3 ms·

At the poorest levels wages are slowest to increase due to inflation, and there aren't cheaper beans and rice to buy at the grocery store. At the mid levels, ma

At the poorest levels wages are slowest to increase due to inflation, and there aren't cheaper beans and rice to buy at the grocery store. At the mid levels, maybe a cost of living raise eats half the current inflation, and switching to cheaper brand items can make up the difference. At the highest levels some may see inflation beating raises, have inflation protected assets, and have disposable income so inflation maybe means not going out to eat as much or not getting a new car.

lotsofpulp 4y ago
> At the poorest levels wages are slowest to increase due to inflation Why would this always have to be true? For example, if the supply of labor sellers at the bottom decreases due to decreasing birthrates, immigration, or people who are no longer employable due to drug addiction. It seems conceivable to me that the lowest paying jobs would have to contend with decreasing supply of labor by increasing the pay. Perhaps the increased pay then causes increased prices for goods/services which then cause sufficient decrease in aggregate demand that demand for the labor then starts decreasing so it pushes wages at the bottom back down , but I do no see why that has to be case.
paulmd 4y ago
> and there aren't cheaper beans and rice to buy at the grocery store I mean, this is a question of policy. The US Federal Government mandates that crops be burned as fuel, which hugely pushes up the price of corn and in turn that pushes up the price of other things that could be grown using that land. We don't explicitly buy up and destroy crops anymore, or pay farmers not to grow them, but the food supply is being deliberately contracted as a matter of federal policy to keep farming profits high. It seems bonkers to say that there's nothing we could do about rising food prices when we're literally paying to (from the perspective of the food supply) destroy food and keep it scarce.
wahnfrieden 4y ago
Extrapolate/compare generationally

lotsofpulp 4y ago

> At the poorest levels wages are slowest to increase due to inflation Why would this always have to be true? For example, if the supply of labor sellers at the bottom decreases due to decreasing birthrates, immigration, or people who are no longer employable due to drug addiction. It seems conceivable to me that the lowest paying jobs would have to contend with decreasing supply of labor by increasing the pay. Perhaps the increased pay then causes increased prices for goods/services which then cause sufficient decrease in aggregate demand that demand for the labor then starts decreasing so it pushes wages at the bottom back down , but I do no see why that has to be case.

paulmd 4y ago

> and there aren't cheaper beans and rice to buy at the grocery store I mean, this is a question of policy. The US Federal Government mandates that crops be burned as fuel, which hugely pushes up the price of corn and in turn that pushes up the price of other things that could be grown using that land. We don't explicitly buy up and destroy crops anymore, or pay farmers not to grow them, but the food supply is being deliberately contracted as a matter of federal policy to keep farming profits high. It seems bonkers to say that there's nothing we could do about rising food prices when we're literally paying to (from the perspective of the food supply) destroy food and keep it scarce.

wahnfrieden 4y ago

Extrapolate/compare generationally