3 ms·

Pointing out that all the inflation that people have been afraid of for maybe two decades now keeps not coming isn't a dismissive Fed talking point. It's realit

by harryh 6y ago

Pointing out that all the inflation that people have been afraid of for maybe two decades now keeps not coming isn't a dismissive Fed talking point. It's reality. The idea that it's just asset inflation and not inflation in the real economy is also wrong. The fact of the matter is that we now live in a world where raw capital is no longer a rare commodity, thus you can no longer get a significant return on a risk free asset like a bank account or a t-bill. In order to make a return you have to take risks with your capital and invest them in something value producing like a business. You don't have a God given right to high interest rates. We've had a secular decline in interest rates for...maybe hundreds of years. That's just reality. Complaining that the Fed (and every other central bank in the developed world) is somehow screwing you by not creating them for you is foolish. The interest rate on your savings account is not important compared to the gainful employment by the populace that happens when we don't have too tight monetary policy.

mindslight 6y ago
> the inflation that people have been afraid of for maybe two decades now keeps not coming isn't a dismissive Fed talking point It's dismissive because you're just reiterating the same paradigm the Fed has been using to get us to the state we are at. Of course the system looks consistent with the system's own rules. That is not evidence that its metrics are appropriate, nor its behavior sustainable. > we now live in a world where raw capital is no longer a rare commodity Also explained by the Fed continuing to print more money. Private raw capital is not in demand, because it's even easier to get newly created money. Hence the stock market continuing to go up because there is "nowhere else" for savings to go - usually private capital would slosh over to bonds during a recession. > The interest rate on your savings account is not important compared to gainful employment by the populace that happens when we don't have too tight monetary policy. You're significantly expanding the scope of the argument here, in an attempt to backstop with another dismissive Fed talking point. That will make any short reply look disjoint, but I will point out: 1. technological progress was supposed to make less human labor required, yet everybody is working even more. 2. women entering the workforce (good for women's self-determination, obviously), yet the labor per person has still not decreased 3. many non-productive administrative jobs have been created, especially in sectors that receive newly created money. 4. ridiculous malinvestment bets such as e-bike/scooter rental. 5. massive waste stream and unsustainable depletion of natural resources. To me, it seems like we have more than enough "gainful employment". Rather we need to stop turning the screws on the working class, especially those who still lack jobs in spite of gross overproduction.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

by harryh 6y ago

mindslight 6y ago

> the inflation that people have been afraid of for maybe two decades now keeps not coming isn't a dismissive Fed talking point It's dismissive because you're just reiterating the same paradigm the Fed has been using to get us to the state we are at. Of course the system looks consistent with the system's own rules. That is not evidence that its metrics are appropriate, nor its behavior sustainable. > we now live in a world where raw capital is no longer a rare commodity Also explained by the Fed continuing to print more money. Private raw capital is not in demand, because it's even easier to get newly created money. Hence the stock market continuing to go up because there is "nowhere else" for savings to go - usually private capital would slosh over to bonds during a recession. > The interest rate on your savings account is not important compared to gainful employment by the populace that happens when we don't have too tight monetary policy. You're significantly expanding the scope of the argument here, in an attempt to backstop with another dismissive Fed talking point. That will make any short reply look disjoint, but I will point out: 1. technological progress was supposed to make less human labor required, yet everybody is working even more. 2. women entering the workforce (good for women's self-determination, obviously), yet the labor per person has still not decreased 3. many non-productive administrative jobs have been created, especially in sectors that receive newly created money. 4. ridiculous malinvestment bets such as e-bike/scooter rental. 5. massive waste stream and unsustainable depletion of natural resources. To me, it seems like we have more than enough "gainful employment". Rather we need to stop turning the screws on the working class, especially those who still lack jobs in spite of gross overproduction.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]