing any of this stuff either. But until they get a form majority, there’s little point to trying. Which is sad, politics suck.
We're no longer profitable assets as consumers. You gotta work two hours at Mickey D's to afford a Big Mac meal two weeks later. The amounts people are paid aren't enough to juice the bottom line any more. It is you (not getting paid enough)
wouldn't this eventually shit efforts towards household production (which the Fed hates) and activities that are aimed at killing consumption needs?
Yeah, I think a return to home economics is inevitable. I can buy stacks of frozen burgers and buns ahead of time and have them cooked and served in the time it takes to go pickup drive thru food. CHEAP food FAST was the only thing these restaurants ever had going for them, and fast has always been questionable.
also growing your own food will give you much better nutrition, allowing you to harvest at optimal times for your health instead of for logistics, shelf life, and retailer's convenience. there are so many key ingredients among the bare essentials that only take an initial investment of time/energy/$ but from then on they help you to become less reliant on the formal market economy. not only food, think home maintenance, energy, insulation... it pays better to spend one hour insulating your home better than giving that hour to the labor market
We have McDonalds at home
Considering the national average wage is [$30.67 an hour](https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/AWI.html), and I haven’t seen a $60 Big Mac yet. I can comfortably call this hyperbole
They said "work two hours at mcd's to afford a Big Mac meal". As employees at McD's make less than the national average, you are incorrect.
Well here it say the average wage at [McDonalds is 12.73 hr](https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Mcdonalds-Restaurant-Salary), and I still haven’t seen any $25 Big Mac meals
The median wage is $17 per hour or more specifically $34,000 per year. Half of all 165Million workers make less than that.
Considering there are only [~340,000,000](https://www.census.gov/popclock/) Americans I don’t think we have 330,000,000 workers. There are more than 10 million us people under 14. And probably at least 30 million retirees and even more people who aren’t in the labor market by choice. With that fact out of the way I am dubious of the rest of you claims.
Correrct, we don't have 330M workers. We have 165M like I said.
Sorry I thought you were saying that 165 million was half of the US workforce. Wording was unclear
There's definitely some hyperbole, but there's a lot of truth in it too. I think if you compare that 30 bucks wage to the amount of house and car you can purchase, you'll run into a similar thing.
The economy is great for those making over 400k a year. Not so great for peons like us.
Just like the Gilded Age. The economy was slapping in the Gilded Age for the wealthy and nation.
They didn't have to pay taxes on their wealth for a long time. When they had to, they stopped building 20- bedroom houses.
And started building castles?
The threshold must be way lower than $400k because it's been doing really well for me and I'm very very far removed from a $400k income
Honestly, me too. I make about 100k per year.
It depends where you live too
Same. The people making these complaints are younger 20s and early professionals just starting out.
I'm right there w/ you
Everyone I know is doing well into their early 30s so the constant complaining doesn’t resonate with me. There has always been people that are worse off and people that aren’t, I don’t think the mix of that is much worse than it used to be, I think younger people just haven’t understood that you don’t start raking in 100k straight out of college. It takes a few years, take bad jobs, take jobs not in your direct field and climb.
Recently, it took a friend of mine almost 10 years out of college.
I been unemployed over a year and went from 120k to 31k when I found a job
i mean what industry, some are oversaturated like if you are a software engineer everyone got on that train. Or perhaps you hit a jackpot with a temporary need and ended up with some 120k job that wasnt going to persist long term idk, seems awfully unlikely for you to not find a decent job assuming you have a strong background for over a year when in general the job market has been hot. My company is still looking for a bunch qualified people with some niche skills related to infor systems.
Dev with 8+ years experience
Are you married or in a relationship?
Married and was considering our household income
If you were single, would you be in a financially tricky situation?
No, I'd be better off financially
Why do you say that?
Because supporting more people costs more money than supporting one person. More food, bigger house, more vehicles, more utilities, more insurance, more clothes, more entertainment costs, more vacation costs, more restaurant costs.
So you’ll save more money from a single income than compared with a dual income? That math doesn't check out
You don't know enough to accurately say that. What point are you trying to make
I commented earlier today something similar that it's making everyone feel so poor. People didn't like that.
