4 ms·

> You know who caused raised the raised interest rates? Oh yeah. That would be the organization that is in charge of deciding what the rates are. Which would

by stale2002 3y ago

> You know who caused raised the raised interest rates? Oh yeah. That would be the organization that is in charge of deciding what the rates are. Which would be the federal reserve. They quite literally decide what the rate is. > "macroeconomic factors" Do you not know how interest rates and borrowing costs work? It's pretty standard econ 101 stuff, about how interest rates effect the economy and effect hiring and firing rates. You can read it in an economics textbook. Here, it is pretty standard stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_curve Its called the Phillips curve.

ath3nd 3y ago
[flagged]
- stale2002 3y ago
  The information is there for you to lookup. The Philips Curve is a well studied topic in mainstream economics. So my only theory is that you haven't studied the topic much. It's ok. Most people don't actually study econ 101. It's not too hard to pick though, and these basic topics are all covered!
  - ath3nd 3y ago
    First of all, the Phillips curve, really? That's a flawed boomer way to correlate inflation and employment percentage. Tell me you are like 3000 years old and out of touch with economy and the world as a whole without telling me. It's not related at all to my argument. My point is the megacorps (especially in the energy sector) are one of the major causes of the current surge of inflation, regardless of borrowing, (un)employment or other macroeconomic factors. Below is some reading for you in an accessible format for your level of comprehension. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/08/excess-profits-of-big-firms-have-driven-up-inflation-report-claims.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/08/excess-profits-of-big-firms-... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/corporate-profits-driving-up-prices-ecb-president-christine-lagarde https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/corporate-p... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/apr/27/inflation-corporate-america-increased-prices-profits https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/apr/27/inflation-c... https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-disproportionately-to-inflation-how-should-policymakers-respond/ https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-... It's okay, you don't have to be well informed yourself if there are well informed people like me who can compile you some material to read in language understandable to you.
    - stale2002 3y ago
      > First of all, the Phillips curve, really? That's a flawed boomer way to correlate inflation and employment Economics 101 always starts from the basics. It is indeed the case that all things about the economy can get more complicated. But, when starting out from the beginning, it is important to learn the baseline foundations before moving on to more complicated special cases. Kind of like how in physics they start you off with frictionless, spherical cows. The same way of learning applies to economics as well. Also, if is important to note how wildly different your statements are from what you were saying at the beginning. If you agree that companies aren't just all deciding together to have layoffs at once, and it is instead a complicated result of interest rates (feel free to say it is the result of the models that come after the Philips Curve!), then I am glad to have moved you on your position.
      - ath3nd 3y ago
        > If you agree that companies aren't just all deciding together to have layoffs at once, and it is instead a complicated result of interest rates (feel free to say it is the result of the models that come after the Philips Curve!), then I am glad to have moved you on your position. The companies did all decide to have their layoffs at the same time frame, it's a fact, because that's what happened. You can claim they all acted in unison, because they all faced the same macroeconomic environment so they were bound to make the same decisions. And I agree, partially. However, what I miss is the admission that the very same companies very much created the very same macroeconomic environment that now "forces them" to do the layoffs. They can't just simply claim it's the invisible hand of the market that makes them do what they do, and they are merely poor passive and unwilling participants. The whole idea of the free market is a funny one. There is no such thing as a "free market", there is already (not enough) a lot of governmental and financial institutions oversight, otherwise it all will collapse in days, just based on greed and speculation. Let me ask: - Who made them overhire? - Who made them overborrow? - Who led them to believe that free money is always going to be there? - Who made them chase potential growth instead of financial soundness? You can claim it's the market which caused all this, and that's partially right, but that kind of claim absolves their "leaders" of the responsibility for their lack of vision and foresight and putting their workers into unemployment, stagnating their wages, and having the ultimate effect of tanking the industry. My claim is that the same way the poor corps were forced by the almighty market to let go of their workers en masse and