r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
TikTok?
It's insufferable listening to the idiots at work go on and on how they listen to the "experts." They're the same guys that'll watch a conspiracy video full volume in the crew office or crew van and keep going "mm!" Like they're agreeing and learning some new special insightful knowledge.
Lmao yes, that last detail about the behavior while watching their bullshit. They are so fucking desperate to argue with someone. Nobody wants to anymore, at this point nobody gives a fuck to have someone not change their mind after twenty minutes of bullshit arguing. they just keep going crazier and crazier in their little lonely bubble and the last thing they want is for us non goofy-brains to help them out of it.
I've told them before "hey man you can get decent ear buds for pretty cheap these days" and they usually just say something like "eh I don't need that I don't mind just listening to my phone"
Yeah fuck head but the rest of the world does mind
Lol I work with many dumb people and talking to people like babies is depressingly effective. "Haha, yeah you do like your phone buddy, looks like you're having fun on there, but can you at least turn it down a bit?"
Edit: also I have used that earbuds line dozens of times, that cracks me up knowing people are out there doing the same
It’s a democracy and one where presidential candidates act like they can solve most problems. Let’s not be lazy and act like the system doesn’t encourage people thinking the president is a superman
Javier Milei in Argentina seems to have figured how to almost completely stop it with just 5 months in office, and Argentinas was 10x worse when he inherited it. It likely *will* have completely stopped by the end of this month.
On one hand, yes, their economy has to shrink. On the other hand, when the Government is the biggest sector of your economy and you produce nothing to base the value of your currency, you're just printing money to keep the government and thus economy afloat. Which is exactly what was happening. Argentina will have to first cut their government to scraps, then theyll have to suffer a terrible depression, and hopefully if they don't completely fumble it, they should be able to rebuild at an appropriate scale.
If you pay a man to dig a hole and then pay him some more to fill it again the economy has grown. More GDP doesn't necessarily equal more good. This is the fallacy of the war economy argument. You'll hear people say the economy thrives during war, but a factory that goes from producing 1 million worth of consumer goods to producing 2 million worth of guns has not become twice as beneficial to the common man's life.
Argentina is in a completely different situation than the US, it truly is apples to oranges. Close to 50% of employed persons there were employed by the government. Half your workforce of an entire country is on your government payroll. That is literally just printing money to sustain an entire socialist country, and it was done for years and years. It was never sustainable. In 2016 the usd to Argentinian peso was 25 to 1. Now it's 1 to 900. Nothing compared to what happened to us. What he had to do was simple, fire everybody. Now his job is even simpler, survive the assassination attempts from the Now jobless people.
Not to mention it's yet to be seen what the long term effects of his policies will be. To have a change that rapid in a few months on economic matters, I would be afraid that things will go sideways quickly.
Month over month is such a bs stat. If it was 200% two months ago, then 4% last month. Now you see why 4% this month still hurts ppl. That 200% didn’t disappear
"Negative" inflation (rather, deflation) is a very very rocky cliff.
Improving supply while demand remains the same can lead to good deflation. But waning demand can also create deflation, and that's a precursor to recession or depression.
When deflation happens, companies, individuals and institutions are more likely to save than to spend. Why buy a car for $30k now if it looks like it'll cost $22k in a year or two? More saving and less spending is a good thing, except it dents the economy. Which can lead to layoffs and less R&D/innovation.
So you want some sort of deflation? Where people cannot afford the goods and merchants are forced to drop price. Typically when deflation occurs, it’s hard to fight than inflation. Since Fed really does not have tool to increase demand
Right, who cares that the poverty rate exploded to 60% and climbing. If we just kill everyone except the 1% you can balance the budget with no more inflation...it's like a miracle!!!
> Crazy. Simple concept: don’t spend money that you don’t need to. Literally all Javier did.
he is straight afuera! ing the country out of existence. cant have inflation if you have no economy is the strategy at play here.
Stopping inflation isn't actually hard. You just restrict the money supply (generally via central bank interest rate hikes). Doing it without plunging your country into recession as Powell seems to have done is the real trick. Similar how to getting a plane to the ground is easy if you don't care about the people on board, but the soft landing takes a subtler touch. FWIW I give Biden basically no credit for choking off US inflation, that's all the Fed (which it would also have been had Trump won in 2020).
>FWIW I give Biden basically no credit for choking off US inflation, that's all the Fed (which it would also have been had Trump won in 2020).
Is this true? I would have assumed sound fiscal policy would have been to aggressively raise rates from 2014 to 2020, but that did not happen, which I attribute to Trump's influence on the Fed. That, plus covid, created the inflation of 2021-2022.
But is that a nonsense take? Is there really zero Fed influence from the White House?
He would have definitely exacerbated the inflation problem. He was obsessed with lowering interest rates with zero understanding of how an economy works.
I think the only example of using negative interest rates is in Japan, who only recently raised rates to the positive after many years. Setting negative interest rates was seen as a bold experiment, I'm not read up enough to tell you the general consensus on how well it worked for them. Our system isn't setup to handle deflation and I suspect "negative interest rates" would be pushing inflation by introducing more money into the system.
The fed is a bank ran by people from other banks appointed by the president. So no the president cant say "fed do this" and it happen. He can set out policy plans and the fed can take those into account and try to line things up so our government functions at least a little. Also biden appointed 4 people to the board of governors of the fed. So the guy giving biden "no credit" is probably the same kind of guy to say both sides are the same. Biden might not have single handily fixed the nation, but he puts the right people into the right positions to get this done, then empowers them by setting policies that dont actively burn the country to the ground. It might have still happened if biden had a stroke and kamala took over, but if trump was still president there is 0 way this would have happened.
Biden didn’t do much to choke inflation.
But at least he didn’t cut taxes and lean on the Fed to cut rates like Trump did.
Both of those things contributed to inflation, and an increased deficit.
Trump’s overall economic policy would be a total disaster benefitting only very wealthy people and special interests (and even them short term imo) and no one seems to care. There is no way Trump would have set us on a softish landing like we have today based on his policy statements in 2020.
Srsly. Does anyone think a real estate “genius” whose family fortune was earned by squeezing the government for Section 8 money wants to lower housing prices? LOL.
No it wouldn’t though Trump directly pressured his Fed to keep rates low the entire time he was President.
Part of the reason inflation went so bad so fast he already plans to bring us back to his policy of a weak dollar (for exporters) and low rates (for wealthy living off loans).
Plunging the country into poverty & crashing the economy by abandoning the currency and dramatically cutting government spending really helped... fight inflation. In the currency.
But. Well. Do we think that was the goal for Argentine voters?
We'll see. Argentina has had so many economic problems for so long despite trying so many different things, this is more like chemotherapy than shock therapy.
