4 ms·
The difference is that wages have not kept up with inflation nor with productivity and house prices are much higher. And another big problem is that the whole t
by preommr 3y ago
The difference is that wages have not kept up with inflation nor with productivity and house prices are much higher. And another big problem is that the whole thing was poorly managed. People built lives around low interest rates, and people that were responsible got screwed over. I don't see how we suddenly flip that. Expectations were not clearly communicated.
I often feel like a lot of social policy is simple as long as people understand the tradeoffs and everyone is on the same page. Unfortunately that has not been the case.
- drewg123 3y agoI'm hoping the recent trend towards more active, powerful unions that we're starting to see now will reverse the wage trends. The problem is that the very low interest rates we've had over the last decade are just not sustainable long term. At the very least, the Fed needs a quick, easy way to stimulate the economy, and having a minuscule prime rate leaves them without the biggest tool in their toolbox.
- pfannkuchen 3y agoUnions will only be able to increase wages while preserving the company if we remove cheap, low wage foreign competition. I think that has been a root problem for awhile.
- piuantiderp 3y agoThey haven't kept because of the low rates. That has now changed but it might take a decade
- itsoktocry 3y agoWhy would you build your life around low interest rates? Historical rates are a Google away. If you levered up with zero room for rising rates, you were not responsible. What's with all the people complaining about the rates? I'm appreciating earning 5% on my savings. There are two sides to every trade.