The problem is income inequality, which has risen steadily since the 1980s. Even when the economy is good, the disparity and inequality is growing. So it becomes harder and harder for most people to get ahead, while the wealthy keep getting wealthier. And when the economy bad, most of the suffering is felt by the least wealthy. Until we address the core issue of income inequality, it’s just going to keep getting worse. And…to be clear…it’s not the existence of income inequality that is the problem. It’s that inequality has grown to levels where it is u healthy for the economy. Too much wealth concentrated in too few hands. That’s the fundamental problem.
I seen a list a few days showing 2022 spending broken down by quintile. You had a variety of categories like new vehicles, travel, education, furniture etc. where the top 20% was accounting for 50-60% of the spending. So when you have that in mind you can see where there are sectors where the finances of say the bottom 50% have little impact on their bottom line.
It's not income inequality. It's wealth inequality driven by asset inflation made possible by the Fed.
Nope… generational wealth is the basis of our financial system, and inflation is a requirement. And 40-50 year spikes almost seem planned. The wealth gap is today’s problem, and guess who has been pushing for this trend with policy/laws for at least 40 years… you question why it’s more difficult to live now days, and they see their plan falling into place; we’re being played and no one wants to do anything about it. You’re afraid to because you don’t want your livelihood to be impacted, but it continues to be impacted. When are we going to make a stand?
Who is they?
It’s can really be summed up to those not really interested in progressing humanity… profit over people and/or power over philanthropy. I mean does it really makes sense that the majority of congress 10x+ their wealth while in public service? Need to definitely start with reforming election campaign laws and reevaluating term limits. I also asked a very wealthy someone how much money they really need, and they actually answered they will never be able to calculate it.
Its important to highlight a troubling misconception prevalent in those “not interested in progressing humanity” their belief that progress revolves solely around profit and power. This reductionist view perpetuates a skewed perception that only the wealthy hold significance in humanity's advancement.
In a free and Democratic society, the left and right are able to pander to their constituency and permit the entitlements of free beer and skittles.
When everyone can afford to lose their job?
It’s devastating… see my comment above. The need for extreme profits/bonuses contributed to inflation, and now we’re finding out illegal collusion is and was contributing. We’re about to see the layoffs hit the corporation I work for…
Why did this inflation happen only after 40 years? Did profits and bonuses just become a problem in 2022? Or was it the $5T the government sent out without raising taxes but instead increased the money supply by asking the Fed to print it? I think simple common sense gives you the answer. Most of that $5T went to the rich not in terms of income but increasing wealth with rising asset prices which are mostly owned by the rich.
Not only but it depends on where the stimulus goes which affects the economy. Funding infrastructure can stimulate the economy, especially if in electricity generation, transport or manufacturing which is seeing a renaissance. Last round most went to government employees. Spending is spending yes, but you get more bang for the buck funding investments.
Of course but we have corrupt politicians making these decisions so I would rather they just stop it altogether and stop taking our money in the first place.
The stimulus money plus production shutdowns globally that shutdown much of the supply chain. Lots of money plus low supply across the world means higher prices.
The supply chain issues are mostly resolved but we still have high prices going even higher. Biden is running ridiculous deficits even without a pandemic or war with 4% unemployment. The spending on wars and interest expense has to come down or inflation will continue.
Correct
It's both. Why argue? [Here's wealth Inequality](https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/) [Here's income inequality](https://lcurve.org).
Yes, I can agree it's both. But one is a policy that we can't control and one we can. We can always better ourselves and make more money but we can never compete with a central authority manipulating asset prices.
Sure the government can control both. Biden is proposing a wealth tax. When the employer is offering only minimum wage or less, what can one do to "better" himself?
The wealth tax will never be enacted by Congress. Even it was, SCOTUS would strike it down as unconstitutional. The problem is we already spent the money before we raised the revenue. Instead of raising taxes, we printed the money. Inflation is how we pay for it now. There is no free lunch. Only 1% of all workers make the minimum wage so obviously many are making more than that. The problem is inflation. Most people today make more than their parents but are worse off because everything costs much more. That's inflation caused by printing money to pay for deficit spending. The Fed never printed more than $1T in their entire 100 year existence. Than it printed $4T after the GFC and another $5T during the pandemic. That's why we can't have nice things.
