4 ms·

Decent living standards (affordable quality housing/health/edu/transport/energy) + reduced inequality between the top and the bottom should not be hard to achie

by qp11 3y ago

Decent living standards (affordable quality housing/health/edu/transport/energy) + reduced inequality between the top and the bottom should not be hard to achieve if its declared as an actual Goal. Technology causes Price of Goods and Services to fall. Not rise. Yet the Fed says its inflation target is 2% which means Prices are always supposed to grow no matter what innovation happens or its speed. This makes no sense. If living standards rise and debt levels drop due to increasing efficiencies and productivity then we should allow Prices to fall. Wont that take care of inequality and living standards?

realusername 3y ago
I think you are mixing up inflation and purchasing power, those two metrics aren't related and can go opposite ways.
Paul-Craft 3y ago
You know, the whole idea of a "cost of living" is actually pretty damn absurd. I can live on about $40k post-tax, even in the Bay Area, paying $2k/month rent. That's pretty much the most basic version of life I can live that includes being able to sleep inside a home with water, heat, and electricity, while also being able to take care of my dog and go to the park with her a few days a week. But, if, somehow, I can't come up with $40k, I don't get to live even that basic life. That's cold, hard capitalism for ya. And even in California, there aren't even social programs available that can simultaneously keep someone from starving while also living indoors. Oh, and the "cost of living" goes up all the time. Now, I'm not saying I want to be a layabout and just not work, drink Mountain Dew, and eat Cheetos or something. People, including myself, actually love work, if it's work that has meaning to them. Being productive is something people are hardwired to love. What they don't like is being told what being productive is, and they especially don't like toiling away forever while watching other people get the vast majority of the benefit from them doing so. The worst part about all this is that the rules of economics are just fucking made up, and we could literally change them at any time. Whether you think it was a good idea or not, we actually did that in 2020, when governments worldwide shut down things like bars, restaurants, gyms, travel, &c. We did that! For better or for worse, we did that! The fact that we all, collectively, could do a thing like that means that we can do other things that are just as big and seem just as impossible. What we need is a reason. And that reason is (or, rather, ought to be) that we now have an economy that simply does not work for most people. Last I checked, around 2/3 of Americans were living paycheck to paycheck. Now, sure, that counts people who are just bad with money. There will always be people like that. Improving financial literacy is definitely something that needs to be done. But, for the most part, what that 2/3 statistic is saying is that we have an economy that normal people can't function in, if by "function," you mean "get through day to day life, while also being able to save back some resources for the future." The way to fix all this is that we need to realign the economy. We have to make sure that the people who make the economy work (i.e. workers) gain most, or at least more of the benefits of doing so. I realize that's a pretty broad statement, and that a lot of this that I've written here sounds like a left wing populist stump speech, but I'm not running for office. I'm just a simple software engineer; I'm not rich enough to be able to drop everything and run a political campaign instead of working as a cog in the machine.[1] What I'm saying is that we need to make sure people can afford to live. The median male worker now has to work 53 weeks to afford a year's worth of expenditures on housing, health insurance, transportation, and education.[2] The same source shows that the average female worker needs to work 66 weeks to afford those expenditures. As they so drolly quote the author of the study these figures come from, "This is a problem, as there are only 52 weeks in a year." We also need to realign how work works. People, especially younger people, have gotten so alienated from the whole concept of work that there's a subreddit with hundreds of thousands of subscribers called "anti-work" that's all about this. And we definitely have to realize as a society and as a species that money is basically made up bullshit. The thing that needs to matter is people, not money. I'm going to cut this off here, because it's already starting to look like I've written the first page of my manifesto lol.... But, I hope you get the idea. The economy doesn't work. We can change that. We should change that. That's it for now, at least until the inevitable grilling y'all are gonna give me about exactly how I expect us to actually accomplish that. --- [1]: That's another problem, but I'm going to leave that one alone for now. [2]: https://www.businessinsider.com/america-middle-class-living-expenses-family-of-four-2020-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/america-middle-class-living-...
amanaplanacanal 3y ago
The fear is that falling prices will contract the economy, because people will not spend today if they are going to be cheaper tomorrow. I don’t have any sense as to whether this fear is reasonable or not.
- qp11 3y ago
  It is probably a fear, if ever expanding economies are defined as the Goal. But that goal doesn't make any sense since Technology shrinks activity. I think we have to work on testing out different goals beyond GDP and CPI targets. They seem outdated.
  - mildchalupa 3y ago
    Collective alignment of citizens with Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
    - Paul-Craft 3y ago
      Holy hell, this guy gets it! I regret that I have but one upvote to give you, @mildchalupa. It's really frustrating to wade through this sea of comments that includes a guy who is saying unironically that living in a tent while starting a business is a viable option for most people, and a whole bunch of other people who just don't seem to get the idea that the economy is literally people, and if it doesn't work for people, it doesn't work, period.
xkekjrktllss 3y ago
Technology also causes the rate of profit to fall. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendency_of_the_rate_of_profit_to_fall https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendency_of_the_rate_of_prof...
tdb7893 3y ago
I think you're too focused on dollar amounts because the value of a dollar is in some ways arbitrary (hence why they can have an inflation target and have that make sense). You can have things practically get cheaper even with inflation. For example, if wages rose 10% in a year but prices rose 2% then in a practical sense things are much cheaper despite having 2% inflation.
- johnnyworker 3y ago
  https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ Productivity keeps rising, wages don't (to the same degree). Slice it how you want, that's the bottom line, and the reason is exploitation by people who are addicted to adding another zero to a number where the last few zeroes already made no difference, because the issue is in their head, not their bank account.
  - supermatt 3y ago
    WTF happened? NASDAQ maybe...
  - RiDiracTid 3y ago
    It was 1973, and it was the oil shock: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
    - xkekjrktllss 3y ago
      [dead]
  - freejazz 3y ago
    > Productivity keeps rising Not according to the fed...
  - red-iron-pine 3y ago
    so what did happen in 1971?
- 3y ago
mildchalupa 3y ago
Deflation also increases the value of debt, so loans become harder to pay back. For those lucky enough to get a low interest rate loan a high inflation rate eats away at the value of the debt. If we look at maxima and minima, Infinite deflation would make the value of debt infinitely high. Infinate inflation would drive the value of debt to 0
- qp11 3y ago
  I was thinking about that, sort of why I said - > If living standards rise and DEBT levels DROP due to increasing efficiencies and productivity then we should allow Prices to fall. I think with better goals we can get more comfortable with falling prices.
CapstanRoller 3y ago
>If living standards rise and debt levels drop due to increasing efficiencies and productivity then we should allow Prices to fall. Wont that take care of inequality and living standards? Sounds like a bunch of commie talk. The Almighty Mar-Ket demands perpetually increasing profits and growth, lest we all perish from its fearsome wrath.
- ycdxvjp 3y ago
  Well Google managed to drop prices of email, chat, video, search etc to 0. Tech is capable of pushing prices down without debt piling up. But ofcourse as soon as they tried to get into stuff like Telcom or Retail or Auto they flubbed. If a tech company manages to succeed in brick and motor space or banking we might end up with something we haven't seen before.
  - pmarreck 3y ago
    not sure if you meant "brick and mortar" (that's the traditional expression; I know there are a lot of non-English-native speakers here so it's OK!) but if you meant "brick and motor" as a joke, then Tesla seems to be doing the latter pretty well...

