6 ms·
But when we're measuring the "world economy" it's not like we're measuring the heights of the stacks of gold behind scrooge mcduck's coffers, right? These numbe
by xvedejas 7y ago
But when we're measuring the "world economy" it's not like we're measuring the heights of the stacks of gold behind scrooge mcduck's coffers, right? These numbers represent things like society's ability to make products people want, and peoples' willingness to spend their savings on things that are useful (instead of stuffing it in their mattress). The effects on labor are terrible, and your furlough reflects that. I personally was recently laid off, and likewise many individuals are hit much harder than 3%. But it's not like we should wish that other parts of the economy were hit as badly. None of it is good.
- analog31 7y agoIndeed. I don't want anybody's money to just vanish. And while as others have pointed out, the numbers are a measure of productivity for somebody, the ability of workers to capture their own productivity in wages is not guaranteed.
- covidacct 7y agoThe ability of workers to capture their own productivity gains is a lower than it's been in a century. This crisis will push the second derivative lower.
- cinquemb 7y agoBut we don't like talking about M2V[0] anymore because it didn't jibe with the daily propaganda for years that all is well [0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2V https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2V
- jibe 7y agoPeople, especially the press, don't talk about M2V because they don't understand it. No one does outside finance or econ classrooms, and most of them don't either. BTW, jibe, not jive.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- jibe 7y agoMaybe productivity gains are vastly overstated? Or more specifically, productivity numbers are distorted by a few industries that have had extreme productivity gains, while most have stagnated.
- imtringued 7y agoYou are offering an explanation for a situation in which everything is fine. Unfortunately we already know that this is not the case.
- viklove 7y ago> spend their savings on things that are useful (instead of stuffing it in their mattress) People are literally spending all their money on food and rent, not stuffing it in their mattress. The only ones doing that are the ones on top, hoarding wealth and exploiting their underlings. > ability to make products people want Wealthy investors have decided this isn't important, all that's important is cutting costs so they can hoard more wealth, which usually means exporting production out of the country so they can exploit laborers in other countries where they don't have protection through the law. This is why we currently don't have enough masks and rely on foreign countries to produce them for us. The "world economy" only seems to measure things that make rich people richer, and how effective these things are at doing so.
- aey 7y agoThey are not actually hoarding “wealth”. No one is sitting on a pile of apartments, or ventilators, or college spots, or food distribution capacity. There is fixed amount of that stuff out there right now. If it was possible to produce apartments for you for half the price, or deliver food, or an fda approved ventilator, and still have a profit investors would be jumping over themselves to do so. Businesses are hoarding cash because they predict a drop in revenue and want to save as much as they can so they can continue operations and realign for the new economy.
- emilecantin 7y ago> No one is sitting on a pile of apartments, or ventilators, or college spots, or food distribution capacity. The large number of empty apartments being rented 3-4 nights a month on AirBnb in most large cities seems to indicate otherwise. The CPAP machine "jailbreak" posted here yesterday seems to indicate otherwise. The large quantity of food going to the trash every day seems to indicate otherwise. I agree that there is a "fixed" amount of stuff out there, but it's far from allocated efficiently. I think it's time we recognized that.
- kortilla 7y agoHow is a CPAP machine hack an indication that there are excess ventilators? I don’t think you thought that through. > but it's far from allocated efficiently. I think it's time we recognized that. Who hasn’t recognized there can be inefficiency in the current system? The argument is that a central planning committee is going to do much worse.