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

Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

stayathomemacro.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 112 posts

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#51

Post by wasabi991011 »

75345d4c wrote: post #13
davidw wrote: post #10

I have been enjoying Paul Krugman's writing, now that he's free from the shackles of the New York "both sides!" Times https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/its-beginning-to-smell-a-... He's obviously got a political angle, but doesn't let that completely color his economic analysis.

If the political angle is not relevant to the analysis, then why do you enjoy it?

As thankyoufriend said, "economics is political".

Personally, I would feel like a discussion about economics that completely avoids politics would be missing something, and I would enjoy it a lot less.

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#52

Post by bediger4000 »

andsoitis wrote: post #21
ActorNightly wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Please don't conflate what the left has done (actual economic plans and policies that resulted in economic growth) with what the right has done (pointlessly destroyed relations with multiple countries because they didn't get their way in 2020). Have I? The idea of deglobalization has been a rallying cry of both the left and the right. If you don't believe me, review someone like Bernie Sanders' beliefs (e.g. https:…

Yeah, the Sanders administration was a disaster. Glad he didn't win reelection in 2024.

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#53

Post by Volundr »

andsoitis wrote: post #48
Volundr wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously I'm not an economist, nor do I play one on TV. One would indeed expect removing currency from the economy to be deflationary, but in GPs example we didn't just remove currency, we removed demand too. If less people have money to buy a car, less cars are produced. When you are making 1k instead of 1m cars, you no longer benefit as much from scale and must raise your prices, which only the rich can afford. No…

> One would indeed expect removing currency from the economy to be deflationary, but in GPs example the issue is that the GP's premise ("When super-rich people receive money, it goes mostly to tax havens, removing it from circulation.") is invalid.

The question I answered was:

> Doesn't the lack of liquidity in an economy cause deflationary behavior?

Which seems to accept the given premise.

But ok, let's look at yours:

> the issue is that the GP's premise ("When super-rich people receive money, it goes mostly to tax havens, removing it from circulation.") is invalid.

Is it? I thought it was well understood at this point that the best place to stimulate the economy was from the bottom, because every dollar put in goes directly back into circulation, creating demand, while the wealthy and middle class will save some portion of it. Certainly I don't think the money in my savings account is doing much to create the kind of demand that would stimulate job growth, and while one might argue that the stocks in my 401k are doing something the idea that it's driving more growth than buying a car is... Dubious.

But if you have data please share.

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#54

Post by gruez »

Qem wrote: post #30
andsoitis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've got your cause/effect chain a little muddled. I would also assert that the system dynamics are neither linear nor singular in the way you frame it. > Increasing wealth inequality, drives prices inflation How does increasing wealth inequality drive price increases?

> How does increasing wealth inequality drive price increases? When poor people receive money, they tend to put it to circulate in the economy, by spending it. When super-rich people receive money, it goes mostly to tax havens, removing it from circulation. Business lose scale, as there is less consumers, raising unitary prices.

>When poor people receive money, they tend to put it to circulate in the economy, by spending it.

That causes inflation, as we seen by the covid stimmy checks.

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#55

Post by ActorNightly »

andsoitis wrote: post #21
ActorNightly wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Please don't conflate what the left has done (actual economic plans and policies that resulted in economic growth) with what the right has done (pointlessly destroyed relations with multiple countries because they didn't get their way in 2020). Have I? The idea of deglobalization has been a rallying cry of both the left and the right. If you don't believe me, review someone like Bernie Sanders' beliefs (e.g. https:…

I love how your evidence on the left is basically what people have said, which you think is somehow just as bad as what the right has actually done.

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#56

Post by tcfhgj »

gruez wrote: post #54
Qem wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How does increasing wealth inequality drive price increases? When poor people receive money, they tend to put it to circulate in the economy, by spending it. When super-rich people receive money, it goes mostly to tax havens, removing it from circulation. Business lose scale, as there is less consumers, raising unitary prices.

>When poor people receive money, they tend to put it to circulate in the economy, by spending it. That causes inflation, as we seen by the covid stimmy checks.

This is only true if the demand can't be met midterm or longterm

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#57

Post by davidw »

thankyoufriend wrote: post #29
davidw wrote: post #10

I have been enjoying Paul Krugman's writing, now that he's free from the shackles of the New York "both sides!" Times https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/its-beginning-to-smell-a-... He's obviously got a political angle, but doesn't let that completely color his economic analysis.

Economics is political.

Sure, but my point is that there are people that reason like "such and such an elected official is bad, therefore everything they do is bad and will have drastic results", and that's not particularly informative even when I agree about the elected official being bad.

Krugman does a decent job of not letting his opinions about the political aspects color his analysis too much.

Things like

"Contrary to what many people believe, tariffs don’t necessarily lead to high unemployment. America had a high average tariff even before Smoot-Hawley — 15.8 percent in 1929 — but the unemployment rate in 1929 was under 3 percent."

He doesn't like the tariffs, he (and pretty much any serious economists) think they're bad, but he tries to be clear about why they're bad rather than just waving his hands at everything.

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#58

Post by Hemospectrum »

merth wrote: post #49
pasquinelli wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How does increasing wealth inequality drive price increases? i'm not the person you asked, and i'm just spit-balling, but here's a way: wealth inequality means there's a group that has substantially more wealth than normal, let's call that group A, and the complimentary group of people who don't have substantially more wealth than normal, let's call them B. A's wealth ultimately comes from B-- you know, you got wor…

i'm not the person you replied but if wages lag furhter, how rents going up? it should go down since there is noone to be able to pay higher rents. they have no choice but either convince homeowner or downgrade. and Group A(rich + upper-middle) won't rent since they have enough wealth to buy a house, they may upgrade and cause inflation in luxury houses/goods.

Rent can continue to go up as long as there is room (literally physical space) in whatever housing is still on the market. Ten years ago you might have been able to afford your own apartment. Now you need three roommates. Soon you'll need seven, and then fifteen, and that can just keep going up as long as that number of bodies can be crammed into the same lodgings.

Re: Job growth has slowed sharply; the question is why

#59

Post by ryandrake »

andsoitis wrote: post #24
AlexandrB wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even if deglobalization were a great idea, then the execution is haphazard, incompetent, rushed. Doesn't this apply to globalization as well? Saying "learn to code" to people who lose their jobs due to globalization is not great execution either and sets the stage for backlash.

> > Even if deglobalization were a great idea, then the execution is haphazard, incompetent, rushed. > Doesn't this apply to globalization as well? Saying "learn to code" to people who lose their jobs due to globalization is not great execution either and sets the stage for backlash. Globalization, or more loosely, more and more people or societies trading with each other over greater distances and competing at who d…

Unfortunately, deglobalization-by-edict is not going to bring jobs or industry back, it's just going to make things more expensive and inefficient to build. China has entire cities that are laid out like a giant assembly line, with raw materials inland, manufacturing and assembly midway, and final packaging and shipping at the coasts. Plus a skilled workforce trained to make it all work. We're not going to replicate this in Detroit or Houston.
Post reply on HN