This is obvious to anyone that works. What do we do about it?
(Ironically the one time I was one of the few hundred, our chosen candidate - who was excellent - got beaten by the Greens in an election upset)
31–40 of 61 posts
This is obvious to anyone that works. What do we do about it?
(Ironically the one time I was one of the few hundred, our chosen candidate - who was excellent - got beaten by the Greens in an election upset)
I understand of course other parts of the market (stocks, perhaps other expensive things like cars and industrial equipment) have not experienced the same price increase and for this reason the inflation is measured as less. This is purely an academic difference for most people, who would not be encountering these products anyway.
This is obvious to anyone that works. What do we do about it?
Get involved with local politics. E.g. the internal party selection process for a candidate for a seat in the UK parliament may only involve a few hundred people - if that seat is safe (i.e. practically guaranteed to that party) then those few hundred effectively choose the representative, and so have a large voice in determining policy. (Ironically the one time I was one of the few hundred, our chosen candidate - wh…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it’s amazing that companies are permitted to increase prices due to “inflation” but not simultaneously increase wages. The implied proposal sounds like a great way to get a wage-price spiral.
I guess we'll just have to shut up and accept a price spiral
>Workers’ Pay Globally Hasn’t Kept Up with Inflation This is by design.
https://www.visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2008/05/04/average...
This is obvious to anyone that works. What do we do about it?
Govt handouts during the pandemic added significant money without increased production to keep people afloat, which is good short term. The cost of that is inflation medium term. Long term wages rise to offset inflation. This has always been the pattern. Adding money for nothing to the system devalues each piece of money, so inflation is expected.
Long term wages for context https://www.visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2008/05/04/average...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get involved with local politics. E.g. the internal party selection process for a candidate for a seat in the UK parliament may only involve a few hundred people - if that seat is safe (i.e. practically guaranteed to that party) then those few hundred effectively choose the representative, and so have a large voice in determining policy. (Ironically the one time I was one of the few hundred, our chosen candidate - wh…
Politics is all backroom stuff and old boy networks. You may get involved, but to even start influencing a little you will need many years of networking before you can ever get started. And statistically speaking, you are unlikely to succeed. Objectively it is the only advice that makes sense, but viewed from the individual it doesn't really yield any kind of solution.
Inflation is not enough stuff to go around. That loss has to be absorbed by people getting less. Either everybody gets a little less by wages not buying what they used to, or some people get a lot less by jobs and businesses disappearing.
Ideally we'd just make more, but after two years of messing around with global supply chains, we've fundamentally damaged them so they no longer have excess capacity to supply. Like an overstretched spring, it won't just go back to where it was.
It's going to take a while to get the virtuous spiral working again.
This is obvious to anyone that works. What do we do about it?
Don't accept free money during a pandemic? Except that would be bad too..... Govt handouts during the pandemic added significant money without increased production to keep people afloat, which is good short term. The cost of that is inflation medium term. Long term wages rise to offset inflation. This has always been the pattern. Adding money for nothing to the system devalues each piece of money, so inflation is exp…