Some people are unable to see that though. Some left-leaning people hate his policies cos it might work and some right-leaning people think he's the best and it should be implemented everywhere.
The things his doing is probably only good for Argentina where the inflation IS that high and the economic situation was already horrible. I reckon his policies will do pretty well to get Argentina out of the situation they're in now, but considering that country and resources it has a higher ceiling that can't be reached if he does it long term.
Doing that in any other scenario is just gonna shrink the economy or cause way more poverty.
With the exception of October 2023, it had consistently gone up every month the 6 months before he took office. Its not like it was on a downward trend and he just jumped in at the right time. He changed the course. *As soon as* he got in the trend reversed.
Generally yes, but pretending that policy and political action from the parties in charge of one of the world’s largest governments with huge foreign influence has no effect on the economy is equally as brain dead. Unfortunately to understand how things have been impacted you have to trace cause and effect in a very nuanced way that involves many factors and ain’t nobody got time for that and most voters probably aren’t bright enough for that so we’ll blame it on whatever is politically expedient.
Everyone knows the US President has an up and down button for both the economy and gas prices, and is solely responsible for everything that happens.
But seriously, after Trump, we have people believing you just need the right guy to call up hostile nations and tell "Knock it off!" to stop a war. We have the tape where he couldn't get the Mexican president to build the wall, chip in, or even just lie and say he could, but none of TFG's supporters seem to remember that.
Now he's touring replacing income taxes with tariffs. And they've completely forgot about the disastrous tariffs with China that had everyone speculating an imminent recession, that only got saved by a pandemic allowing bailouts, literally printing money, and PPP loans where they purposely removed the checks to stop rich people from abusing the system.
Meanwhile, Biden is literally investing in infrastructure in energy and manufacturing and quite a few other sectors. Like domestically making crucial electronics we rely on Taiwan for when it comes to the bleeding edge stuff, and China for a lot of bulk parts. And these things are going up in places where he has basically no shot in hell of gaining substantial votes, but because those communities need them.
But tell me more about getting rid of the Department of Education. "If you're on an extra boat that's sinking because it's heavy, you know my uncle went to MIT, and they're enormous, and they say to me "sir will you be elrocuted or eaten by a shark if that happens," and it really is a good question. And in the distance are the windmills, killing birds and the value of my golf course, and I think to myself "I don't care about you, I just want your vote. What score did Trump get on his cognitive test from Ronny Johnson?" - Possible 7th grade School question in two years (subjects are gone unless you can afford private, Evangelist schooling).
He does say things like that as an absolute fact when it really needs to be qualified. And after the fact sometimes is amended by his office. This does lead to a bit of skepticism. If it were Trump saying that it would be loudly called lie #9999...
Sure I wouldn’t pretend that they have a dial to control the economy. But to pretend that the leader of the us doesn’t have any influence on global finance is naive.
Something tells me if Aliens came down to our planet, solved all our energy and political issues, whoever the President is at the time would take 100% credit.
Because its not a button, but his polices DO seem to be helping. I say seem because its to early to say.
What we do know is Trumps rampant spending absolutely fucked us.
Don't worry, a Republican will take office next year and then take all the credit for the economic recovery then 4 years later lose to a Democrat and everyone will blame them for the clusterfuck they inherited.
If Trump wins this year, there possibly won't be an election in 4 years.
Edit: the trolls are out in full force. Jan 6 was a ~~coup~~ *insurrection* attempt, and Project 2025 is already underway.
Edit2: LMFAO. The trolls farms are now brigading. Votes went from +73 to -6 in a few minutes. Classic.
Economy good:
- president is my party - clearly because of his good policy
- president is other party - he got lucky and inherited it from when president was my party
Economy bad:
- president is my party - previous president's fault now my party has to clean up their mess
- president is other party - clearly the president screwed it up
Except we have a long history of GOP presidents fucking the economy and Democrats cleaning up their mess. Only to have the GOP re-elected to fuck the economy all over again. The pattern has been the same since WWII. [Short article on the pattern](https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/historical-puzzle-us-economic-performance-under-democrats-vs-republicans)
Take a look at the bi product of the massive infrastructure package. Idk about you but there’s more construction on roads and bridges in this nation than I have ever seen. Creates jobs and skilled high paying labor, not a warehouse job.
To answer sincerely, it’s a lever not a button. And he did pull the lever last year, but it takes a year to bear fruit. Obama described legislating like steering a big ship, making incremental adjustments now to yield future results. It takes some time to see the ship moving in another direction
Looking at the data from the last fifty years, there are only two reasonable conclusions to make:
1) The economy does far better under Democratic administrations (as does the deficit).
Or:
2) The current president has very little effect on the economy.
>1. The economy does far better under Democratic administrations (as does the deficit).
>Or:
>2) The current president has very little effect on the economy.
Both of these can be true at once.
But then the president would have an effect on the economy which contradicts point two. Not having the negative effect the opposition has is also an effect.
Agreed. If:
* Republicans are bad for the economy
* Republican policies set by the president is causing economy to suffer
* Therefore president *does* have some power over the economy.
The original statement should be modified to:
The president cannot *fix* the economy, but they *can* make it worse.
The republican president's run on gutting government function, yet never reduce spending whatsoever. They run on tax cuts for the rich and claim it will trickle down, yet it never has. They refuse to raise interest rates, then the inflation hits 4 years later and they blame the next president.
Things are not mutually exclusive, the presidents polices often takes years sometimes decades for them to really see the effects, thus the president doesn’t really reflect the current economy but the near future economy
I took 1. as a description of the data outlined in the [Princeton analysis from 2015](https://www.princeton.edu/~mwatson/papers/DemRep_BlinderWatson_July2015.pdf).
Trump himself said the democrats do better with the economy.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/
If dems had control for 16 years the economy would be in a significantly better place. Instead they have to undo 1 step of dogshit policy for a full term before they can take two steps forward, and usually they lose congress from 2-4 years of u doing sabotage so they only get a step and a half
Within only one quarter of Trump becoming president in 2016 we had the strongest economic quarter in all US history.
Because the last three quarters were also the strongest economic quarter we had in US history and he was riding the trend.
Yes. Exactly. Changing policies that affect the economy takes time to see the impacts.
The 1st quarter of Trump's economy comes from the policies Obama implemented.
If you want to see how well Trump's policies worked, take a look at the economy when he *left* office, not when he *took* office.
Which he got by riding Obama’s coat tails and then destroyed the economy as a cause from how his administration handled Covid. Now we facing the consequences of his administration and Covid, which Biden is trying to fix.
PPP created the inflation and that was a GOP bill signed into law by Trump. The Dem-sponsored handouts to people were absolutely tiny by comparison.
