5 ms·

I was looking at used cars on Carmax about two or three weeks ago. I looked again today. They're another $1-2k. This is the shareholder/political class trying

I was looking at used cars on Carmax about two or three weeks ago. I looked again today. They're another $1-2k. This is the shareholder/political class trying to eat their cake and have it too. Pay people a stagnant wage for 40 years while taking most of the surplus value and dedicating it to equities, then pretend to do something about it, but in a way that passes the buck to the people who have been making a stagnant wage so that the wealthy don't incur actual losses. Share prices will be brought back up through layoffs.

gU9x3u8XmQNG 2y ago
100% agree with this perspective. It’s surprising how few others seem to note this. Thanks for posting it.
- anon291 2y ago
  And what is the solution?
  - noisy_boy 2y ago
    Repeal citizens united, curb campaign and lobbying spending, breaking down of these chaebol-like conglomerates, make healthcare public and tax the rich massively. Something no body seems to want.
    - oblio 2y ago
      Switch to a better voting system to destroy the 2 party system and curb extremists getting into power. At least the state compact voting change to modernize the electoral college.
  - gU9x3u8XmQNG 2y ago
    I’m definitely not qualified to answer this. I would like to say, from my perspective, that it seems to not matter how “good”, even “exceptional”, business listed on the stock market do; the outcome is hostile and negative to the customer/consumer. Costs have only gone up, dramatically so. In my case; entirely disproportionate to, if any, income increase coming in. Market does good. Market does exceptional. The experience has generally been negative? Market does bad? I expect a lot of us can connect the dots, and will no doubt be impacted again. Maybe the market, in my perspective; is not a beneficial experience.
- JackYoustra 2y ago
  Why would shareholders want to tank the value of their shares?
  - tjbiddle 2y ago
    Buy the dip?
    - otterley 2y ago
      Most wealthy people’s wealth is in investments. If the value of the investments goes down, there are fewer resources to “buy the dip.” It doesn’t hold water as a theory. Basically robbing Peter to pay Paul.
      - lenerdenator 2y ago
        They have people whose jobs it is to even out those troughs, and I don't think you realize just how wealthy the wealthiest wealthy really are. Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and Larry Ellison each have a net worth that is on par with the total gross economic output of a small American metropolitan area.
        tasuki 2y ago
        > Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and Larry Ellison each have a net worth that is on par with the total gross economic output of a small American metropolitan area. You're comparing apples to oranges. Net worth is in dollars, while economic output is dollars per unit of time. The comparison does not make sense. You didn't even say which unit of time! Hell, I have a higher net worth than the total economic output of the US, given a short enough time frame.
        joquarky 2y ago
        This level of pedantry won't play in reality against someone who just lost everything and is seeking revenge on the tech bros who they perceive as enabling all of this.
VirusNewbie 2y ago
Are you claiming that the 'shareholder class' would rather depress the economy and wipe out trillions in shareholder value...over inflating the economy and lowering interest rates?
- bitmasher9 2y ago
  Agreed. It’s very rare to get a group of shareholders to agree that the price of their stock should go down.
- SJMG 2y ago
  That is what I believe I also just read... I was just telling my girlfriend that Hackernews is the smarter, tech oriented reddit. Better go fix that.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  Not "the shareholder class" but the actual super wealthy, those few thousand individuals at the top. A way I have recently seen this put is that if you have a billion dollars another billion doesn't do that much for you in real terms. But if you're a billionaire who likes to sexually harass your child's nanny, you would much prefer she be desperate and precarious rather than economically secure or with a lot of other viable options. This is one crude example but the dynamic is in play in many other situations. So idk, it's plausible to me that the class interests of the wealthy extend beyond mere wealth accumulation. I can imagine circumstances where they would be willing to give up some of their absolute wealth in exchange for greater relative wealth.
  - VirusNewbie 2y ago
    Ok, I buy the premise that maybe the top 1000 people are super evil mr. burns type folks. I even buy the fact that they would be giving up absolute wealth for greater relative wealth. But you know the easiest way to do that. Inflation. Expanding the money supply. Increasing the value of their assets at the expense of the working class. not tanking the value of the companies they own!
- clipsy 2y ago
JackYoustra 2y ago
...or they could've just laid off and gotten even more. maybe, just maybe, trump and the people around him are actually just crazy and there's no big conspiracy.
- zip1234 2y ago
  It's the simplest explanation and also the one with the most evidence
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  I don't think of it as the classic conspiracy in the sense of a La Cosa Nostra meeting in Apalachin. It's more like a shared set of ideas, and those ideas are crazy, at least if you don't have a net worth that is enough to ride out all but the most historic of social upheavals. And part of avoiding that most historic of social upheavals is not laying off people for the sole profit of it, at least not without a good excuse.
ants_everywhere 2y ago
> while taking most of the surplus value Just FYI, "surplus value" refers a concept Marx made up that is considered in mainstream economics to be an error in reasoning. Even making sense of it requires buying into the labor theory of value that Marx took from Adams and Ricardo, but which is not taken seriously anymore. That doesn't detract from the substance of the point you're making. But it's a little like reading someone say their house is hot because of all the phlogiston. It detracts from the force of the argument.
- dcre 2y ago
  You haven’t said anything.
  - ants_everywhere 2y ago
    Surely this retort sounded cooler in your head? But also, literally I said a lot. There's enough meat there for someone who hasn't spent much time in the history of economics to spend an entire afternoon going down an enjoyable rabbit hole.
    - polotics 2y ago
      that connection between surplus value and the labour theory of value is fully unexplained in your post, so... you have not said nothing, but you haven't said enough to make your post consequential I'm afraid
JeremyNT 2y ago
It amazes me the contortions some people go through to maintain the belief that this administration is competent. Occam's razor suggests that they just have no idea what they're doing.
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  These people all have a shared idea of what they're doing, and since they sit in financially-backed echo chambers, those ideas eventually turn so absurd that they appear to have no idea of what they're doing.
- nitwit005 2y ago
  I'm fairly convinced it's easier feel like there is some plan, even if a bad or sinister one, than things being in a state of genuine chaos. You occasionally see the people jumping between different ideas as to what the underlying plan is, once events no longer support their initial idea.
  - thethimble 2y ago
    The plan is crystal clear: 1. When equities crash, market liquidity floods the bond market causing yields to drop 2. Refinance debt at these lower rates massively reducing interest burden 3. Cut government spending to cause rates to drop further 4. Reduced rates with a balanced budget results in non-inflationary borrowing and an economic upswing Along the way, eliminate taxes for those earning below $150k. If all of the above happens at the expense of equity holders so be it. This plan has been made clear by multiple people from within the administration (namely Bessent who is one of the greatest macro investors of all time). Now there’s many things to criticize in this plan (and lots of risk and unknown possible second order effects), but to describe it as “genuine chaos” or ineptitude is strange.
    - piva00 2y ago
      It's not that crystal clear when the ideas from Stephan Miran to reshape the world order by turning allies into vassals is also part of the plan. There's a plan, it's to reshape the global trade à la Bretton-Woods, and the Plaza Accords. The rest is just noise and plausible deniability for people to gobble up and accept to have been shoved into a New World Order.

