Guess who bought up real estate post-2009 crisis, when prices were at rock bottom? Wealthy individuals and corporations that had enough assets to withstand the storm and capitalize on a down market. Guess who will grab more market share post-COVID? Better yet, guess who wasn't affected by forced lockdowns and benefited during the worst of COVID? I find it very distressing that this massive transfer of wealth from sma…
That is essentially the ugly nature of recessions period. Those who buy it up for fire sale prices get the assets and the worst part is stopping it without funding the losers would only make it /worse/ for them. The only good I can see from restrictions there is barring profit from those who promote or cause recessions which is a very tall order to prove much less how to make illegal without ironically larger collate…
Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
51–60 of 89 posts
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#52Guess who bought up real estate post-2009 crisis, when prices were at rock bottom? Wealthy individuals and corporations that had enough assets to withstand the storm and capitalize on a down market. Guess who will grab more market share post-COVID? Better yet, guess who wasn't affected by forced lockdowns and benefited during the worst of COVID? I find it very distressing that this massive transfer of wealth from sma…
I share the distress. Covid has accelerated the inequality that was already at record levels. For many in tech and other white colar work Covid is either a non-event or a net benefit, while for many others its life ruining. We better start preparing for a future where many, maybe most, people have no economic value.
this also manifests in evolution where all but a finitely many mutants survive a catastrophic change in the environment and the rest perish.
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#53In the Bay Area, a lot of stores are closing down, not 50% but probably around 30%-50% range depending on which part. Places with less traffic are getting hit harder (obv). The thing that you have to understand is that the smbs were competing with other local smbs. So your favorite local coffeeshop only had 4 other competitors (not in SF lol). Ppl who used to type in "yoga classes near me" will be typing in "yoga cla…
Some local shops around my place have done great online reaches: some food shops did online order/pickup, some drinks (bottles) did online order/delivery, ... Most have reinforced their followers on social networks. There are some reasons to be optimistic for those who make the move!
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I share the distress. Covid has accelerated the inequality that was already at record levels. For many in tech and other white colar work Covid is either a non-event or a net benefit, while for many others its life ruining. We better start preparing for a future where many, maybe most, people have no economic value.
Inequality is an increasing function of population size, so it probably went down some due to COVID. the reason is that for many things there is only value in being the best or within the top finite number in the population. Being top x percent isn’t good enough, even 0.1% with sufficiently large populations. For example: spectator sports, politics, movie stars, the first to discover relativity, semiconductors... and…
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#55https://www.xero.com/small-business-insights/
Again, it’s likely to undercount low / no-tech businesses and over count those that were already looking towards technology as a differentiator (having decided to move their accounting to the cloud)
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The parasitic elite have been destroying the core of this country for almost half a century Yet over that half a century the standard of living in the US has vastly increased, so much that the US poverty line is in the top quintile of world incomes. US Median household wealth adjusted for household size changes and inflation has increased 50%. That's a massive increase [1]. The middle class has shrunk; because more…
I'm not sure how this demonstrates your point. The rich get richer. US households have changed dramatically since 1967. There's participation of women in the workforce (up about 20% https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2002/05/art2full.pdf ), housing prices have gone up about (~800% https://dqydj.com/historical-home-prices/ ) - home ownership being the hallmark of the middle class, and the wages of the middle class have incr…
People claim this a lot, but for a half dozen datasets I've looked at over the years, the opposite is true.
To prove this claim, make some definition of rich (income, wealth, top N, whatever), and see how many people in that class stay there. You'll find that most rich do not stay in the level of wealth you picked very long.
A simple place to check is Forbes 400. The top 400 churns a lot. The next place is places like FRED data on mobility, where it's clear over the span of 10 years most of those in the top decile are no longer there, and those in the bottom are no longer there.
Another place to look is how many millionaires in the US are first generation - last I checked it;s about 90% of them.
So, for what reasonable metric of wealth can you demonstrate those people in that group stay there for a decade, or a generation? My experience is that your claim is made by people that believe it but have never measured it. Over the years I've ran across a few datasets for which it can be properly evaluated, and in each case, and for each definition of rich that could be answered by the datatset, the same pattern emerges: the people in the rich group get poorer and the people in the poor group get richer. Reversion to the mean is a much more powerful force than the ability to hoard wealth.
>US households have changed dramatically since 1967
Yes; both places I linked made adjustments for such things, as I mentioned. Go ahead and read their methodology before arguing strawmen.
>housing prices have gone up about (~800% https://dqydj.com/historical-home-prices/)
From your link, inflation adjusted price was 162,915.87 for 1970 and was 271,768.42 for 2020, only a 67% increase. Why would you criticize my numbers above, which were inflation adjusted, then try to pull such a dishonest stunt as using the non-inflation adjusted prices, when they're right there?
Over the same time, median house sizes have gone up nearly 200% from 1970 [1]. And they've gotten vastly safer, more energy efficient, and better in just about every possible way.