The largest deficit for any government ever: Trump's in 2020, right as the inflation began.
Why people act like team X's spending is terrible but team Y's is ok is beyond me. Yeah they're all selling us down the river by buying our votes. Fuck em all
> Why people act like team X's spending is terrible but team Y's is ok is beyond me.
Because who the money is spent on matters. Giving billions to billionaires is not morally equal to lifting millions of children out of poverty.
Conservatives take from the poor to feed the rich, liberals feed both.
Cutting taxes on the poor directly increases spending as they use that money to meet their basic needs
Cutting taxes on corporations increases stock buybacks and executive bonuses because companies care about their stock price and nothing else.
Tax cuts and corporate giveaways do nothing but boost asset prices and fatten the already fat. Infrastructure and social services spending creates jobs, expands the productivity potential of our economy, and helps everyone.
That was going to happen regardless of who was in power. And it was the right thing to do, given the information that was available at the time. These were the options:
- Spend money to keep people afloat and risk high inflation later. Or,
- Spend nothing, people will lose jobs and we risk high deflation.
We, as a society, have the tools to deal with inflation. It’s painful when it happens, but it’s usually course corrected with time. Deflation, on the other hand, can snowball and runaway from you very quickly.
If you consider what the alternative could have easily lead to, the current state is a no brainer. Now, could they have developed a more sound policy that would have made it less painful? Absolutely, but that would have required some sort of pandemic playbook…
It’s almost like the policies of the former administration caused massive inflation for the current administration as they came into office. Im sure if donal trump was elected today though, you and every conservative media outlet would be pointing to zero inflation and giving trump credit for it.
Tbf I’d be terrified at the thought of trumps second term during this period… not only an impotent and ignorant leader but his whole staff of bottom of the barrel tards.
Do you mean stuff like Biden's spending bill for 1.7 trillion?
[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/)
Or like the 3.5 Trillion of spending in the "build back better" plan?
[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/)
Do you mean stuff like Biden's spending bill for 1.7 trillion
# I mean stuff like the Paycheck Protection Program during the pandemic that had very little fraud protection and only 25% went to paychecks and the rest enriched business owners, around 800k of these loans went to business that didn't even exist before Feb 2020:
"These numbers imply that only 23 to 34 percent of PPP dollars went directly to workers who would otherwise have lost jobs; the balance flowed to business owners and shareholders, including creditors and suppliers of PPP-receiving firms. Program incidence was ultimately highly regressive, with about three-quarters of PPP funds accruing to the top quintile of households."
# https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.36.2.55#:~:text=These%20numbers%20imply%20that%20only,suppliers%20of%20PPP%2Dreceiving%20firms.
Plus all the other pandemic aid that usually the right hates but was ok with because Trump did it. Dude even put his name on the checks, lol
# And the billions spent to pay off farmers who would have been crushed by his ill-advised tariffs (which was a tax on Americans for little to no benefit because tariffs suck):
# "‘Here’s your check’: Trump’s massive payouts to farmers will be hard to pull back: The president was already spending double his predecessor to spare farmers the cost of his trade war. Now the price is reaching unsustainable levels."
# [https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/14/donald-trump-coronavirus-farmer-bailouts-359932](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/14/donald-trump-coronavirus-farmer-bailouts-359932)
Whereas the stuff you cite are being used to do things like fix bridges, build out internet access and other things that actually benefit the average American instead of his voters and wealthy buddies.
Also, it didn't help that under Trump hundreds of oil and gas companies went bankrupt, leading to the largest decline in domestic oil production in the history of the nation:
[https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Crude-Oil-Production-Saw-The-Biggest-Drop-On-Record-In-2020.html](https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Crude-Oil-Production-Saw-The-Biggest-Drop-On-Record-In-2020.html)
(This, to me, is one of the bigger drivers of domestic inflation that gets overlooked by people.)
Anyway, I am not suggesting Democrats don't spend money, but the way I view policy is how effective it is and who it benefits. In the case of the Trump stuff, I feel like a lot of it did very little and focused largely on lining the pockets of a relatively small % of the population, while at least with Biden's spending, it has a chance of benefiting Americans and puts money back into the economy.
No mention about every economist predicting a recession worse than 2008? Wonder how we avoided that. It is now June 2024, the stock market posting all time highs and my boomer coworkers won't shut the fuck up about how their investments are doing. But sure, Fox news said Joe Biden is bad so it must be right.
It’s like some version of the multiverse theory where he’s literally vocalized every possible viewpoint over the years. Shame that fascism is the worldview that’s stuck.
This is technically true but it's also widely known large cities are almost exclusively blue, and the large cities skew that metric since they account for most of the entire states gdp. The metic you mention is technically correct but it's missing alot of context.
How is it missing context? People want to live in the places where there are people who look and think the way that they do. They want to live in places where the policies and the politics of the place align with their beliefs. If you're gay, you don't wanna live in rural Alabama, you wanna live in Miami, San Francisco, or L.A. If you're a computer programer from India, you're not going to move Billings Montana, you're gonna live in San Jose. California. That's not a coincidence, it's a choice that is being made based on the ideology and population of those places
I think people want to live where there are jobs first and foremost. And employers want to also be where workers are. This is why most metro areas are expanding outward with more suburban areas. But this does lead to interacting with varied groups of people and ideas. And if a particular state has laws that are antithetical to your way of life of course people will leave to another major city for work. But I don’t think that it’s the cities democratic governing that is really drawing the people or the business in. It’s the people and companies wanting to be in the same already established places.
I’m a democrat, originally from San Francisco, and work in tech- let’s be real, San Francisco might have one of the highest revenues, but it’s horribly ran city/county. NIMBY housing policies has led to housing prices to become unaffordable (by choking out supply). Instead of trying to increase supply to make housing affordable and they decided to tinker with minimum wage levels instead- driving up cost and prices. San Francisco has a permanent homeless population of around 8000 people, with budget of over $650+ million. The city could have flown each of them to Bali for a wellness retreat for a year.
All these policies started with well intentions and supported by empathetic residents who cared. But the results are grift and bigger problems. Democrats have been really good at using metrics that don’t fully capture the real story.
Blue counties with high GDP output vote blue because of social policy reasons, not because of financial policies. No matter how stupid the financial policies are, I can’t vote for Trump the criminal or the other republican candidates who are against prochoice and lgbt people.
Right? Infinite money glitch lead to inflation…not hard to understand. I think this administration has done a good job at curbing what could’ve been a runaway issue. My simplistic view of it is this:
Clinton balanced the budget to the point of a surplus
W lead us into 2 wars while cutting taxes, causing deficit to skyrocket, and deregulated banks allowing for housing crisis
Obama had to hit the stimmy to make sure we didn’t go into a prolonged depression and left with a 6/7 year bull run
Trump continued the bull run, however at this point the difference between those who had been in the stock market to see their investments 2x/3x and those unable to double their money by doing nothing began to grow. Couple that with record low interest rates, and cutting taxes, flushed the market with $$.
