3 ms·
So your definition is exclusively from the PoV of an asset owner, and denies that there are also producers, and people who own nothing. > If I buy a house for
by leppr 5y ago
So your definition is exclusively from the PoV of an asset owner, and denies that there are also producers, and people who own nothing.
> If I buy a house for $250,000 and suddenly it is $500,000 then I am suddenly $250,000 wealthier. If I buy 2 liters of milk for $6 and a week later I want to buy more but now it is $12 then I am poorer because the things I consume cost more.
If I have a milk factory selling bottles at $6 and suddenly it is $12 then I am suddenly twice wealthier. If I save $250,000 to buy a house but a week later it is $500,00 then I am poorer because the things I want to buy cost more.
In any case, the proof is in the pudding as they say. If you chose to witness the successive explosion in dollar supply > asset prices > manufacturing costs > consumer goods prices, attribute it to simply "COVID-19 and supply chain disruptions", and call people seeing correlations "crazy", then good for you. There's not much argumentation possible.
> Every profession uses certain words in specialized ways. If you don't like the way some topics are discussed in a given branch of knowledge, then just don't participate in those conversations. I will assume, since you are on Hacker News, that you don't have a problem when engineers give special meaning to "message" or "bus" or "event" or "queue" or "broker".
It's one to give special meaning to words in a particular context and it's another to refuse their use in slightly different contexts because it differs from the most common usage.