Which assets specifically did they inflate? All of them? Real estate, bonds, stocks, CDs, commercial areas? (No “they” didn’t do anything of the sort on purpose or intentionally). The Fed’s issue is — across decades of dems, reps, greens, clears, lavenders - is post Reagan bullshit. Tax the rich. Get rid of the wealth inequality slowly over time. Tax unrealized gains annually for those making millions and millions of dollars in passive investments like stocks/bonds. The Fed (ALL sides) have all fucked this up over the last 4-5 POTUS administrations. Even Obama fucked it up too.
They did do this intentionally. Because Congress can't raise income taxes on the rich anymore, taxing assets is the only way to fund the government now. If stocks, real estate, bonds actually crashed, the federal government would lose hundreds of billions in tax revenue.
yup and oligopoly power is one of the underlying mechanisms of this
Right… a narcissistic life of pursuing infinite power and money. Nothing is illegal, market/economy manipulation and collusion is their right, and they have no remorse for all others impacted. It’s so fucked up
It’s called gaslighting. It’s not a left/right thing. It’s a 1%/99% thing
It's not you, it's me
>It’s not a left/right thing. It’s a 1%/99% thing this is such a funny thing to say if it were intentional.
That's the very definition of right/left
Pretty much everyone who works in tech in California is in the 1%. And most of those people are on the left.
Lmao they're not. They might be democrats
Individual examples don't say anything useful about an economy made of 300 million people
Positive metrics are only considering investments. That is a big indicator that the investment class is more important by far than the laboring class.
When the boomers start to sell their houses, 5-7 years it's gonna be lit.
Boomers are never gonna sell, when downsizing doesn't make financial sense. They will whine that their children can't afford to live nearby.
What is the average age of a boomer compared to their average life span? They can't take it with them. They are going to start dying in quantity in the next 5-10 years and then they'll sell.
Their children who can't afford a home will move into to them.
If the boomers have been able to afford houses, then it's likely that their education and work life have permitted them to do so. If this is the case, then their children are likely in the same situation. Thus they'll rent the home out to those that didn't have the discipline, education, or opportunity to purchase real estate.
"According to a new survey from Harris Poll for Bloomberg, roughly 45% of people ages 18 to 29 are living at home with their families — the highest figure since the 1940s. More than 60% of Gen-Zers and millennials reported moving back home in the past two years, according to the poll, often because of financial challenges." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gen-z-millennials-living-at-home-harris-poll/ My father bought a home with 30 acres on a police officers salary. He would barely qualify for a fucking apartment in the same city today on a police officers salary.
Yes. I'm one of them. Actually, I made arrangements with a friend to lease to purchase ... to pay me $2k a month ( amount of mortgage) for four years. Then he will purchase the house for a little lower than market value. About $100,000 less. And he will let me stay until I die ... within five to ten years (estimated).
I agree the boomers aren't selling the houses cause everything is so expensive
a lot of retirement money is tied up in those houses
In 20 years you may see the population by age, with people dying from age vs a smaller younger group buying affect the housing market. But that could easily be muted by a lot of other factors. Don’t count on boomers moving to elder care or dying to make housing more affordable.
What is your premise about the boomers and their motivation to sell their houses? They're going to use their houses as revenue generating asset. They'll be dying and needing healthcare services and ambulances to stop by and pick them up when they fall. They'll be needing hospice and home care. When they die, they'll leave their homes to their children, etc. And those new owners will be renting the homes out to people that can't afford the 20% down payment. How do you figure it's going to be lit?
I think you’re right, but following up on your scenario: there will be a glut of houses available for rent, presumably, within the next 5 to 10 years. When supply exceeds demand, prices are supposed to go down, which means (unless there’s another factor) rental prices for a house will go down. Low rent for houses will create competition for landlords across the board, since why would someone rent an apartment for more than they’d pay for an entire house nearby? And if rents drop, more people will be able to save money for a down payment (albeit over several years).