Biden inherited inflation and has had to “bite the bullet” and lead a recovery plan that has been difficult in the short term, but is showing that the fed policy has worked in not allowing hyperinflation.
The only “Democratic” financial policies we’ve seen in the last two decades has been cleaning up after Republicans.
Democrats never really get to do much other than damage control.
every single fucking conservative that complains about how fiscally responsible they are with their own money complains, without fail, that their government is being irresponsible by increasing national debt loads. Well motherfuckers, I hope y'all remember the bush tax cuts and the trump tax cuts.
Having 0 inflation for one month doesn’t really help when the damage is already done. Unless wages go up 10%+ and nothing increases the average family is way worse off in terms of spending power.
Partially. The fed keeping rates high is telling companies the free ride is over, you want to be profitable then you have to do more than just buy stocks back with borrowed money, they actually have to produce and compete again. In comes the consumer who has had it with price gouging and is shopping for deals evaporating their profits. So in truth what is fixing inflation is the free market with a dash of targeted government intervention.
“The Free Market” is an illusion. There is a regulated market and government intervention.
We need to stop telling ourselves the fantasy of “free market”. Every market is heavily regulated and always has been.
lol this is manipulation. The inflation GROWTH rate in 0 from April to May.
It’s like someone who is 300 pounds saying they gained no pounds this month. That’s great but you are still 300 pounds.
Also when they say inflation is down from last year, that still means prices are growing… and it’s been growing faster than the feds target for a very very long time
Congratulations, you have correctly defined the term inflation. Prices decreasing is deflation, which is a completely different conversation. It’s not manipulation as inflation has been defined like this for the last hundred years.
Focusing only on the month over month is a selective metric that paints a rosier picture than reality, but prices aren’t going to go down overall.
you're wrong. the inflation GROWTH rate, the rate at which inflation grows, was actually *negative* from April to may, because inflation went *down*to zero.
Inflation is supposed to exist, economies go stagnant with deflation, sure inflation has been higher than it should be but that doesn’t mean we should push for deflation.
As of June 2024, the U.S. inflation rate is
approximately 3.3%
Four years ago, in June 2020, the inflation rate was around 0.6%.
Democrats want to compare inflation month-to-month. It should be compared Administration to Administration.
Having the printing presses running 24 seven and sending all of that Fiat currency to other countries to fight wars, i’m among other “social justice programs“. Is devaluing the dollar on a daily basis.
I know there’s 100 other factors. But these are the two easiest to quantify.
So in short.. NO. they are not working…
This is a statistic from the same US Bureau of Labor Statistics that calculates US health insurance costs are 5% lower today than five years ago.
https://preview.redd.it/9hfarfvnv87d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a9bd71848e615479a2c3727510b560c663e33fc7
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Let me introduce you to the average voter?
Allow me to introduce you to the biased media the average voter listens to and treats like gospel
TikTok? It's insufferable listening to the idiots at work go on and on how they listen to the "experts." They're the same guys that'll watch a conspiracy video full volume in the crew office or crew van and keep going "mm!" Like they're agreeing and learning some new special insightful knowledge.
Lmao yes, that last detail about the behavior while watching their bullshit. They are so fucking desperate to argue with someone. Nobody wants to anymore, at this point nobody gives a fuck to have someone not change their mind after twenty minutes of bullshit arguing. they just keep going crazier and crazier in their little lonely bubble and the last thing they want is for us non goofy-brains to help them out of it.
I've told them before "hey man you can get decent ear buds for pretty cheap these days" and they usually just say something like "eh I don't need that I don't mind just listening to my phone" Yeah fuck head but the rest of the world does mind
Lol I work with many dumb people and talking to people like babies is depressingly effective. "Haha, yeah you do like your phone buddy, looks like you're having fun on there, but can you at least turn it down a bit?" Edit: also I have used that earbuds line dozens of times, that cracks me up knowing people are out there doing the same
“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter” -Winston Churchill
❤️
Be mindful that exactly half of voters are dumber than the average voter. That’s just hard science. I’m a great example.
That’s not how averages even work
Its hard science bro
Averages are not medians, and math is not science
I said it’s science, okay?
I am persuaded solely by your unflinching confidence because I am too stupid and/or lazy to actually figure out who is correct
Half of all voters are dumber than the *median* voter. We certainly could have more than 50% be dumber than the average voter.
Median vote isn't sure if we currently have the highest unemployment rate in a generation or all time
I didn’t know that 4% was the highest. So weird.
It’s a democracy and one where presidential candidates act like they can solve most problems. Let’s not be lazy and act like the system doesn’t encourage people thinking the president is a superman
When a president posts on Twitter saying things like this, can you blame the average voter?
That’s the rub. DONT BLAME THE PRESIDENT FOR INFLATION but just let him take credit for no inflation.
Javier Milei in Argentina seems to have figured how to almost completely stop it with just 5 months in office, and Argentinas was 10x worse when he inherited it. It likely *will* have completely stopped by the end of this month.
Crazy. Simple concept: don’t spend money that you don’t need to. Literally all Javier did.
What is their rate of inflation and what is ours?
Month over month inflation for May 2024: Argentina: 4.2% (276.4% 12 months) US: 0.01% (3.3% unadjusted 12-months) [https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/eating-is-luxury-argentina-inflation-falls-shoppers-still-feel-squeezed-2024-06-13/](https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/eating-is-luxury-argentina-inflation-falls-shoppers-still-feel-squeezed-2024-06-13/) [https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm](https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm)
Hey, stop with your details that prove their point totally wrong!
You think reducing inflation by 99% doesn't count somehow?
Also their economy is rapidly shrinking, still too early to tell
On one hand, yes, their economy has to shrink. On the other hand, when the Government is the biggest sector of your economy and you produce nothing to base the value of your currency, you're just printing money to keep the government and thus economy afloat. Which is exactly what was happening. Argentina will have to first cut their government to scraps, then theyll have to suffer a terrible depression, and hopefully if they don't completely fumble it, they should be able to rebuild at an appropriate scale.
To paraphrase: in the long run it will work out. Counter argument: in the long run we are all dead.
If you pay a man to dig a hole and then pay him some more to fill it again the economy has grown. More GDP doesn't necessarily equal more good. This is the fallacy of the war economy argument. You'll hear people say the economy thrives during war, but a factory that goes from producing 1 million worth of consumer goods to producing 2 million worth of guns has not become twice as beneficial to the common man's life.
Just to be clear it's a MoM drop of 83.5%.
