Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

usatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 593 posts

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#531

Post by R0b0t1 »

jmyeet wrote: post #319
bogomipz wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"This is turning into the West's version of Pakistan's brick kilns." Could you elaborate on this reference? I am not familiar with this.

Brick kilns in Pakistan (and also Bangladesh and possibly other places) are a form of neoslavery [1]. What happens is that depserate people are forced to take a job but as part of that job they go into debt. The company provides housing? You'll have to pay that back. They provide food too. You'll have to pay that back. That's the point. For most there is absolutely no escaping that debt so they can't possibly get out…

We are already serfs. You own no land and pay rent to Uncle Sam. Stop paying? Not your land.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#532

Post by R0b0t1 »

lumost wrote: post #250
queuebert wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this because of the transition to a service economy?

There is a counter view that the US economy experienced a variation of dutch disease by being the world's reserve currency. In this view, being the world's reserve currency forced the US to "export" dollars and "import" goods. Making goods manufactured from USD jurisdictions irrationally non-competitive. The reason "dutch disease" is a problem for resource producing countries is that manufacturing productivity growth…

All progress so far has been related to scientific instruments in some way, shape, or form. We required the industrial revolution to get to where we are because our bodies can't do it.

So, yeah, anything but an industrial, or post-industrial computer driven line, is setting your country up for long term failure. There is lots of societal enrichment that comes not just from the direct production of these things and their sale but also from how they facilitate the ad-hoc understanding of reality.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#533

Post by R0b0t1 »

kamaal wrote: post #524
atweiden wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The alternative is to have your boss decide for you when he wants to fire you Just for fun, I thought I’d do the math on deflationary economics: #!/usr/bin/env raku use v6; multi sub deflate($n, $r, $y) { my $m = $n; loop (my $i = 0; $i Without inflation, your personal wealth would grow by the average inflation rate target plus GDP growth, compounding each year. Assuming an average inflation rate target of 2% per y…

Wow! Nice to see Perl 6 in use these days!

Same, very surprising. I was tracking the project for a while with great interest but they lost a lot of things that made Perl actually good at its niche. I'm amazed they made Perl look worse.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#534

Post by cudgy »

ayngg wrote: post #528
cudgy wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> these were all policies that people wanted What people wanted to send almost all labor intensive jobs like manufacturing overseas? Or sending almost all the production of semiconductors which are the primary building blocks of technology overseas? The corporate ownership? Yes. The vast population of citizens? No. Do you realize that the United States mainly exports cardboard and oil plus a few car parts for BMW? Wh…

It largely doesn't matter what the vast population of citizens wants, the various interest groups lobbied for their own things that all contributed what is going on. Regular citizens wanted policies that had consequential effects too, like housing, student loans and stimulus for example. Finance was not a glamorous, high paid profession like Wall Street depicted before liberalization, it has only become what it is no…

Finance has been a glorious, high paid profession for much longer than tech. Tech only became glorious in the mid-late 1990’s and has proven to be a continuation of the corporate raider mentality of eviscerating companies into top-heavy laden enterprises. Basically, “productivity” increases is the manifestation or facade if you will of these ideals.

You may think that it doesn’t matter what the vast population wanted, but the slack in the system has been narrowed so far now that even the last bastion of the Fed cannot bail out the top-heavy institutions much longer.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#535

Post by ayngg »

cudgy wrote: post #534
ayngg wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It largely doesn't matter what the vast population of citizens wants, the various interest groups lobbied for their own things that all contributed what is going on. Regular citizens wanted policies that had consequential effects too, like housing, student loans and stimulus for example. Finance was not a glamorous, high paid profession like Wall Street depicted before liberalization, it has only become what it is no…

Finance has been a glorious, high paid profession for much longer than tech. Tech only became glorious in the mid-late 1990’s and has proven to be a continuation of the corporate raider mentality of eviscerating companies into top-heavy laden enterprises. Basically, “productivity” increases is the manifestation or facade if you will of these ideals. You may think that it doesn’t matter what the vast population wanted…

