6 ms·
Could this actually just be a biproduct of large generations that don't prioritize investment yet?
by nautilus12 7y ago
Could this actually just be a biproduct of large generations that don't prioritize investment yet?
- buboard 7y agoImplying that they will in the future?
- nickjj 7y agoI don't pay too much attention to this type of thing but I think it might be related to wages not going up but the cost of living skyrocketing. For example people in their late 50s and early 60s might have been making let's say $30,000 back in the 1980s and 1990s and now today the same exact type of job pays the same 30k salary except the cost of living is crazy high now compared to back then. Back then they had money to spare for investments but that same salary today means you're probably in debt.
- sunshinerag 7y agoYou mean inflation is high. But they claim inflation is not high.
- gwern 7y agoIf that were the case, the people who do take out loans etc should be realizing supernormal returns as they exploit the low-hanging fruit being ignored. Do they?
- anigbrowl 7y agoCheck into it and let us know.
- 0x8BADF00D 7y agoThe average person is so levered up they cannot afford to invest.
- IggleSniggle 7y agoI really don’t think this is true anymore, with regard to the people that are capable of being levered up (ie the top 30% in USA)
- skybrian 7y agoYou have it backwards. There are investors (such as banks and pension funds) who want certain very safe investments (government bonds) but governments are unwilling to supply it. So, if anything, this would be too much savings rather than not enough. But really, it's not about consumers, but about banks not making as many loans as governments want them to. That suggests a lack of safe investment opportunities. Maybe, instead of pressuring banks to make investments that they don't want to make, governments could stimulate demand in some other way? There are certainly people who, if you give them money, they will spend it.