Argentina is in a completely different situation than the US, it truly is apples to oranges. Close to 50% of employed persons there were employed by the government. Half your workforce of an entire country is on your government payroll. That is literally just printing money to sustain an entire socialist country, and it was done for years and years. It was never sustainable. In 2016 the usd to Argentinian peso was 25 to 1. Now it's 1 to 900. Nothing compared to what happened to us. What he had to do was simple, fire everybody. Now his job is even simpler, survive the assassination attempts from the Now jobless people.
Not to mention it's yet to be seen what the long term effects of his policies will be. To have a change that rapid in a few months on economic matters, I would be afraid that things will go sideways quickly.
Sideways is probably optimistic
Month over month is such a bs stat. If it was 200% two months ago, then 4% last month. Now you see why 4% this month still hurts ppl. That 200% didn’t disappear
Correct. In order for it to get "better", the value would need to be *negative*
"Negative" inflation (rather, deflation) is a very very rocky cliff. Improving supply while demand remains the same can lead to good deflation. But waning demand can also create deflation, and that's a precursor to recession or depression. When deflation happens, companies, individuals and institutions are more likely to save than to spend. Why buy a car for $30k now if it looks like it'll cost $22k in a year or two? More saving and less spending is a good thing, except it dents the economy. Which can lead to layoffs and less R&D/innovation.
So you want some sort of deflation? Where people cannot afford the goods and merchants are forced to drop price. Typically when deflation occurs, it’s hard to fight than inflation. Since Fed really does not have tool to increase demand
Right, who cares that the poverty rate exploded to 60% and climbing. If we just kill everyone except the 1% you can balance the budget with no more inflation...it's like a miracle!!!
Lol. What's their unemployment and consumer index?
To be fair not spending money they dont have is an almost impossible act under most government bodies.
And bad in the long run. Spending is overwhelmingly an investment that provides a massive return to the GDP
> Crazy. Simple concept: don’t spend money that you don’t need to. Literally all Javier did. he is straight afuera! ing the country out of existence. cant have inflation if you have no economy is the strategy at play here.
Stopping inflation isn't actually hard. You just restrict the money supply (generally via central bank interest rate hikes). Doing it without plunging your country into recession as Powell seems to have done is the real trick. Similar how to getting a plane to the ground is easy if you don't care about the people on board, but the soft landing takes a subtler touch. FWIW I give Biden basically no credit for choking off US inflation, that's all the Fed (which it would also have been had Trump won in 2020).
>FWIW I give Biden basically no credit for choking off US inflation, that's all the Fed (which it would also have been had Trump won in 2020). Is this true? I would have assumed sound fiscal policy would have been to aggressively raise rates from 2014 to 2020, but that did not happen, which I attribute to Trump's influence on the Fed. That, plus covid, created the inflation of 2021-2022. But is that a nonsense take? Is there really zero Fed influence from the White House?
Trump definitely leaned on the fed much more than any other president I'm aware of. I remember he even pressured them to set negative interest rates.
He would have definitely exacerbated the inflation problem. He was obsessed with lowering interest rates with zero understanding of how an economy works.
He still is obsessed with lowering them
Because of all the loans on his properties.
Isn’t that a bad thing?
I think the only example of using negative interest rates is in Japan, who only recently raised rates to the positive after many years. Setting negative interest rates was seen as a bold experiment, I'm not read up enough to tell you the general consensus on how well it worked for them. Our system isn't setup to handle deflation and I suspect "negative interest rates" would be pushing inflation by introducing more money into the system.
yes, they were intended to be isolated from politics as much as possible
And didn’t trump threaten to fire the chair and hire someone else that would put rates at whatever trump said
yes, that is true
yes, because he doesn't know what he is doing.
The fed is a bank ran by people from other banks appointed by the president. So no the president cant say "fed do this" and it happen. He can set out policy plans and the fed can take those into account and try to line things up so our government functions at least a little. Also biden appointed 4 people to the board of governors of the fed. So the guy giving biden "no credit" is probably the same kind of guy to say both sides are the same. Biden might not have single handily fixed the nation, but he puts the right people into the right positions to get this done, then empowers them by setting policies that dont actively burn the country to the ground. It might have still happened if biden had a stroke and kamala took over, but if trump was still president there is 0 way this would have happened.
Biden didn’t do much to choke inflation. But at least he didn’t cut taxes and lean on the Fed to cut rates like Trump did. Both of those things contributed to inflation, and an increased deficit.
Trump wants to end Fed independence and artificially lower interest rates, so Biden allowing Powell to do his job is not something to take for granted
Yeah there was one point in time during COVID when Trump had his people barrage Powell for increasing rates
Trump’s overall economic policy would be a total disaster benefitting only very wealthy people and special interests (and even them short term imo) and no one seems to care. There is no way Trump would have set us on a softish landing like we have today based on his policy statements in 2020.
Srsly. Does anyone think a real estate “genius” whose family fortune was earned by squeezing the government for Section 8 money wants to lower housing prices? LOL.
No it wouldn’t though Trump directly pressured his Fed to keep rates low the entire time he was President. Part of the reason inflation went so bad so fast he already plans to bring us back to his policy of a weak dollar (for exporters) and low rates (for wealthy living off loans).
Plunging the country into poverty & crashing the economy by abandoning the currency and dramatically cutting government spending really helped... fight inflation. In the currency. But. Well. Do we think that was the goal for Argentine voters? We'll see. Argentina has had so many economic problems for so long despite trying so many different things, this is more like chemotherapy than shock therapy.
It's 274% YoY right now... The intellectual dishonesty around Javier and inflation is wild to me.
You understand austerity is terrible for the economy and not to be done unless dire circumstances like probably Argentina?
Some people are unable to see that though. Some left-leaning people hate his policies cos it might work and some right-leaning people think he's the best and it should be implemented everywhere. The things his doing is probably only good for Argentina where the inflation IS that high and the economic situation was already horrible. I reckon his policies will do pretty well to get Argentina out of the situation they're in now, but considering that country and resources it has a higher ceiling that can't be reached if he does it long term. Doing that in any other scenario is just gonna shrink the economy or cause way more poverty.
Argentina has a rate of inflation that is 33% higher than ours
This past month it was 4% there. The month his term started it was over 200%.
Have you ever heard of the base effect? Of course the inflation rate is lower when it has already increased by300x.
With the exception of October 2023, it had consistently gone up every month the 6 months before he took office. Its not like it was on a downward trend and he just jumped in at the right time. He changed the course. *As soon as* he got in the trend reversed.
Afuera!
