301–310 of 593 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you asked for a raise?
People at my company have, in all-hands meetings. Is the company going to raise our salaries to compensate from the widely acknowledged inflation that's going on, given the company nets billions a year? No comment.
Hiring budget is 3x bigger than rises budget.
Dont ask me whose retarded idea is that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48636 "At the beginning of 2021, 129 refineries were either operating or idle in the United States (excluding U.S. territories), down from 135 operable refineries listed at the beginning of 2020. The additional refinery closures in the 2021 Refinery Capacity Report largely reflect the impact of responses to COVID-19 on the U.S. refining sector." Claims below that leases…
That's refineries. We're talking about leases for drilling on federal land, which accounts for nearly 25% of US oil & gas production. Refineries are active and will be active as you need them when importing crude oil from other countries. The issue is the reliance and importing of crude oil in the first place. API estimation of impact by federal ban: https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/fe... --…
I suggest you research how leases work. They cover ranges, not a single well. There are tens of thousands of leases which have volume for additional wells. The industry is sitting on 9000 untapped leases.
Again, this has nothing to do with production today. It has nothing to do with prices today. I've provided links on Covid impacts and 141 oil executives dragging their feet. Am not going to make more effort.
This is a typical overcorrection (the Fed is run by humans after all). US debt is over $23x10^12, so such rates are unsustainable even in the short term (12-24 months). Algorithmic Monetary Policy > Dictated Monetary Policy(TM) IMHO.
Algorithmic monetary policy, based on the Taylor rule, would have been many percentage points higher for many months already, this correction is too late.
The returns that capital demands (and the government obliges to) are ultimately unsustainable. That's the core problem here. Rising wages? There has been no meaningful real increase in wages in 40 years despite a massive increase in productivity. Profits keep going up and up. The expectations for profits keep going up. The problem here is that the people who make companies possible don't get to share in the proceeds…
>What we're allowing to happen here through investors buying up housing stock (and jacking up the prices), second homes, AirBnB and so on has reached the point of being a human rights violation IMHO. There are plenty of affordable places to live. People just don't want to move there. Buying a house in a hip U.S. city/suburb isn't a human right.
The returns that capital demands (and the government obliges to) are ultimately unsustainable. That's the core problem here. Rising wages? There has been no meaningful real increase in wages in 40 years despite a massive increase in productivity. Profits keep going up and up. The expectations for profits keep going up. The problem here is that the people who make companies possible don't get to share in the proceeds…
>What we're allowing to happen here through investors buying up housing stock (and jacking up the prices), second homes, AirBnB and so on has reached the point of being a human rights violation IMHO. There are plenty of affordable places to live. People just don't want to move there. Buying a house in a hip U.S. city/suburb isn't a human right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...and the lower classes hold a lot of debt, which under high inflation would start to vaporize. It would effectively transfer a lot of wealth from those who hold a lot of cash to those who don't. Can't have that.
The lower classes hold a lot of debt? Can you source that? I would assume middle/upper class would hold most debt.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/household... for a higher level set of charts.
If you look at it by state, you can draw a north south line from the western boundary of Texas to the western boundary of North Dakota. West of that line is debt; east of that line (until you hit the coast) its better.
Running it from 1999 to present is also kind of interesting.
The St. Louis Fed has a report on Income Distribution, Household Debt, and Aggregate Demand: A Critical Assessment1 https://www.stlouisfed.org/-/media/project/frbstl/stlouisfed... - it is not light reading.
From part of the summary (on page 29):
> With respect to the long-term rise in household debt: This is a monetary phe- nomenon. Fundamentally, it is the result of higher interest rates and lower real income growth and inflation. On the other side of the equation, increasing income inequality has simply led to an increase in private consumption inequality. To the extent that consumption demand has been stronger than would be predicted by a Keynesian story of consumption propensities declining with income, the ex- planations appear to be a mix of increased luxury consumption by high-income households and and increased social spending classified as household consumption in the national accounts. Income inequality may indeed have contributed to weaker aggregate demand. But so may a number of other factors affecting desired consump- tion and investment, including: the progressive satiation of consumption demand; slowing population growth; increasing monopoly power; the shift from manufac- turing to less capital-intensive services; changes in the fraction of profits retained in the business sector; the trade deficit; and increased longevity of capital goods. The possible influences of all these factors, along with countervailing forces tending to raise aggregate demand, need to be investigated systematically we should not immediately focus on one possible story to the exclusion of the others.
Page 28 appears to have the line item you're after:
> Household debt is concentrated near the top of the income distribution; very little is owed by lower-income households.
Another chunk of data to work from: https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/demographics/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the good play here? Cause a recession or price those lower middle class out of being able to afford the cost of living? Typically they aren't the ones with the best negotiating power.
I don't see why people think inflation hits the bottom of the wealth distribution the most. If you own your home but make the minimum payments, inflation is good. Your payments stay the same but the dollars are worth less, and hopefully your wages go up (as many people's have been). If you owe student debt, healthcare debt, same thing. Almost every lower middle class person has one of these kinds of debt. Inflation h…
Inflation causes absolute value of the number represented by that floor to increase.
I assure you. There is only one relative group of people local to whom that number teitching makes a big difference.
Hint: If you sort by income descending, they're toward the far end.
I was watching the Fed Reserve Youtube feed and expected the announcement there, but my phone streamed a Yahoo Finance feed discussing the announced 0.75% rate hike.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Related (but different): I'm wondering how much inflation will shift tax payers into higher brackets and increase the overall income for the government from those taxes.
The marginal tax brackets are inflation adjusted every year.