gU9x3u8XmQNG 2y ago

100% agree with this perspective. It’s surprising how few others seem to note this. Thanks for posting it.

anon291 2y ago
And what is the solution?
- noisy_boy 2y ago
  Repeal citizens united, curb campaign and lobbying spending, breaking down of these chaebol-like conglomerates, make healthcare public and tax the rich massively. Something no body seems to want.
  - oblio 2y ago
    Switch to a better voting system to destroy the 2 party system and curb extremists getting into power. At least the state compact voting change to modernize the electoral college.
- gU9x3u8XmQNG 2y ago
  I’m definitely not qualified to answer this. I would like to say, from my perspective, that it seems to not matter how “good”, even “exceptional”, business listed on the stock market do; the outcome is hostile and negative to the customer/consumer. Costs have only gone up, dramatically so. In my case; entirely disproportionate to, if any, income increase coming in. Market does good. Market does exceptional. The experience has generally been negative? Market does bad? I expect a lot of us can connect the dots, and will no doubt be impacted again. Maybe the market, in my perspective; is not a beneficial experience.
JackYoustra 2y ago
Why would shareholders want to tank the value of their shares?
- tjbiddle 2y ago
  Buy the dip?
  - otterley 2y ago
    Most wealthy people’s wealth is in investments. If the value of the investments goes down, there are fewer resources to “buy the dip.” It doesn’t hold water as a theory. Basically robbing Peter to pay Paul.
    - lenerdenator 2y ago
      They have people whose jobs it is to even out those troughs, and I don't think you realize just how wealthy the wealthiest wealthy really are. Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and Larry Ellison each have a net worth that is on par with the total gross economic output of a small American metropolitan area.
      - tasuki 2y ago
        > Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and Larry Ellison each have a net worth that is on par with the total gross economic output of a small American metropolitan area. You're comparing apples to oranges. Net worth is in dollars, while economic output is dollars per unit of time. The comparison does not make sense. You didn't even say which unit of time! Hell, I have a higher net worth than the total economic output of the US, given a short enough time frame.
        joquarky 2y ago
        This level of pedantry won't play in reality against someone who just lost everything and is seeking revenge on the tech bros who they perceive as enabling all of this.