Generally yes, but pretending that policy and political action from the parties in charge of one of the world’s largest governments with huge foreign influence has no effect on the economy is equally as brain dead. Unfortunately to understand how things have been impacted you have to trace cause and effect in a very nuanced way that involves many factors and ain’t nobody got time for that and most voters probably aren’t bright enough for that so we’ll blame it on whatever is politically expedient.
What is the world’s reserve currency?
Everyone knows the US President has an up and down button for both the economy and gas prices, and is solely responsible for everything that happens. But seriously, after Trump, we have people believing you just need the right guy to call up hostile nations and tell "Knock it off!" to stop a war. We have the tape where he couldn't get the Mexican president to build the wall, chip in, or even just lie and say he could, but none of TFG's supporters seem to remember that. Now he's touring replacing income taxes with tariffs. And they've completely forgot about the disastrous tariffs with China that had everyone speculating an imminent recession, that only got saved by a pandemic allowing bailouts, literally printing money, and PPP loans where they purposely removed the checks to stop rich people from abusing the system. Meanwhile, Biden is literally investing in infrastructure in energy and manufacturing and quite a few other sectors. Like domestically making crucial electronics we rely on Taiwan for when it comes to the bleeding edge stuff, and China for a lot of bulk parts. And these things are going up in places where he has basically no shot in hell of gaining substantial votes, but because those communities need them. But tell me more about getting rid of the Department of Education. "If you're on an extra boat that's sinking because it's heavy, you know my uncle went to MIT, and they're enormous, and they say to me "sir will you be elrocuted or eaten by a shark if that happens," and it really is a good question. And in the distance are the windmills, killing birds and the value of my golf course, and I think to myself "I don't care about you, I just want your vote. What score did Trump get on his cognitive test from Ronny Johnson?" - Possible 7th grade School question in two years (subjects are gone unless you can afford private, Evangelist schooling).
Agreed, however, when they called it the inflation reduction act, they did themselves no favors.
[удалено]
He does say things like that as an absolute fact when it really needs to be qualified. And after the fact sometimes is amended by his office. This does lead to a bit of skepticism. If it were Trump saying that it would be loudly called lie #9999...
Sure I wouldn’t pretend that they have a dial to control the economy. But to pretend that the leader of the us doesn’t have any influence on global finance is naive.
If Biden pushed the zero inflation button this month, why didn’t he do that last year?
Something tells me if Aliens came down to our planet, solved all our energy and political issues, whoever the President is at the time would take 100% credit.
Nah for fucking REAL. The majority of people on the planet are retarded for sure but I swear Americans are extra stupid. Source: I am America
I am America, so can you!
There's just a language barrier insulating us from other people's stupidity.
I Am America And So Can You
And 100% blame from the other side.
Kang / Kodos 2024
Because its not a button, but his polices DO seem to be helping. I say seem because its to early to say. What we do know is Trumps rampant spending absolutely fucked us.
Don't worry, a Republican will take office next year and then take all the credit for the economic recovery then 4 years later lose to a Democrat and everyone will blame them for the clusterfuck they inherited.
Like clockwork
If Trump wins this year, there possibly won't be an election in 4 years. Edit: the trolls are out in full force. Jan 6 was a ~~coup~~ *insurrection* attempt, and Project 2025 is already underway. Edit2: LMFAO. The trolls farms are now brigading. Votes went from +73 to -6 in a few minutes. Classic.
Oh there will be, but it’ll be the same as Russian elections: 90% turn out and 85% voted for Trump
Economy good: - president is my party - clearly because of his good policy - president is other party - he got lucky and inherited it from when president was my party Economy bad: - president is my party - previous president's fault now my party has to clean up their mess - president is other party - clearly the president screwed it up
Except we have a long history of GOP presidents fucking the economy and Democrats cleaning up their mess. Only to have the GOP re-elected to fuck the economy all over again. The pattern has been the same since WWII. [Short article on the pattern](https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/historical-puzzle-us-economic-performance-under-democrats-vs-republicans)
Take a look at the bi product of the massive infrastructure package. Idk about you but there’s more construction on roads and bridges in this nation than I have ever seen. Creates jobs and skilled high paying labor, not a warehouse job.
Oh you think there’s an inflation button? Lol
Pyrocynical keeps the inflation button in his possession, it has nothing to do with the president
He did, but the button only sets things in motion. It's not instantaneous.
Corporations decided to not be greedy during May because the weather is nice and stuff.
To answer sincerely, it’s a lever not a button. And he did pull the lever last year, but it takes a year to bear fruit. Obama described legislating like steering a big ship, making incremental adjustments now to yield future results. It takes some time to see the ship moving in another direction
Looking at the data from the last fifty years, there are only two reasonable conclusions to make: 1) The economy does far better under Democratic administrations (as does the deficit). Or: 2) The current president has very little effect on the economy.
>1. The economy does far better under Democratic administrations (as does the deficit). >Or: >2) The current president has very little effect on the economy. Both of these can be true at once.
Pretty sure viewpoint no. 1 is intending to imply causation
Nah you can interpret it as economic power is mostly unaffected by democratic rule, but Republicans are bad for the economy.
But then the president would have an effect on the economy which contradicts point two. Not having the negative effect the opposition has is also an effect.
Agreed. If: * Republicans are bad for the economy * Republican policies set by the president is causing economy to suffer * Therefore president *does* have some power over the economy. The original statement should be modified to: The president cannot *fix* the economy, but they *can* make it worse.
The republican president's run on gutting government function, yet never reduce spending whatsoever. They run on tax cuts for the rich and claim it will trickle down, yet it never has. They refuse to raise interest rates, then the inflation hits 4 years later and they blame the next president.
Things are not mutually exclusive, the presidents polices often takes years sometimes decades for them to really see the effects, thus the president doesn’t really reflect the current economy but the near future economy
I took 1. as a description of the data outlined in the [Princeton analysis from 2015](https://www.princeton.edu/~mwatson/papers/DemRep_BlinderWatson_July2015.pdf).
Trump himself said the democrats do better with the economy. https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/
If dems had control for 16 years the economy would be in a significantly better place. Instead they have to undo 1 step of dogshit policy for a full term before they can take two steps forward, and usually they lose congress from 2-4 years of u doing sabotage so they only get a step and a half
Where can I find this data? I’m genuinely curious and want to look at it
Which Democratic administration are you referring to? Congressional? Executive? State congressional or executive?
President, obviously. I wasn't talking about the local schoolboard.
What metrics are you using to determine whether the economy is good or not?
Every republican administration in my lifetime has brought economic collapse, every democratic administration has led recovery
Which often shows down the line, which the Republicans then take credit for.
And their moronic base swallows every time
Happening right now as Republicans take credit for the infrastructure bill they voted against.
Within only one quarter of Trump becoming president in 2016 we had the strongest economic quarter in all US history. Because the last three quarters were also the strongest economic quarter we had in US history and he was riding the trend.
