4 ms·
Why do you think such distributions generally precede a recession or depression? I don’t see the causality here as clearly as say a yield curve inversion. And f
by throwawaysea 7y ago
Why do you think such distributions generally precede a recession or depression? I don’t see the causality here as clearly as say a yield curve inversion. And follow-up, why is that bad instead of just expected?
People have more purchasing power and access to goods/services than ever before. Perhaps the relative ubiquity of smartphones is the most emblematic sign of this. Put another way, things are better than they’ve ever been and even in the last ten years, quality of life has improved in many ways. So is there really a problem?
- calcifer 7y ago> things are better than they’ve ever been [...] So is there really a problem? That's begging the question. Things are better for you, but is the improvement across the board or did the rich getting richer screwed over some people and made them even poorer?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- kjar 7y agoThis argument is laughable. We all have smartphones so serious wealth inequality is OK? These days having a phone is a near requirement.
- throwawaysea 7y agoHow is it a requirement? I have friends that don’t have a smartphone as well. Or cable. Or Netflix. And yet lots of people who seem upset at the state of things happily spend on all these same unnecessary goods and services. If anything it points to the fact that these things are more important to them than things people are claiming are necessities or “rights”, such as healthcare.
- throwawaymath 7y agoI don't have a comment on inequality generally, but what's your point specifically about a phone being a requirement? Toilets are also a "near requirement" in any meaningful sense that phones are a near requirement. But toilets (and sewage more generally) are obviously quality of life improvements over what humans had in previous epochs of history. Stated more succinctly: hasn't it always been common for major improvements in quality of life to eventually become the default, rather than the exception? Or am I misunderstanding your point?
- salawat 7y agoPeople have access to smartphones because a smartphone is the ultimate loss leader. Give someone a smartphone and Internet connectivity, and all of a sudden, they are a customer waiting to happen. Point being, look at what is not ubiquitous. Housing, ability to get medical care, financial security enough to start a family... Focusing on Net Access, and possession of the most powerful tool known to Marketing is an absurd metric from which to argue that systemic economic inequality isn't a problem.
- throwawaysea 7y agoIt’s a luxury item that costs hundreds of dollars. People choose to spend money on it instead of these other things. People spend money on a lot of things that aren’t strictly necessary. So I don’t see why it is absurd. Edit: also is housing actually in a bad shape or is it just that housing in the most desirable locations isn’t universally accessible to every income group?
- themattress 7y agoMaybe iPhones and flagship androids are considered luxury items, but is the $40 Tracphone from 7-11 really a luxury item? Or maybe it’s that anyone without a contact number and internet connection is at a huge disadvantage in our society in 2019?
- nickthemagicman 7y agoPrices are actually skyrocketing, but only for things you need. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/prices-are-skyrocketing-but-only-for-things-you-actually-need/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/prices-are-skyrocketing-but...
- jedberg 7y ago> Why do you think such distributions generally precede a recession or depression? Here is a good meta-analysis of the research on it: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5775138/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5775138/