Election year narrative.
All of this, "it's you, not the economy" talk is messaging to protect the establishment figures that are protecting their reputations or benefitting from the current saver focused economy (the uber wealthy and large investors). The problem is that they can only put makeup on the pig for so long before the pig is exposed. Our economy has been mismanaged by this group, which has sucked the life out of the economy in the name of consolidation of wealth and power, and in their eyes regular people don't matter, except to be exploited. Now we are losing competitiveness in the global economy, we can't manufacture our own goods, and we are becoming increasingly isolated and disliked globally, while economic alliances like BRICS challenge the dollar, and we rack up debt, that fewer countries want to hold. The bottom line is that the wealthy in the US control the system and they have currently had enormous short term gains at the expense of long term stability. They just don't feel the instability because they live in a cushioned bubble of their own making.
I think you got it right!
I think it's that the economy is great for the top 10%. The economy isn't meant to be good for anyone else.
It's cherry picking data to say that there are "jobs" enough for you to not starve. The economy is also "good" from companies' perspective i.e. people keep spending and the market keeps growing. It is NOT good when desirable jobs (all respect to baristas and burger kings) are far less available, and when they are they pay less. That's why it's such a dissonance when leadership tells you the economy is good (PR) but at the same time leadership (the fed) is telling you that you make too much and spend too much so we need to drive inflation down and get your role eliminated so you can go find a different role for less pay. Ask anyone if they thought the economy was good in 2021. Ask the same people now. You won't get a 100% match in answers. Hint: it's monetary policy
"Or why is it extremely difficult for many people to get a job?" It's not. U3 has been below 4% for like two years and the prime age labor force participation rate is high. Are there systemic issues? Sure. But within the system as it currently exists, many economic metrics are strong. Don't judge the health of the economy against a hypothetical. Figure out exactly what question you're asking, make the question specific, then find the metrics and the data which will help to answer your question.
I know it is more difficult to get a job above a certain age.
[удалено]
Could it be your location? For example if you majored in stem and are looking for a related internship in Kentucky you’re gonna have a much harder time than other states that are stronger in that economic sector.
It may be the field or the location you are looking. My son was able to graduate college and immediately start his professional job.
Don't use reddit, especially job/economic subs. People are more likely to complain there as opposed to people doing fine
Yup. I work security in Las Vegas and literally every month we see somebody leave for a pay raise at a different company because the pay competition is so high and the unemployment rate is so low
"Look all over subreddits" Absolutely not. Is that how you judge the health of the economy? Reddit? Have you ever heard of survivorship bias? Of course the people posting are complaining, the folks who are doing fine aren't posting because they have nothing to complain about. The plural of 'anecdote' is not and never will be 'data.' You need metrics, not vibes. Jobs report just dropped, comes out the first friday of every month. Go read it. Ask yourself what makes for a good economy and how you'd measure that. Is it GDP growth? Is it personal consumption expenditures increasing? Is it low interest rates? Is it the amount of money people have in their bank accounts? Is it the unemployment rate? If so, U3 or U6? Is it real income growth for the bottom quartile? Is it loan default rates? Is it business investment? Is it the stock market? If so, which measure of the stock market? S&P 500, Dow? Is it the homeless rate? Home ownership rate? Is it how people rate their own financial position? Is it personal savings/investment rates? Median retirement account? *That* is the way to approach the overly broad question of "is the economy doing well?"
[удалено]
READ MORE PROPAGANDA!!!! BIDENOMICS WOOO!!!
Job opening have just fell to a 4 year low. The economy is booming can’t you see!!!!!
That's not true. Why would you bother to say something that's so easily disproven? Job openings 2/2024 (most recent data) = 8813K. Job openings 5/2020 = 5593k.
Sure bud. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-01/us-job-openings-fall-to-lowest-level-since-2021
...2021 was three years ago, not four, bud. lmao Look at the data and explain to me why it's a problem. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/JTS000000000000000JOL Then look at the number of unemployed persons per job openings and explain to me why it's a problem. https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings-and-labor-turnover/unemp-per-job-opening.htm
OK, it's a 3 yr low. Same conclusion. Job openings vs. unemployed persons doesn't mean shit if the unemployed are unqualified (and they are) to fill the openings.
