37 ms·

It's certainly good for the shareholders to have more money in the market, I'm not sure about the others. I know I'd much rather have a solid 6-7% interest retu

It's certainly good for the shareholders to have more money in the market, I'm not sure about the others. I know I'd much rather have a solid 6-7% interest return than a flaky market return.

whimsicalism 5y ago
> I know I'd much rather have a solid 6-7% interest return than a flaky market return. And college debt holders, mortgage holders, generally impoverished people would rather have lower rates on the debt that they have. They'd also rather have jobs, which again comes with more investment. They'd also like to have a higher quality of life, again which comes with more investment in capital/production/real output.
- Clubber 5y ago
  >generally impoverished people would rather have lower rates on the debt that they have. Generally impoverished people aren't granted lower rates because of the credit system. They typically pay usury rates. Only people with existing assets / collateral get low rates. >They'd also rather have jobs, which again comes with more investment. Generally impoverished people have shit jobs, that's why they are generally impoverished. Also, investment leads to automation and offshoring which actually lowers jobs. >They'd also like to have a higher quality of life, again which comes with more investment in capital/production/real output. If investment in capital/production/real output helps impoverished people, it's very little. It generally helps already wealthy people. You're looking at stuff from a textbook macroeconomic position. In the realistic / microeconomic world, things aren't as you are portraying them.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    1. If you get higher interest rate returns, how do you think that is being paid for if poor people aren't getting higher rates? 2. Unexpectedly lower interest rates increase employer competition in the labor market, raising wages. This is well studied. 3. The quality of life of a poor person in the US is unimaginably better than that of someone ranked relatively the same 100 years ago. That is due to investment. Denying those massive quality life improvements is absurd, although increasingly popular in our out-of-touch political climate.
    - Clubber 5y ago
      >1. If you get higher interest rate returns, how do you think that is being paid for if poor people aren't getting higher rates? Loans to business, home loans, etc. Education loans really weren't a big thing because education used to be subsidized. Also, poor people aren't the only source of ROI on loans. They're quite lucrative though because they seldom are able to pay the principal and are an endless source of interest payments. 2. Unexpectedly lower interest rates increase employer competition in the labor market, raising wages. This is well studied. Yet wages have been largely stagnant for 40 years, how do you account for that? Got links? https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ 3. The quality of life of a poor person in the US is unimaginably better than that of someone ranked relatively the same 100 years ago. I'm interested in how you are measuring this. Got any links? How about the quality of life from someone 40 years ago before neoliberalism? >Denying those massive quality life improvements is absurd Which quality of life improvements are you referring to? Are you being intentionally vague? I mean we can buy cheap plastic crap from China, but that's at the expense of US manufacturing jobs, isn't it? Food certainly isn't cheaper. Healthcare and housing isn't either. So yes, if you believe buying cheap disposable stuff from overseas is a massive quality of life improvement, then ok. Take a stroll down middle America and tell me how good they have it. I know lots of towns with boarded up main streets because all the manufacturing went overseas. That's where the investment went. Again, you're quoting macroeconomic theory when microeconomic conditions on the ground subvert any gains in macroeconomic theory. How does investment drive up wages when labor investment is say 90% overseas or automation?
      - whimsicalism 5y ago
        Not going to keep responding to someone who is skeptical of the claim that life for the average person is better in 2019 than it was in 1919. Our starting points are so off that I don't think we could have a productive conversation. Take care, believe what you want I guess.
        baremetal 5y ago
        people certainly seem to be eating better and less sedentary in 2019. oh wait..

It's certainly good for the shareholders to have more money in the market, I'm not sure about the others. I know I'd much rather have a solid 6-7% interest return than a flaky market return.

whimsicalism 5y ago

> I know I'd much rather have a solid 6-7% interest return than a flaky market return. And college debt holders, mortgage holders, generally impoverished people would rather have lower rates on the debt that they have. They'd also rather have jobs, which again comes with more investment. They'd also like to have a higher quality of life, again which comes with more investment in capital/production/real output.

Clubber 5y ago
>generally impoverished people would rather have lower rates on the debt that they have. Generally impoverished people aren't granted lower rates because of the credit system. They typically pay usury rates. Only people with existing assets / collateral get low rates. >They'd also rather have jobs, which again comes with more investment. Generally impoverished people have shit jobs, that's why they are generally impoverished. Also, investment leads to automation and offshoring which actually lowers jobs. >They'd also like to have a higher quality of life, again which comes with more investment in capital/production/real output. If investment in capital/production/real output helps impoverished people, it's very little. It generally helps already wealthy people. You're looking at stuff from a textbook macroeconomic position. In the realistic / microeconomic world, things aren't as you are portraying them.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  1. If you get higher interest rate returns, how do you think that is being paid for if poor people aren't getting higher rates? 2. Unexpectedly lower interest rates increase employer competition in the labor market, raising wages. This is well studied. 3. The quality of life of a poor person in the US is unimaginably better than that of someone ranked relatively the same 100 years ago. That is due to investment. Denying those massive quality life improvements is absurd, although increasingly popular in our out-of-touch political climate.
  - Clubber 5y ago
    >1. If you get higher interest rate returns, how do you think that is being paid for if poor people aren't getting higher rates? Loans to business, home loans, etc. Education loans really weren't a big thing because education used to be subsidized. Also, poor people aren't the only source of ROI on loans. They're quite lucrative though because they seldom are able to pay the principal and are an endless source of interest payments. 2. Unexpectedly lower interest rates increase employer competition in the labor market, raising wages. This is well studied. Yet wages have been largely stagnant for 40 years, how do you account for that? Got links? https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ 3. The quality of life of a poor person in the US is unimaginably better than that of someone ranked relatively the same 100 years ago. I'm interested in how you are measuring this. Got any links? How about the quality of life from someone 40 years ago before neoliberalism? >Denying those massive quality life improvements is absurd Which quality of life improvements are you referring to? Are you being intentionally vague? I mean we can buy cheap plastic crap from China, but that's at the expense of US manufacturing jobs, isn't it? Food certainly isn't cheaper. Healthcare and housing isn't either. So yes, if you believe buying cheap disposable stuff from overseas is a massive quality of life improvement, then ok. Take a stroll down middle America and tell me how good they have it. I know lots of towns with boarded up main streets because all the manufacturing went overseas. That's where the investment went. Again, you're quoting macroeconomic theory when microeconomic conditions on the ground subvert any gains in macroeconomic theory. How does investment drive up wages when labor investment is say 90% overseas or automation?
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      Not going to keep responding to someone who is skeptical of the claim that life for the average person is better in 2019 than it was in 1919. Our starting points are so off that I don't think we could have a productive conversation. Take care, believe what you want I guess.
      - baremetal 5y ago
        people certainly seem to be eating better and less sedentary in 2019. oh wait..