by qp11 3y ago

realusername 3y ago

I think you are mixing up inflation and purchasing power, those two metrics aren't related and can go opposite ways.

Paul-Craft 3y ago

You know, the whole idea of a "cost of living" is actually pretty damn absurd. I can live on about $40k post-tax, even in the Bay Area, paying $2k/month rent. That's pretty much the most basic version of life I can live that includes being able to sleep inside a home with water, heat, and electricity, while also being able to take care of my dog and go to the park with her a few days a week. But, if, somehow, I can't come up with $40k, I don't get to live even that basic life. That's cold, hard capitalism for ya. And even in California, there aren't even social programs available that can simultaneously keep someone from starving while also living indoors. Oh, and the "cost of living" goes up all the time. Now, I'm not saying I want to be a layabout and just not work, drink Mountain Dew, and eat Cheetos or something. People, including myself, actually love work, if it's work that has meaning to them. Being productive is something people are hardwired to love. What they don't like is being told what being productive is, and they especially don't like toiling away forever while watching other people get the vast majority of the benefit from them doing so. The worst part about all this is that the rules of economics are just fucking made up, and we could literally change them at any time. Whether you think it was a good idea or not, we actually did that in 2020, when governments worldwide shut down things like bars, restaurants, gyms, travel, &c. We did that! For better or for worse, we did that! The fact that we all, collectively, could do a thing like that means that we can do other things that are just as big and seem just as impossible. What we need is a reason. And that reason is (or, rather, ought to be) that we now have an economy that simply does not work for most people. Last I checked, around 2/3 of Americans were living paycheck to paycheck. Now, sure, that counts people who are just bad with money. There will always be people like that. Improving financial literacy is definitely something that needs to be done. But, for the most part, what that 2/3 statistic is saying is that we have an economy that normal people can't function in, if by "function," you mean "get through day to day life, while also being able to save back some resources for the future." The way to fix all this is that we need to realign the economy. We have to make sure that the people who make the economy work (i.e. workers) gain most, or at least more of the benefits of doing so. I realize that's a pretty broad statement, and that a lot of this that I've written here sounds like a left wing populist stump speech, but I'm not running for office. I'm just a simple software engineer; I'm not rich enough to be able to drop everything and run a political campaign instead of working as a cog in the machine.[1] What I'm saying is that we need to make sure people can afford to live. The median male worker now has to work 53 weeks to afford a year's worth of expenditures on housing, health insurance, transportation, and education.[2] The same source shows that the average female worker needs to work 66 weeks to afford those expenditures. As they so drolly quote the author of the study these figures come from, "This is a problem, as there are only 52 weeks in a year." We also need to realign how work works. People, especially younger people, have gotten so alienated from the whole concept of work that there's a subreddit with hundreds of thousands of subscribers called "anti-work" that's all about this. And we definitely have to realize as a society and as a species that money is basically made up bullshit. The thing that needs to matter is people, not money. I'm going to cut this off here, because it's already starting to look like I've written the first page of my manifesto lol.... But, I hope you get the idea. The economy doesn't work. We can change that. We should change that. That's it for now, at least until the inevitable grilling y'all are gonna give me about exactly how I expect us to actually accomplish that. --- [1]: That's another problem, but I'm going to leave that one alone for now. [2]: https://www.businessinsider.com/america-middle-class-living-expenses-family-of-four-2020-2 https://www.businessinsider.com/america-middle-class-living-...