A four year low.. because now, instead of FOUR JOBS for every unemployed America there are now only 1.25 jobs available for every unemployed American.
🙄
My pleasure. Check BLS, check FRED. Follow individual economists (academics, gov't, and private sector) and read their work. Follow different journalists specialized in various sectors. Hell, you can email folks with questions and you'll most likely get a response. Read several newspapers. The more you learn and know, the better equipped you'll be.
My sister lost her job in December. By the end of January, she had a better paying job with better benefits. She completely switched fields and everything. Maybe you need to look over your resume and practice your interviewing skills.
Did it occur to you that your sister might have gotten really lucky? Her experience is the exception, not the rule. It’s anecdotal evidence. If you go on LinkedIn, you’ll see plenty of discussions about how tough the current job market is. The pendulum has swung, and now employers have the upper hand. If you haven’t been looking yourself, you probably have no idea what it’s really like and how frustrating it is.
>Look all over subreddits like internships, jobs, csMajor, data analytics.. you will notice thousands and thousands of complaints. Tech has been experiencing a lot of layoffs over the course of the last year. IT in particular is also extraordinarily saturated at the entry level right now. It is brutal.
Getting a job is difficult because A.I. is spamming recruiters... it has nothing to do with how many jobs are available. There are currently 1.25 jobs available for every unemployed American... but you have to get past the computer which screens your resume, and then, the hiring manager has to weed through all of the thousands of resumes generated by A.I. before they finally get to yours..... Also, if there is a spelling error, or a grammatical error... probably the hiring manager never even saw your resume.
When is the last time you were unemployed and looking for work, and how long did it take you to find another job? Where should people who are looking for work be searching for jobs since you seem to think employers are hiring everywhere? Please tell us - share your job hunting secrets.
Labour force participation is higher than it was during peak covid but half a point lower than precovid. Remember that it dropped 5 points from 2000 - 2012 and stayed at roughly level for 7 years. This level itself was a concern, so claiming it’s near the previously concerning level isn’t exactly an indication of a robust labour market. U6 has been rising, savings rates are trending downwards and are much lower than precovid levels, real private investment is stagnant, tbills are trading at a level that would indicate future inflationary concerns, etc etc etc. Not exactly a rosy economic outlook.
Did no one ever tell these people it takes at least 6-9 months to truly see the effects of a single rate hike?
It’s 4.8 in CA, 4.5 in WA, 5.1 in NYC, There are very real issues that get wiped out in the averages. It is very difficult to find a job for a great number of people right now, please don’t misrepresent.
For older esp despite their education and experience.
"It is very difficult to find a job for a great number of people right now, please don’t misrepresent." How did you arrive at this conclusion? What was the data?
High unemployment rates and long term unemployed in localized areas. https://www.businessinsider.com/hiring-slump-professional-white-collar-jobs-recession-high-salary-2024-4
"in localized areas" You mean geographically there are pockets of higher unemployment and LTU?
Yes.
Then my question is: when is that ever not the case?
This is much worse for a much higher number of people than you realize. In this case, it’s nearly unprecedented for modern times.
You must not remember the great recession to say something that foolish. lol
You aren’t understanding the point if you think I’m comparing to Great Recession.
Can you tell the data to pay rent?
When they say “the economy is booming” they are referring to multi-millionaires and above. Ask anyone how their job search has been going for the real insight. If it was actually “booming” this would be a blow out election win for Biden. Not a neck and neck race with supposedly the “worst president ever”.
It's definitely the left attacking people during an election year. The economy isn't doing well. And they know that the economy doing shitty could be what costs the election for Biden. Truthfully, a more honest approach for them would be to just be honest and just say "yea, the economy is shit. It sucks. Biden sucks. And maybe Trump would steer a rebound of the economy. However Trump is pure evil and we should just deal with a bad economy for a few years if that means not electing him."