stagnating their wages, the almighty market's conditions are forcing us, the employees, to band together in unions so we can counteract that. If you replace "market" with "corporate greed", in my statement, it's all the same to me, it's what I meant. You can think that the robotic sameness with which they all played the same layoff playbook is due to it "being the logical thing to do at the time", but all I see is a bunch of stupid, amoral douches without any governmental scrutiny or oversight in search of a payout who wouldn't hesitate to use any opportunity for a buck. And yes, most likely they didn't have a Machiavellian meeting in the dark, behind close doors to discuss how to trod on the working class. The banal truth is probably that once the insane manchild Musk started trashing Twitter, the other ones just followed suit, simply because it benefited them at the time. This is still coordinated action from employers, and the best way to counteract that is government oversight, worker protection laws, and unions.
- brightball 3y ago
  What in the world have you been reading to believe any of this? There were a whole lot of factors involved in the subprime crisis, partially free market and partially government. At it's core, the banks were taking on risky loans. Banks package and sell loans as investment vehicles and in order to get these loans off of their books they mixed the risky loans in with the safer ones to sell them. As they sold and passed ratings approval from the institutions that were supposed to identify these risks for investors, other banks did the same in order to compete effectively because the free market incentivizes competition. When businesses discover a new way to make money, others will adopt and impersonate that technique. That was the free market hand in the housing crisis because these investment vehicles were sold everywhere. But the root cause was the risky loans in the first place. All banks had to do to remain stable was continue loaning money after verifying a high level of confidence that the borrowers could pay it back. But their hand was forced. Similarly, if you look at the cost of higher education today it's entirely due to student loans. Supply of admissions at colleges remained relatively the same but demand was sky high. Normally increasing prices would slow demand, but the unlimited supply of student loan dollars allowed it to continually increase in price year over year. As prices go up, income goes up, compensation and construction increases and other institutions have to do exactly the same things to compete. So they do. But all of that is enabled through the firehose of federal money tampering with the free market. I don't know what you have been reading to believe all that, but this is mathematical in its consistency. Yes, regulations are sometimes needed but 9/10 times when there is a financial issue aligned around skyrocketing costs it is due to government interference. Whether housing, healthcare, education or otherwise it's always the same.
  - ath3nd 3y ago
    > But the root cause was the risky loans in the first place. AKA not enough regulation from the government to the business. > As they sold and passed ratings approval from the institutions that were supposed to identify these risks for investors, other banks did the same in order to compete effectively because the free market incentivizes competition. All I read here is that the government needs to regulate financial institutions more and to put some guardrails on investments. And that the market competition is a race to the bottom where you end up everybody selling garbage to the public in order to cut costs, and then tank the economy. Sounds about right. > Similarly, if you look at the cost of higher education today it's entirely due to student loans. Supply of admissions at colleges remained relatively the same but demand was sky high. Normally increasing prices would slow demand, but the unlimited supply of student loan dollars allowed it to continually increase in price year over year. As prices go up, income goes up, compensation and construction increases and other institutions have to do exactly the same things to compete. So they do. Thought patterns like that is why the US has inaccessible higher education, while the rest of us in the civilized world have pretty affordable one. > I don't know what you have been reading to believe all that, but this is mathematical in its consistency. Yes, regulations are sometimes needed but 9/10 times when there is a financial issue aligned around skyrocketing costs it is due to government interference. Whether housing, healthcare, education or otherwise it's always the same. This is the funniest take I've read in a while! You surely can't be serious. The US has arguably the worst healthcare system in the civilized world, it's the whole premise of shows like Breaking Bad and the butt of many jokes. Don't know what copium you've been smoking, but every time when there is a financial crisis, it's caused by the cowboys in the free market getting greedy, lazy or downright stupid, and it's always the government and the taxpayer that has to bail them.
ath3nd 3y ago
You know what also raises inflation and interest rates? Price gouging. https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1736461510627467533 https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1736461510627467533