I'm not sure what you are arguing, I'm just saying both Tech and Finance are winners in the current globalized economy. I am just talking about how policy happens, and finance and big tech will come out of this fine or at least better than the general public, they are hoarding cash right now and retail is left bagholding all the way down like always and will be affected more by inflation and other knock on effects.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#536

Post by pandaman »

no_wizard wrote: post #480
notch656a wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can buy a plot of dirt for maybe $10k near a city with lots of jobs in my state. The problem is actually building something requires following codes and building regulations. A simple adobe house is doable by hands by a family with the occasional help from extended family or friends. But government say "bad" and I need permits, even if it's on a 5 acre plot with zero chance of any structural failure spreading to a…

I don't think its onerous safety regulations that limit affordable housing. Its a well documented phenomenon that housing policy is driven to protect past buyers over future ones (NIMBY, using zoning laws to limit density of housing, minimal acreage in cities etc). A combination of loosening up zoning laws around residential buildings and a land value tax would do lots to facilitate affordable housing, but nobody wan…

You are talking about an entirely different situation of building in an existing neighborhood, not what GP described. If affordable housing is your goal then would not it be better to have it somewhere instead of insisting that either it has to be near the evil NIMBY's houses or not at all? Many people would be fine with a cheap SFH in suburbs instead of a micro-apartment in the middle of downtown.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#537

Post by hgomersall »

QuarterReptile wrote: post #477
hgomersall wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would infer from your comment that you don't understand what MMT is. If you do, perhaps you could clarify how it involves sticking your head in a hole?

Sure, I'll clarify. Do you have objections to it as laid out on Wikipedia? If you have something that you think more accurately delineates its tenets, I'll address that instead. I will give you a full answer once we've agreed on a concise explanation of it that you stand by, but the short version is that it mistakes effect for cause and assumes stability in various factors while undermining the bases for that very st…

Sure, the 5 principles seem good to me. The job guarantee is given not much prominence, but I can work with that.

Edit: sectoral balances are not very prominent either, which are an important conceptual tool, though not really MMT per se (more an accounting identity that most people ignore).

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#538

Post by eecc »

notch656a wrote: post #437
eecc wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah the old patronizing saw "you just want free stuff"... no sir, I don't. I'm just playing another Game with a different equilibrium. One where everyone doesn't get to die for lack of health-care, like animals in the wilderness. One where my neighbor's education is not considered a threat to the small place under the sun I've managed to rip out of their hands, like predators quarreling for some spoils.

Hey who doesn't like free stuff. I like free stuff. Just pointing out not to get too used to it. History hasn't been kind to those who become too dependent on oil revenue, including in the form of distributions from the state. >"you just want free stuff" Ah the old patronizing "I invent a quote the person didn't say, and then I straw man against it like they did."

It’s not a straw-man, at worst it’s a paraphrase. Quote: “I can see how getting a bunch of stuff without working”

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31758991

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#539

Post by alangibson »

Auracle wrote: post #522
alangibson wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. I buy manufactured goods for a couple of businesses and everyone blames the price increases on supply issues. Also, Google MMT. Printing money is only inflationary of the economy is running near capacity.

MMT is far from fact, and I would go as far to say this little issue we're having disproves a good portion of it.

Which portion?

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#540

Post by ketzo »

Retric wrote: post #451
ketzo wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People aren’t buying gas or groceries with “cheap money.” Housing, business debt — sure. But there’s a long, convoluted path from cheap debt to inflation of consumer goods.

The thought process goes: Consumer goods like TV dinners are still based on things further up the supply chain like fertilizer. Normally you get inflation when there is a shortage of say crude oil, but when everything is running into random shortages companies get defensive and start trying to stockpile supplies. Hypothetical example: If Dell wants another 2 weeks of GPU’s on hand from Random Supplier X, and Random S…

Interesting. Thank you for that explanation. That makes a lot of sense.
Post reply on HN