151–160 of 593 posts
The fed is aggressively raising rates as the economy goes into recession. The last time something similar to this happened was in 1980. A very bad unusual situation, but on the other hand, the worst may be over. I think Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, and other large cap tech stocks are good buys at these levels and are more immune to macro factors (compared to other sectors ) and can hedge inflation by raising…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
please show where trickle down economics ever worked, anywhere.
An iPhone user in rural India surfing the open internet on $1 / month LTE mobile networks is absolutely an example of Trickle down economics working. Every single of the thousands of innovation that goes into an iPhone was subsidized by rich venture capitalists and rich early adopters who were willing to plonk large sums of money to a 'gadget' that only showed promises of work. It wasn't because the Indian Government…
I don’t think finding a silver lining in the end results of a process counts as it succeeding.
The fed is aggressively raising rates as the economy goes into recession. The last time something similar to this happened was in 1980. A very bad unusual situation, but on the other hand, the worst may be over. I think Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, and other large cap tech stocks are good buys at these levels and are more immune to macro factors (compared to other sectors ) and can hedge inflation by raising…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that the same thing?
Using percentages rather than basis points can be ambiguous. E.g. "1% increase from a 1% rate". Does this mean 1.01% (relative increase) or 2% (absolute increase)?
You can argue either side to this, and make a good case. My personal preference is to trigger a recession and reduce inflation. The easy cop-out solution is to say a "big f*ck off" to pensioners, lower middle class, and poor people and let inflation soar, but I believe that long term this would be more destructive to the general economy. Better take the long term view here and not kick the can down the street.
Here's another perspective to this. An induced recession at a time when most people and businesses are recovering from historic losses that came about in the pandemic, is the worst. In a recession, spending from the top 10% of the population slows down, which in turn stops the trickle down economics, and hits the lower 90% of the society the hardest. And when that happens after a 2 year long period where they were al…
That's the thing. Most people and businesses did not have historic losses, outside of a few market segments. People and businesses are flush with cash, pumping up demand/inflation.
You can argue either side to this, and make a good case. My personal preference is to trigger a recession and reduce inflation. The easy cop-out solution is to say a "big f*ck off" to pensioners, lower middle class, and poor people and let inflation soar, but I believe that long term this would be more destructive to the general economy. Better take the long term view here and not kick the can down the street.
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.
Raising taxes to take money out of the system. With that you have control over who the pain hits. Some specific areas that are getting hit hard like housing have specific problems that need to be fixed, like zoning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
no one here buys the 'putin price hike' excuse
Anyone honest can agree that most of the increase was return to normal. After a massive anomaly in the market. The sanctions on energy sector might be part of the blame, but most of increase was just return to normal. Just look at 2018 prices.
Ridiculous that the Fed doesn't just raise 200bp and be done. They could have done this six months ago (call it 250bp then) if they truly believe that the level of interest rates will have a material effect on the inflation rate. The piece meal, drip drip increases just raises uncertainty for consumers and businesses while ensuring they are "behind the curve"
The piecemeal approach ensures they avoid massive shocks and over-correction. The cure should not be worse than the disease.
I know this may sound petty and the wording is regularly found even in the best editorial offices, but the engineer in me resists every time: the correct wording should be "by 0.75%-points" instead of "by 0.75%". Am I the only one who is bothered by this?