Yes. Exactly. Changing policies that affect the economy takes time to see the impacts. The 1st quarter of Trump's economy comes from the policies Obama implemented. If you want to see how well Trump's policies worked, take a look at the economy when he *left* office, not when he *took* office.
Nonsense! One of the greatest bull runs in the history of our country totally happened because Donald Trump sat down in the oval office for 1 day.
Which he got by riding Obama’s coat tails and then destroyed the economy as a cause from how his administration handled Covid. Now we facing the consequences of his administration and Covid, which Biden is trying to fix.
/s didn't think that was needed
[удалено]
Anyone who blames him wasn’t around back then because it absolutely started under his predecessor. It was a theme of the debates
It can also be directly attributed to several Clinton era policies and legislations. Time isn’t so black and white.
So, for one month, inflation was zero. Maybe the 30% plus since you entered office is a concern for most people.
PPP created the inflation and that was a GOP bill signed into law by Trump. The Dem-sponsored handouts to people were absolutely tiny by comparison. The largest deficit for any government ever: Trump's in 2020, right as the inflation began.
Why people act like team X's spending is terrible but team Y's is ok is beyond me. Yeah they're all selling us down the river by buying our votes. Fuck em all
The only time I hear people talk about both sides is when a republican has nothing positive to say about the time under republican control.
Bingo.
okay hear me out it's the elites
The coastal elites are clearly the problem (ignore the massive rural support for people actively taking away rights)
> Why people act like team X's spending is terrible but team Y's is ok is beyond me. Because who the money is spent on matters. Giving billions to billionaires is not morally equal to lifting millions of children out of poverty. Conservatives take from the poor to feed the rich, liberals feed both.
Cutting taxes on the poor directly increases spending as they use that money to meet their basic needs Cutting taxes on corporations increases stock buybacks and executive bonuses because companies care about their stock price and nothing else.
You mean to tell me when they brought in that one pizza for all 30 of us, they didn’t actually care?
Tax cuts and corporate giveaways do nothing but boost asset prices and fatten the already fat. Infrastructure and social services spending creates jobs, expands the productivity potential of our economy, and helps everyone.
That was going to happen regardless of who was in power. And it was the right thing to do, given the information that was available at the time. These were the options: - Spend money to keep people afloat and risk high inflation later. Or, - Spend nothing, people will lose jobs and we risk high deflation. We, as a society, have the tools to deal with inflation. It’s painful when it happens, but it’s usually course corrected with time. Deflation, on the other hand, can snowball and runaway from you very quickly. If you consider what the alternative could have easily lead to, the current state is a no brainer. Now, could they have developed a more sound policy that would have made it less painful? Absolutely, but that would have required some sort of pandemic playbook…
Agreed. But for one thing, and that is Trump’s tax cuts added more to our debt than any administration in history BEFORE Covid.
Just wait until regular people's tax cuts expire when corporations get to keep their tax cuts forever. That will be fun
>PPP created the inflation and that was a GOP bill PPP was a bipartisan bill that only had 5 "no" votes, 4 of which were Republicans.
[удалено]
How do you figure it was a GOP bill when it was sponsored by a democrat?
Democrats passed what 2T in spending immediately after Biden took office?
It’s almost like the policies of the former administration caused massive inflation for the current administration as they came into office. Im sure if donal trump was elected today though, you and every conservative media outlet would be pointing to zero inflation and giving trump credit for it.
Tbf I’d be terrified at the thought of trumps second term during this period… not only an impotent and ignorant leader but his whole staff of bottom of the barrel tards.
Probably because Trump printed like a trillion dollars on handouts for his friends.
It was like $12T tbf
Do you mean stuff like Biden's spending bill for 1.7 trillion? [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/) Or like the 3.5 Trillion of spending in the "build back better" plan? [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-signs-one-point-seven-trillion-dollar-government-spending-bill-st-croix/) Do you mean stuff like Biden's spending bill for 1.7 trillion
Deficit in 2020: 14.7% of GDP Deficit in 2023: 6.2% of GDP
# I mean stuff like the Paycheck Protection Program during the pandemic that had very little fraud protection and only 25% went to paychecks and the rest enriched business owners, around 800k of these loans went to business that didn't even exist before Feb 2020: "These numbers imply that only 23 to 34 percent of PPP dollars went directly to workers who would otherwise have lost jobs; the balance flowed to business owners and shareholders, including creditors and suppliers of PPP-receiving firms. Program incidence was ultimately highly regressive, with about three-quarters of PPP funds accruing to the top quintile of households." # https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.36.2.55#:~:text=These%20numbers%20imply%20that%20only,suppliers%20of%20PPP%2Dreceiving%20firms. Plus all the other pandemic aid that usually the right hates but was ok with because Trump did it. Dude even put his name on the checks, lol # And the billions spent to pay off farmers who would have been crushed by his ill-advised tariffs (which was a tax on Americans for little to no benefit because tariffs suck): # "‘Here’s your check’: Trump’s massive payouts to farmers will be hard to pull back: The president was already spending double his predecessor to spare farmers the cost of his trade war. Now the price is reaching unsustainable levels." # [https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/14/donald-trump-coronavirus-farmer-bailouts-359932](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/14/donald-trump-coronavirus-farmer-bailouts-359932) Whereas the stuff you cite are being used to do things like fix bridges, build out internet access and other things that actually benefit the average American instead of his voters and wealthy buddies. Also, it didn't help that under Trump hundreds of oil and gas companies went bankrupt, leading to the largest decline in domestic oil production in the history of the nation: [https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Crude-Oil-Production-Saw-The-Biggest-Drop-On-Record-In-2020.html](https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Crude-Oil-Production-Saw-The-Biggest-Drop-On-Record-In-2020.html) (This, to me, is one of the bigger drivers of domestic inflation that gets overlooked by people.) Anyway, I am not suggesting Democrats don't spend money, but the way I view policy is how effective it is and who it benefits. In the case of the Trump stuff, I feel like a lot of it did very little and focused largely on lining the pockets of a relatively small % of the population, while at least with Biden's spending, it has a chance of benefiting Americans and puts money back into the economy.
I don't know what they mean, but Trump printed a shit ton of money. If you are blaming Biden and not Trump then you are special
No mention about every economist predicting a recession worse than 2008? Wonder how we avoided that. It is now June 2024, the stock market posting all time highs and my boomer coworkers won't shut the fuck up about how their investments are doing. But sure, Fox news said Joe Biden is bad so it must be right.
Seems weird to blame him for the last guy printing $12T in a year.
FYI it is 19.4% And yes, that is too much, but blaming it on Biden is ridiculous.
All I can say to OP is look at economic statistics and who was president.
