The Great Resignation? More Like the Great Renegotiation

Post by gred » Tue, Jan 25, 2022, 8:30 PM UTC

rodgerd wrote: post #412

makecheck wrote: post #329

At least two things happened here: - The pandemic gave most people an unusually-long period of time at home to help them realize all the things they could have been doing (e.g. spending more time with family, not being stuck in a commute), if only their work had not been sucking up all their time and energy. - Income vs. expenses changed to the point where people couldn’t hope to pay off their debts even if they work…

Close to a million people have died in the US. That is a pretty important point in the labour market, quite aside from the brutal human cost. The people demanding "let 'er rip" got what they wanted - mass death to avoid personal inconvenience - and it turns out that they're getting an economic cost anyway.

Post by wonderwonder » Tue, Jan 25, 2022, 8:30 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #313

wonderwonder wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inflation was 7%. Most of my diet is meat which is up ~20%. Also if you want to do some home improvement like put in a pool, that's up 20 - 25%.

Interesting. I wouldn't have thought that would comprise enough of one's budget to have such a big effect. Thanks

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 25, 2022, 8:32 PM UTC

bhouser wrote: post #311

MilnerRoute wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other thing I never hear discussed is that this round of inflation isn't expected to be permanent, or even particularly long-lasting. So a wage increase in January which is (temporarily) eaten up by January's inflation means....an actual wage increase in May which then goes on for years and years.

I think you're making a mathematical error here. If inflation goes to zero, that does not mean prices have fallen to where they were before. It merely means prices stop increasing further. So a temporary bout of inflation equal in magnitude to a one-time but persistent wage increase, _do_ cancel out.

Post by Kon-Peki » Tue, Jan 25, 2022, 8:36 PM UTC

015a wrote: post #388

nickff wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Well if you target 0% and any actual result below 0% happens, that's deflation which is a disaster for economies." It's not actually clear that deflation causes economic problems for the commonly cited reason (decrease in consumer spending). I think you're right about most of what you say concerning inflation. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/111715/can-def...

The bigger issue isn't just a decrease in consumer spending; it's a decrease in investment (public markets, private equity, consumer loans, etc). If a bank can just sit on their dollars, and see a guaranteed rate of return potentially higher than a risk-adjusted rate of return after investment, that will happen more often. It trades a reduction in the long-term health of the real economy for an increase in the short-…

Post by dleslie » Tue, Jan 25, 2022, 8:40 PM UTC

whynotminot wrote: post #422

astrange wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We all assumed that governments could/would do a lot more to help. They did. The US gave out trillions in aid, more than any other country except Japan (by GDP). If you were unemployed this was at least $2400/month and more if you had children - the end result is that poverty and child hunger went down in 2020 and 2021, not up like you seem to think, and everyone went shopping so hard while they were home it brough…

It's the strangest disconnect right now between the actual health of the average person's bank account, and the sentiment that everything is terrible. Like GP is talking about insurmountable debt, but the stats show people actually paid down debt/saved money during the pandemic. I can't disagree that doomsday journalism has a played a role here.