amanaplanacanal 3y ago

The fear is that falling prices will contract the economy, because people will not spend today if they are going to be cheaper tomorrow. I don’t have any sense as to whether this fear is reasonable or not.

qp11 3y ago
It is probably a fear, if ever expanding economies are defined as the Goal. But that goal doesn't make any sense since Technology shrinks activity. I think we have to work on testing out different goals beyond GDP and CPI targets. They seem outdated.
- mildchalupa 3y ago
  Collective alignment of citizens with Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
  - Paul-Craft 3y ago
    Holy hell, this guy gets it! I regret that I have but one upvote to give you, @mildchalupa. It's really frustrating to wade through this sea of comments that includes a guy who is saying unironically that living in a tent while starting a business is a viable option for most people, and a whole bunch of other people who just don't seem to get the idea that the economy is literally people, and if it doesn't work for people, it doesn't work, period.

xkekjrktllss 3y ago

Technology also causes the rate of profit to fall. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendency_of_the_rate_of_profit_to_fall https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendency_of_the_rate_of_prof...

tdb7893 3y ago

I think you're too focused on dollar amounts because the value of a dollar is in some ways arbitrary (hence why they can have an inflation target and have that make sense). You can have things practically get cheaper even with inflation. For example, if wages rose 10% in a year but prices rose 2% then in a practical sense things are much cheaper despite having 2% inflation.

johnnyworker 3y ago
https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ Productivity keeps rising, wages don't (to the same degree). Slice it how you want, that's the bottom line, and the reason is exploitation by people who are addicted to adding another zero to a number where the last few zeroes already made no difference, because the issue is in their head, not their bank account.
- supermatt 3y ago
  WTF happened? NASDAQ maybe...
- RiDiracTid 3y ago
  It was 1973, and it was the oil shock: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
  - xkekjrktllss 3y ago
    [dead]
- freejazz 3y ago
  > Productivity keeps rising Not according to the fed...
- red-iron-pine 3y ago
  so what did happen in 1971?
3y ago

mildchalupa 3y ago

Deflation also increases the value of debt, so loans become harder to pay back. For those lucky enough to get a low interest rate loan a high inflation rate eats away at the value of the debt. If we look at maxima and minima, Infinite deflation would make the value of debt infinitely high. Infinate inflation would drive the value of debt to 0

qp11 3y ago
I was thinking about that, sort of why I said - > If living standards rise and DEBT levels DROP due to increasing efficiencies and productivity then we should allow Prices to fall. I think with better goals we can get more comfortable with falling prices.

CapstanRoller 3y ago

>If living standards rise and debt levels drop due to increasing efficiencies and productivity then we should allow Prices to fall. Wont that take care of inequality and living standards? Sounds like a bunch of commie talk. The Almighty Mar-Ket demands perpetually increasing profits and growth, lest we all perish from its fearsome wrath.

ycdxvjp 3y ago
Well Google managed to drop prices of email, chat, video, search etc to 0. Tech is capable of pushing prices down without debt piling up. But ofcourse as soon as they tried to get into stuff like Telcom or Retail or Auto they flubbed. If a tech company manages to succeed in brick and motor space or banking we might end up with something we haven't seen before.
- pmarreck 3y ago
  not sure if you meant "brick and mortar" (that's the traditional expression; I know there are a lot of non-English-native speakers here so it's OK!) but if you meant "brick and motor" as a joke, then Tesla seems to be doing the latter pretty well...