ath3nd 3y ago

[flagged]

stale2002 3y ago
The information is there for you to lookup. The Philips Curve is a well studied topic in mainstream economics. So my only theory is that you haven't studied the topic much. It's ok. Most people don't actually study econ 101. It's not too hard to pick though, and these basic topics are all covered!
- ath3nd 3y ago
  First of all, the Phillips curve, really? That's a flawed boomer way to correlate inflation and employment percentage. Tell me you are like 3000 years old and out of touch with economy and the world as a whole without telling me. It's not related at all to my argument. My point is the megacorps (especially in the energy sector) are one of the major causes of the current surge of inflation, regardless of borrowing, (un)employment or other macroeconomic factors. Below is some reading for you in an accessible format for your level of comprehension. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/08/excess-profits-of-big-firms-have-driven-up-inflation-report-claims.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/08/excess-profits-of-big-firms-... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/corporate-profits-driving-up-prices-ecb-president-christine-lagarde https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/27/corporate-p... https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/apr/27/inflation-corporate-america-increased-prices-profits https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/apr/27/inflation-c... https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-disproportionately-to-inflation-how-should-policymakers-respond/ https://www.epi.org/blog/corporate-profits-have-contributed-... It's okay, you don't have to be well informed yourself if there are well informed people like me who can compile you some material to read in language understandable to you.
  - stale2002 3y ago
    > First of all, the Phillips curve, really? That's a flawed boomer way to correlate inflation and employment Economics 101 always starts from the basics. It is indeed the case that all things about the economy can get more complicated. But, when starting out from the beginning, it is important to learn the baseline foundations before moving on to more complicated special cases. Kind of like how in physics they start you off with frictionless, spherical cows. The same way of learning applies to economics as well. Also, if is important to note how wildly different your statements are from what you were saying at the beginning. If you agree that companies aren't just all deciding together to have layoffs at once, and it is instead a complicated result of interest rates (feel free to say it is the result of the models that come after the Philips Curve!), then I am glad to have moved you on your position.
    - ath3nd 3y ago
      > If you agree that companies aren't just all deciding together to have layoffs at once, and it is instead a complicated result of interest rates (feel free to say it is the result of the models that come after the Philips Curve!), then I am glad to have moved you on your position. The companies did all decide to have their layoffs at the same time frame, it's a fact, because that's what happened. You can claim they all acted in unison, because they all faced the same macroeconomic environment so they were bound to make the same decisions. And I agree, partially. However, what I miss is the admission that the very same companies very much created the very same macroeconomic environment that now "forces them" to do the layoffs. They can't just simply claim it's the invisible hand of the market that makes them do what they do, and they are merely poor passive and unwilling participants. The whole idea of the free market is a funny one. There is no such thing as a "free market", there is already (not enough) a lot of governmental and financial institutions oversight, otherwise it all will collapse in days, just based on greed and speculation. Let me ask: - Who made them overhire? - Who made them overborrow? - Who led them to believe that free money is always going to be there? - Who made them chase potential growth instead of financial soundness? You can claim it's the market which caused all this, and that's partially right, but that kind of claim absolves their "leaders" of the responsibility for their lack of vision and foresight and putting their workers into unemployment, stagnating their wages, and having the ultimate effect of tanking the industry. My claim is that the same way the poor corps were forced by the almighty market to let go of their workers en masse and stagnating their wages, the almighty market's conditions are forcing us, the employees, to band together in unions so we can counteract that. If you replace "market" with "corporate greed", in my statement, it's all the same to me, it's what I meant. You can think that the robotic sameness with which they all played the same layoff playbook is due to it "being the logical thing to do at the time", but all I see is a bunch of stupid, amoral douches without any governmental scrutiny or oversight in search of a payout who wouldn't hesitate to use any opportunity for a buck. And yes, most likely they didn't have a Machiavellian meeting in the dark, behind close doors to discuss how to trod on the working class. The banal truth is probably that once the insane manchild Musk started trashing Twitter, the other ones just followed suit, simply because it benefited them at the time. This is still coordinated action from employers, and the best way to counteract that is government oversight, worker protection laws, and unions.
brightball 3y ago
What in the world have you been reading to believe any of this? There were a whole lot of factors involved in the subprime crisis, partially free market and partially government. At it's core, the banks were taking on risky loans. Banks package and sell loans as investment vehicles and in order to get these loans off of their books they mixed the risky loans in with the safer ones to sell them. As they sold and passed ratings approval from the institutions that were supposed to identify these risks for investors, other banks did the same in order to compete effectively because the free market incentivizes competition. When businesses discover a new way to make money, others will adopt and impersonate that technique. That was the free market hand in the housing crisis because these investment vehicles were sold everywhere. But the root cause was the risky loans in the first place. All banks had to do to remain stable was continue loaning money after verifying a high level of confidence that the borrowers could pay it back. But their hand was forced. Similarly, if you look at the cost of higher education today it's entirely due to student loans. Supply of admissions at colleges remained relatively the same but demand was sky high. Normally increasing prices would slow demand, but the unlimited supply of student loan dollars allowed it to continually increase in price year over year. As prices go up, income goes up, compensation and construction increases and other institutions have to do exactly the same things to compete. So they do. But all of that is enabled through the firehose of federal money tampering with the free market. I don't know what you have been reading to believe all that, but this is mathematical in its consistency. Yes, regulations are sometimes needed but 9/10 times when there is a financial issue aligned around skyrocketing costs it is due to government interference. Whether housing, healthcare, education or otherwise it's always the same.
- ath3nd 3y ago
  > But the root cause was the risky loans in the first place. AKA not enough regulation from the government to the business. > As they sold and passed ratings approval from the institutions that were supposed to identify these risks for investors, other banks did the same in order to compete effectively because the free market incentivizes competition. All I read here is that the government needs to regulate financial institutions more and to put some guardrails on investments. And that the market competition is a race to the bottom where you end up everybody selling garbage to the public in order to cut costs, and then tank the economy. Sounds about right. > Similarly, if you look at the cost of higher education today it's entirely due to student loans. Supply of admissions at colleges remained relatively the same but demand was sky high. Normally increasing prices would slow demand, but the unlimited supply of student loan dollars allowed it to continually increase in price year over year. As prices go up, income goes up, compensation and construction increases and other institutions have to do exactly the same things to compete. So they do. Thought patterns like that is why the US has inaccessible higher education, while the rest of us in the civilized world have pretty affordable one. > I don't know what you have been reading to believe all that, but this is mathematical in its consistency. Yes, regulations are sometimes needed but 9/10 times when there is a financial issue aligned around skyrocketing costs it is due to government interference. Whether housing, healthcare, education or otherwise it's always the same. This is the funniest take I've read in a while! You surely can't be serious. The US has arguably the worst healthcare system in the civilized world, it's the whole premise of shows like Breaking Bad and the butt of many jokes. Don't know what copium you've been smoking, but every time when there is a financial crisis, it's caused by the cowboys in the free market getting greedy, lazy or downright stupid, and it's always the government and the taxpayer that has to bail them.

ath3nd 3y ago

You know what also raises inflation and interest rates? Price gouging. https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1736461510627467533 https://twitter.com/RBReich/status/1736461510627467533