41–50 of 62 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A 50% drop in housing costs will serve them better than a 15% raise. The number of Americans who would benefit from a substantial deflation rises every day. Except servicing existing debt would become nearly impossible as wages went down, but that pesky car payment stayed at $500/mo.
young people haven't taken on debt yet, they will be better served by a world where things are cheaper older Americans with high debt loads are DOA no matter what
An otherwise insightful (but somewhat crass) comment seems to have been immediately [dead] upon being posted, but I think they might be on to something. Readers: I hope you don't mind me momentarily intervening in the voting process, but I will post the comment below for others who may not have show-dead turned on to see. EDIT: Even more curious, the majority of this accounts otherwise normal posts seem to be [dead]…
It's a valid take. Not one I necessarily agree with, but one that deserves exploration. IMO we are facing costs and painful trade offs: * Many insisted that the "moral" course of action was shutting the economy down during Covid to minimize deaths. Well, OK, there is a price for that in terms of destroying businesses and livelihoods, of loneliness and isolation. A lot of people are now stressed out, out of work - and…
That is the most silk glove way of saying "humans should serve the economy not the other way around". Which to be honest is no world I want to live in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't COVID unemployment all over now, though?
It depends on state. Red States happen to have recovered better. https://wallethub.com/edu/states-covid-recovery/90947
A lot of blue states - big & small seems recovered faster, except California. California recovered better than Florida. But all other reports shows California economy did better than most states in 2020.
In fact, overall it seems that higher vaccinated states recovered faster.
I have another thesis. Take a sample of all the last few major economic crisis. For example the 2008 credit crisis. Check if available jobs persisted open, 18+ months subsequent to crisis. If they didnt, then something is different in this crisis vis a vis all prior crisis. Take a look at confounding factors. What do you see? -Huge subsidy of unemployment via federal checks and unemployment expansions. Pay matters, b…
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART
Edit:
St. Louis Fed quote from article on unemployment
> For perspective, in June, we were short by about 7.1 million jobs compared with the pre-pandemic level. This analysis suggests that this gap will only close about half by June 2022.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2021/october/labor...
I think the overall workforce participation rate paints the reality much better than unemployment numbers. The drop was the sharpest in the entire dataset going back to 1950 and while a portion of jobs have returned the possibility we may not see workforce participation return to pre COVID levels within the next 2-3 years is a definite possibility. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART Edit: St. Louis Fed quote…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a valid take. Not one I necessarily agree with, but one that deserves exploration. IMO we are facing costs and painful trade offs: * Many insisted that the "moral" course of action was shutting the economy down during Covid to minimize deaths. Well, OK, there is a price for that in terms of destroying businesses and livelihoods, of loneliness and isolation. A lot of people are now stressed out, out of work - and…
>The biggest problems that we face in our economy are problems we ourselves create in trying to approach the economy as a pez-dispenser of fairness rather than as an engine of economic growth that follows emergent technical, rather than ethical, laws. That is the most silk glove way of saying "humans should serve the economy not the other way around". Which to be honest is no world I want to live in.
It does not matter whether you like it or don't like it, it's reality, and denying reality is foolish. Foolishness is what causes most of the bad outcomes we see in the world, including the bleak lives of so many who were victims of good intentions which I gave examples of in my post.
When people convince themselves that it's unfair to make unemployed people leave their apartments and are then shocked, shocked, that rental rates go up, that is foolishness. When people convince themselves that everyone should go to college, and are shocked, shocked that we have an army of unskilled workers, it is again foolishness. When people decide that advanced placement is unfair because the rich benefit and are then shocked, shocked that the rich end up benefiting even more as only private schools have advanced placement, then this is even more foolishness.
But some people insist on living a world where society makes foolish choices rather than wise choices. Fortunately societies with too many such people don't last very long.
- Almost million died due to Covid. - A lot of olders or those who can retire, left the workforce - Some took flexible jobs - like uber/lift or food delivery or groceries or amazon delivery - Legal immigration is closed for year and half. That is almost 2 million working individuals - Few people that I know who got covid, and are in 40s & 50s don't feel that they are recovered 100%. After 10 months, my manager can't smell as she used to. - People like my wife who don't need to work are staying home.
I am sure there are few other groups that I don't know about. That is a lot of people missing from the workforce and won't show up in unemployment data.
Childcare will continue to be a problem for the foreseeable future. The cost will keep parents, mostly women, out of the workforce. Childcare used to be cheap, but overregulation at the state and local level have made it extremely expensive. For example, extreme caregiver to child ratio regulations really drive up costs. On top of that you need a lawyer and a pile of permits just to open up a daycare center in severa…
An average housewife who actually do the housework can do a lot of things in parallel, she can cook, clean, take care of children, help with school work, gardening, laundry and taking care of older family members. If you think about the amount of outsourcing one need to do in order to get all those jobs done it comes up to a cost which is much higher than the average woman contribution in the workforce.
Taking into account that women almost don't create new businesses and therefore hardly create any new jobs, that a good chunk of them work in tax payer financed governmental jobs which their sole purpose is to replace the housewife, all those types of caregiver jobs for example, and that even in the private sector a lot of them do secretarial jobs with fancy names (I am looking at you "HR officer for diversity and inclusion"), it is safe to say that we need to look again at the role of the housewife in our society.
Granted, it is an individual decision of each woman but I think society and culture should encourage women, especially with young children, to stay at home and be housewife. In parallel we should encourage different time line for men and women in terms of entering the job market and when to study. Women are best suitable to bring children to the world in certain ages, we should give them an opportunity to study during their child bearing days, namely their 20s and accept that they will enter the workforce in later ages when their kids are older and don't need so much care. A woman in their mid 30' still got about 30 years to work and can develop a serious career without the pressure of balancing home and work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a valid take. Not one I necessarily agree with, but one that deserves exploration. IMO we are facing costs and painful trade offs: * Many insisted that the "moral" course of action was shutting the economy down during Covid to minimize deaths. Well, OK, there is a price for that in terms of destroying businesses and livelihoods, of loneliness and isolation. A lot of people are now stressed out, out of work - and…
>The biggest problems that we face in our economy are problems we ourselves create in trying to approach the economy as a pez-dispenser of fairness rather than as an engine of economic growth that follows emergent technical, rather than ethical, laws. That is the most silk glove way of saying "humans should serve the economy not the other way around". Which to be honest is no world I want to live in.