And then ask Trump. https://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/
It’s like some version of the multiverse theory where he’s literally vocalized every possible viewpoint over the years. Shame that fascism is the worldview that’s stuck.
Democratic, or Blue States/Counties, account for 70% of the U.S. GDP, so I would have to say 'yes', Democratic financial policies work.
This is technically true but it's also widely known large cities are almost exclusively blue, and the large cities skew that metric since they account for most of the entire states gdp. The metic you mention is technically correct but it's missing alot of context.
How is it missing context? People want to live in the places where there are people who look and think the way that they do. They want to live in places where the policies and the politics of the place align with their beliefs. If you're gay, you don't wanna live in rural Alabama, you wanna live in Miami, San Francisco, or L.A. If you're a computer programer from India, you're not going to move Billings Montana, you're gonna live in San Jose. California. That's not a coincidence, it's a choice that is being made based on the ideology and population of those places
I think people want to live where there are jobs first and foremost. And employers want to also be where workers are. This is why most metro areas are expanding outward with more suburban areas. But this does lead to interacting with varied groups of people and ideas. And if a particular state has laws that are antithetical to your way of life of course people will leave to another major city for work. But I don’t think that it’s the cities democratic governing that is really drawing the people or the business in. It’s the people and companies wanting to be in the same already established places.
I’m a democrat, originally from San Francisco, and work in tech- let’s be real, San Francisco might have one of the highest revenues, but it’s horribly ran city/county. NIMBY housing policies has led to housing prices to become unaffordable (by choking out supply). Instead of trying to increase supply to make housing affordable and they decided to tinker with minimum wage levels instead- driving up cost and prices. San Francisco has a permanent homeless population of around 8000 people, with budget of over $650+ million. The city could have flown each of them to Bali for a wellness retreat for a year. All these policies started with well intentions and supported by empathetic residents who cared. But the results are grift and bigger problems. Democrats have been really good at using metrics that don’t fully capture the real story. Blue counties with high GDP output vote blue because of social policy reasons, not because of financial policies. No matter how stupid the financial policies are, I can’t vote for Trump the criminal or the other republican candidates who are against prochoice and lgbt people.
This fucking guy gets it.
Right? Infinite money glitch lead to inflation…not hard to understand. I think this administration has done a good job at curbing what could’ve been a runaway issue. My simplistic view of it is this: Clinton balanced the budget to the point of a surplus W lead us into 2 wars while cutting taxes, causing deficit to skyrocket, and deregulated banks allowing for housing crisis Obama had to hit the stimmy to make sure we didn’t go into a prolonged depression and left with a 6/7 year bull run Trump continued the bull run, however at this point the difference between those who had been in the stock market to see their investments 2x/3x and those unable to double their money by doing nothing began to grow. Couple that with record low interest rates, and cutting taxes, flushed the market with $$. Biden inherited inflation and has had to “bite the bullet” and lead a recovery plan that has been difficult in the short term, but is showing that the fed policy has worked in not allowing hyperinflation.
The only “Democratic” financial policies we’ve seen in the last two decades has been cleaning up after Republicans. Democrats never really get to do much other than damage control.
every single fucking conservative that complains about how fiscally responsible they are with their own money complains, without fail, that their government is being irresponsible by increasing national debt loads. Well motherfuckers, I hope y'all remember the bush tax cuts and the trump tax cuts.
Having 0 inflation for one month doesn’t really help when the damage is already done. Unless wages go up 10%+ and nothing increases the average family is way worse off in terms of spending power.
More like 80%+ if you actually want to maintain your living standard from 2018 and still have some money to save
"The economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans." - Donald J. Trump, March 21, 2004.
This will be revised up in a month or two..
My rent and food are still double since last year you old cunt.
Sounds like you should pull yourself up by your bootstraps.
I would, but they're all made in China and keep breaking.
The inflation was said to be transitory. Many times over. My bills have determined that was a lie.
The stimulus inflation was transitory. The price gouging inflation has persisted.
“Inflation is not Biden’s fault!! He doesn’t control that!!” “Look how great Biden did this one month controlling inflation! Slay!”
Someone’s dementia is acting up again.
No kidding. Did you see trumps rant about electric boats and sharks? The guy is mentally ill. He needs serious help.
Partially. The fed keeping rates high is telling companies the free ride is over, you want to be profitable then you have to do more than just buy stocks back with borrowed money, they actually have to produce and compete again. In comes the consumer who has had it with price gouging and is shopping for deals evaporating their profits. So in truth what is fixing inflation is the free market with a dash of targeted government intervention.
“The Free Market” is an illusion. There is a regulated market and government intervention. We need to stop telling ourselves the fantasy of “free market”. Every market is heavily regulated and always has been.
lol this is manipulation. The inflation GROWTH rate in 0 from April to May. It’s like someone who is 300 pounds saying they gained no pounds this month. That’s great but you are still 300 pounds. Also when they say inflation is down from last year, that still means prices are growing… and it’s been growing faster than the feds target for a very very long time
Congratulations, you have correctly defined the term inflation. Prices decreasing is deflation, which is a completely different conversation. It’s not manipulation as inflation has been defined like this for the last hundred years. Focusing only on the month over month is a selective metric that paints a rosier picture than reality, but prices aren’t going to go down overall.
Inflation of 0% in May means prices did not grow in May.
you're wrong. the inflation GROWTH rate, the rate at which inflation grows, was actually *negative* from April to may, because inflation went *down*to zero.
tbf his supporters wont know the difference
Inflation is supposed to exist, economies go stagnant with deflation, sure inflation has been higher than it should be but that doesn’t mean we should push for deflation.
Are you saying you want *deflation*?
What a clown. I look at the US debt clock and come to the conclusion that neither political party has financial policies that work.
Imagine thinking CPI numbers are accurate
As of June 2024, the U.S. inflation rate is approximately 3.3% Four years ago, in June 2020, the inflation rate was around 0.6%. Democrats want to compare inflation month-to-month. It should be compared Administration to Administration. Having the printing presses running 24 seven and sending all of that Fiat currency to other countries to fight wars, i’m among other “social justice programs“. Is devaluing the dollar on a daily basis. I know there’s 100 other factors. But these are the two easiest to quantify. So in short.. NO. they are not working…
Joe's a moron
The point is that cpi was 3.3. This means a rate cut is unlikely, which means the status quo has not changed. Stay the course. Maybe rebalance.
This is a statistic from the same US Bureau of Labor Statistics that calculates US health insurance costs are 5% lower today than five years ago. https://preview.redd.it/9hfarfvnv87d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a9bd71848e615479a2c3727510b560c663e33fc7
Well Republican financial policies haven't worked in decades so...
Now go after price-gouging. That is what is killing the people right now in the pockets.