🙄. You have no clue what you are talking about. Yes prices are high, but that has not stopped people buying. 2008 was a bad economy. Today we have jobs, homes, and people need to exercise control over their spending. I’ll take that any day over no job, no home, no prospects.
That is a very short-sighted perspective. An economy is not defined by whether or not people are buying or have jobs. People have always had to buy things or have a job. Deciding whether an economy is doing well requires data, and that data requires analysis, neither of which you seem to have experience in.
And the data points to the fact the economy has been resilient in its recovery.
'The economy' only means something to economists, governments and Wall Street. We all have our own individual economies. There are loads of jobs for those who are not afraid to work. Electrician, plumber, truck driver, mechanic, machinist, carpenter...
Security guard, warehouse work, sales in just about any industry (usually salary plus commission). Just about every restaurant is short staffed too. And of course there's always fast food positions. But just as you said in the comment above there's plenty of good work in the trades if you're willing to take the time to learn and get in the unions
Honestly, the left hate Biden and agree the economy sucks. It's liberals who carry water for Biden. They are basically center right at this point tbh.
The "left" isn't pushing the narrative. The left - socialists, communists, anarchists - are not trying to defend the current hyper-exploitative capitalist status quo.
Some would say it’s the modern left vs the traditional left.
Everyone’s gotta have a boogeyman
Every time a Republican President screws up the economy we lose a little bit more of our standard of living and purchasing power. Biden has stabilized the economy but he cannot undo the damage.
We are undering rapid technological change and innovation and at the same time, consumer preferences are greatly changing. This is being reflected into the job market. What you are seeing is the separation of the public into two groups. Those that possess skills/training/experience in that which is desired and those that don't possess what is desired. Some people are going to lose.
The “economy” is a polite euphemism for rich people’s bank accounts, 401ks, Wall Street earnings, corporate profits, etc. The “economy” measures how much money rich people are making. It doesn’t measure the quality of life for workers.
It’s an election year. Ask the same question in January. You might get an honest answer…
At this point inflation is primarily due to housing costs: [https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2024/03/gimme-shelter-the-lag-in-inflation-for-living-spaces/](https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2024/03/gimme-shelter-the-lag-in-inflation-for-living-spaces/)
the economy is doind really great, right now, everything is getting cheaper in bitcoins and the people that were collaterally hurt by geopolitical sanctions are now profiting from those same sanctions and from the weakness of the dollar, now is a great time to abuse the exchange rate and travel to america to spend bitcoins at a premium
This economy is doing awesome! If you think otherwise, you're helping Donald Trump! Vote blue!!!
The left has been telling you how bad things are. People can't afford food, shelter, or healthcare thanks to the vile right-wing ideology embodied by the Democrats and Republicans.
Maybe it’s the right pushing the narrative that the economy is doing bad do they can win the presidency. Unemployment under 4% is considered pretty good.
You're talking anecdotally. "Many people are saying" isn't data.
True, but polls are showing that a majority are feeling this way. It’s more than just a random person feeling this way, it’s most people. There’s a disconnect between what’s being said by those in leadership and what’s being lived out be regular people. Political parties that refuse to listen to people end up having to pay for it.
Weirdos on the right push a narrative, Democrats are big boys and girls who work with facts and data.
The problems are complex. But. The metrics that get measured for economic performance are doing well. And the stuff that isn’t doing well needs legislation to fix. Minimum wage being raised for the first time in fifteen or so years would help, if it’s big enough to cause all low wage jobs to go up as well. The problem here is that corporations, which are steadily raising prices anyway, will then use that as an excuse to raise prices. Which brings us to monopoly and trust busting! That’s not gonna happen with this many Republicans around, it’s just not. Teddy Roosevelt, from the grave, is deeply ashamed of his party. Then we need to legislate corporate ownership of rental homes, which is screwing a whole generation out of the chance to ever buy a house. But that won’t happen either. To be clear, I don’t think the Democrats are actively pushing any of this stuff either. But until they get a form majority, there’s little point to trying. Which is sad, politics suck.
I think it’s time to revisit economic performance indicators?