VirusNewbie 2y ago

Are you claiming that the 'shareholder class' would rather depress the economy and wipe out trillions in shareholder value...over inflating the economy and lowering interest rates?

bitmasher9 2y ago
Agreed. It’s very rare to get a group of shareholders to agree that the price of their stock should go down.
SJMG 2y ago
That is what I believe I also just read... I was just telling my girlfriend that Hackernews is the smarter, tech oriented reddit. Better go fix that.
giraffe_lady 2y ago
Not "the shareholder class" but the actual super wealthy, those few thousand individuals at the top. A way I have recently seen this put is that if you have a billion dollars another billion doesn't do that much for you in real terms. But if you're a billionaire who likes to sexually harass your child's nanny, you would much prefer she be desperate and precarious rather than economically secure or with a lot of other viable options. This is one crude example but the dynamic is in play in many other situations. So idk, it's plausible to me that the class interests of the wealthy extend beyond mere wealth accumulation. I can imagine circumstances where they would be willing to give up some of their absolute wealth in exchange for greater relative wealth.
- VirusNewbie 2y ago
  Ok, I buy the premise that maybe the top 1000 people are super evil mr. burns type folks. I even buy the fact that they would be giving up absolute wealth for greater relative wealth. But you know the easiest way to do that. Inflation. Expanding the money supply. Increasing the value of their assets at the expense of the working class. not tanking the value of the companies they own!
clipsy 2y ago

JackYoustra 2y ago

...or they could've just laid off and gotten even more. maybe, just maybe, trump and the people around him are actually just crazy and there's no big conspiracy.

zip1234 2y ago
It's the simplest explanation and also the one with the most evidence
lenerdenator 2y ago
I don't think of it as the classic conspiracy in the sense of a La Cosa Nostra meeting in Apalachin. It's more like a shared set of ideas, and those ideas are crazy, at least if you don't have a net worth that is enough to ride out all but the most historic of social upheavals. And part of avoiding that most historic of social upheavals is not laying off people for the sole profit of it, at least not without a good excuse.

ants_everywhere 2y ago

> while taking most of the surplus value Just FYI, "surplus value" refers a concept Marx made up that is considered in mainstream economics to be an error in reasoning. Even making sense of it requires buying into the labor theory of value that Marx took from Adams and Ricardo, but which is not taken seriously anymore. That doesn't detract from the substance of the point you're making. But it's a little like reading someone say their house is hot because of all the phlogiston. It detracts from the force of the argument.

dcre 2y ago
You haven’t said anything.
- ants_everywhere 2y ago
  Surely this retort sounded cooler in your head? But also, literally I said a lot. There's enough meat there for someone who hasn't spent much time in the history of economics to spend an entire afternoon going down an enjoyable rabbit hole.
  - polotics 2y ago
    that connection between surplus value and the labour theory of value is fully unexplained in your post, so... you have not said nothing, but you haven't said enough to make your post consequential I'm afraid

JeremyNT 2y ago

It amazes me the contortions some people go through to maintain the belief that this administration is competent. Occam's razor suggests that they just have no idea what they're doing.

lenerdenator 2y ago
These people all have a shared idea of what they're doing, and since they sit in financially-backed echo chambers, those ideas eventually turn so absurd that they appear to have no idea of what they're doing.
nitwit005 2y ago
I'm fairly convinced it's easier feel like there is some plan, even if a bad or sinister one, than things being in a state of genuine chaos. You occasionally see the people jumping between different ideas as to what the underlying plan is, once events no longer support their initial idea.
- thethimble 2y ago
  The plan is crystal clear: 1. When equities crash, market liquidity floods the bond market causing yields to drop 2. Refinance debt at these lower rates massively reducing interest burden 3. Cut government spending to cause rates to drop further 4. Reduced rates with a balanced budget results in non-inflationary borrowing and an economic upswing Along the way, eliminate taxes for those earning below $150k. If all of the above happens at the expense of equity holders so be it. This plan has been made clear by multiple people from within the administration (namely Bessent who is one of the greatest macro investors of all time). Now there’s many things to criticize in this plan (and lots of risk and unknown possible second order effects), but to describe it as “genuine chaos” or ineptitude is strange.
  - piva00 2y ago
    It's not that crystal clear when the ideas from Stephan Miran to reshape the world order by turning allies into vassals is also part of the plan. There's a plan, it's to reshape the global trade à la Bretton-Woods, and the Plaza Accords. The rest is just noise and plausible deniability for people to gobble up and accept to have been shoved into a New World Order.