So, given the inflation adjusted housing value and size, again things have gotten better, not worse, despite you trying to spin it so dishonestly.
>home ownership being the hallmark of the middle class
Home ownership Q1 1970 64.3%. Q2 2020 is 67.9% [2] First and second moment going upwards as well. Again not the direction you're claiming.
>Once you obtain a home, you can springboard (in a generation or 5) into the wealthy class
Income mobility in the US has not changed much in 50+ years as measured by investigating ALL IRS records [3]. FRED single generation income and wealth mobility [4] show that more than half of the bottom 20% move up and more than half of the top 20% move down in one generation. Doing a simple markov walk with the values they give shows nearly complete mixing in 3 generations.
>by ensuring that entering the middle class is as difficult as possible,
More than half of the poor do it every generation [4].
>The inflation has been due to US debt,
Never had an econ course?
>looking at you JPM Chase, Apple, Bank of America, etc
The biggest three banks in the US have around 10% market share each, the 4th has >That's what I believe based on my own observation (and experience)
Using one's own experience and observation to make claims about complex issues like this is terribly and ridiculously incorrect, subject to ignorance, selection bias, and a host of other personal issues. That's why studying econ and reading proper data sources before making all the claims you are is very important if you want an accurate view of what is actually happening, instead of what one or another echo chamber has fed you.
[1] https://www.newser.com/story/225645/average-size-of-us-homes...
[2] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RHORUSQ156N
[3] https://www.cfr.org/blog/new-harvard-study-us-social-mobilit...
[4] https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/j...
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Inequality is an increasing function of population size, so it probably went down some due to COVID. the reason is that for many things there is only value in being the best or within the top finite number in the population. Being top x percent isn’t good enough, even 0.1% with sufficiently large populations. For example: spectator sports, politics, movie stars, the first to discover relativity, semiconductors... and…
Yes, but I think that is not the whole story. The shift in value in the economy from things to bytes has massively amplified that tendency. Information production scales infinitely since information is free to copy. The work of one single genius that deals in information, and arguably sport and entertainment now do deal in information in that sense, as does politics, can be consumed by billions. So there are simply n…
People are also not always very good judges of long-term value. For the longest time the response I'd get whenever I expressed some sentiment of supporting small business, all things being equal, was something along the lines of "well you should support whoever can deliver the good at the lowest price." Although that's true to some extent, in the long term it leads to personal costs as local services are gone, and there's less and less competition. Short-term benefits, long term costs and so forth.
In general, I think there's far too little focus on maintaining healthy competition. The pendulum in public discussions often swings from public to private services and employment, which is a good conversation to have, but there's almost never a serious, critical discussion about increasing competition and what those barriers are. US society is full of things that stifle competition and they don't get 1/10 the attention they deserve. It seems as if when it's brought up, you're forced into these ultra-libertarian or anti-capitalist stereotypes.
The other day I was looking for a cycle restoration shop. There's a great one and they should be thriving right now. But their business was destroyed in riots. Not the business owner's fault. You could make an argument that it's just one more downstream effect of a racist cop killing someone over a counterfeit bill, a very significant one. This effect has played out many many times across the country now I'm sure. But who will foot the bill? The Mpls police dept?
It seems we used to have this intuitive understanding of "bad things happen to good people" and "the community should pitch in collectively to support these things" but it's fading away.
The darwinian model is flawed, unless you're focuses solely on the net benefits to those who benefit, which is circular in its reasoning.
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#58Guess who bought up real estate post-2009 crisis, when prices were at rock bottom? Wealthy individuals and corporations that had enough assets to withstand the storm and capitalize on a down market. Guess who will grab more market share post-COVID? Better yet, guess who wasn't affected by forced lockdowns and benefited during the worst of COVID? I find it very distressing that this massive transfer of wealth from sma…
And megacorps are composed by people. People that have jobs and savings. Not grey abstract entities. Workers. E.g. tech workers.
E.g. how much real state transfer will happen in the Bay Area in the following months?
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a very understandable mindset and I tend to sympathize with it. On the other hand, fast-tracked does not necessarily mean less safe. As far as my understanding for clinical trials goes, we can still have the exact same tests with the exact same criteria and quality but still speed up the overall process. Simply by eliminating the default waterfall and accepting higher financial risk. (Also higher medical risk, b…
My main worry is that there may be longer term effects which are not apparent for a year or more. There doesn't seem to be a way to ensure long term effects are absent besides conducting a long term test. I'll happily get my flu shot this year though, so perhaps I'm being a bit hypocritical.
Re: Small Businesses Are Dying by the Thousands – and No One Is Tracking the Carnage
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
My main worry is that there may be longer term effects which are not apparent for a year or more. There doesn't seem to be a way to ensure long term effects are absent besides conducting a long term test. I'll happily get my flu shot this year though, so perhaps I'm being a bit hypocritical.
Well, I'm sitting here with long term effects from covid itself (difficulty breathing from smoke from the forest fires.) If I was to live my life over again, I'd take the risk from the vaccine.