Live data from Hacker News

How This Ends

avc.com

51–60 of 698 posts

Re: How This Ends

#51
post #39
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also weight his opinion higher than my favorite financial columnists I don't think he's saying anything that you couldn't find in Barron's or FT.

Maybe, but Barron's also has plenty of day-trader hype. How do you separate the good long-term predictions in Barron's from the bad ones? Read someone else. (You can optimize the process by skipping Barron's entirely.)

By ignoring the day-trader hype? (shouldn't be that difficult to spot)

Re: How This Ends

#52
post #10

When governments rise the interest rate, is that the interest rate the government pays when you lend money to the government?

Yes, but the main effect is how much it costs to “buy” money - if the fed rate is zero then companies can often get money at 1% or so - which means if they have a way of making only 1.5% on the money it’s worth doing it and they grow.

When the rates rise, it’s no longer worth doing these marginal businesses and so growth slows down. You’re not going to borrow at 5% to make 3%.

Re: How This Ends

#53
post #28

I agree we are working through an asset bubble in tech and housing - P/E's went quite a ways above the historical line, as did housing prices. But think about the chip shortage (automotive, consumer electronics) - raising interest rates does not "fix" supply and make prices lower. Think about oil & gas markets. Think about labor shortages. When supply is broken, it's not only a monetary policy problem. Most of these…

The “chip shortage” was fake. The actual issue was inflation since the start.

The shortage was very much not fake, or I’m misinterpreting your meaning.

Re: How This Ends

#54
post #24

I'm going to explain what has happened so far. What happens next entirely depends on how inflation continues and the feds reaction. 1. We had zero percent interest rates. This causes the value of assets with cash flows out into the future (think speculative tech, Tesla) to accelerate. 2. We had massive herding in megacap tech. These valuations are high in part because for a decade you would not have beat the index wi…

1. Zero Percent interest rates doesn't necessarily cause a bubble. It's the excess liquidity in the market that causes the bubble (too many financial assets chasing real assets).

Re: How This Ends

#55
Second half of 1940s and early 1950s are, IMO, a much better data point on how asset prices and economy would develop than 1970-80s than the author chooses.

The situation in 1940s, with massive post-war government debt and high inflation is a much better match to today's state than 1970s with low debt and high inflation.

Re: How This Ends

#56
post #8

I wonder how much irreparable damage the lockdowns did to the economy as we knew it before the pandemic. The more subjective aspects of the economy are hard to map - are people motivated enough to work? Do they feel invested enough in the future to work? Have they been burnt out by the yoyo cycle of work/lockdowns? Was their industry severely damaged and they pivoted to other careers? Like there’s a massive pilot sho…

[deleted]

Re: How This Ends

#57
post #40
post #8

I wonder how much irreparable damage the lockdowns did to the economy as we knew it before the pandemic. The more subjective aspects of the economy are hard to map - are people motivated enough to work? Do they feel invested enough in the future to work? Have they been burnt out by the yoyo cycle of work/lockdowns? Was their industry severely damaged and they pivoted to other careers? Like there’s a massive pilot sho…

Yes, they did sit down and think that through. That's their job. This is not the first epidemic. Public health departments, unlike people on the Internet, actually study the topic. You might consider sitting down and thinking about who is making these decisions and what their backgrounds are before you pronounce that they didn't take something into account. On what basis are you making that accusation? Do you have an…

>Yes, they did sit down and think that through. That's their job. This is not the first epidemic.

So was “Two weeks to flatten a the curve” the plan that just happened to extended into a year or an always an intended lie?

Re: How This Ends

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of those deaths probably had a positive or null effect, since they primarily occurred in the 65+ demographic. edit: It is interesting to contemplate the possibility that the death of so many seniors exacerbated the inflation problem. That's a lot of assets that were previously tied up in retirement accounts and real estate that suddenly flowed into the hands of middle aged people.

65+ and often at the lower end of economic scale (at least in the USA). I can't imagine that much flowed. E.g., housing prices would have feel as supply outpaced demand. For the non 65+ that died, that's a negative for the economy. Loss of productive years, etc.

[deleted]

Re: How This Ends

#59
post #8

I wonder how much irreparable damage the lockdowns did to the economy as we knew it before the pandemic. The more subjective aspects of the economy are hard to map - are people motivated enough to work? Do they feel invested enough in the future to work? Have they been burnt out by the yoyo cycle of work/lockdowns? Was their industry severely damaged and they pivoted to other careers? Like there’s a massive pilot sho…

One thing I learned is that many jobs that are considered essential are also considered dead-end. I assume that's pretty demotivating for anyone doing such a job.

The thing that I learned was that “essential” really meant “an acceptable loss of life so long as the profits keep flowing to the upper management class”.

This isn’t just demotivating, its dehumanizing, and it’s the reason so many people I work with now won’t lift a finger to help stop the collapse of society. Just the opposite in fact: many people seem to be looking for a match to start the fire.

Post reply on HN