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

361–370 of 593 posts

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#361

Post by Aloha »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #245
Aloha wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mind you, I think the electric future s 15-30 years away, not 8-15 - but the lifetime of a refinery is 40-50 years. Thats the issue, it wont pay for itself on a conventional amortization schedule.

Disagree. We’re already past peak combustion vehicle sales per Bloomberg NEF, and the rate of EV sales will only increase based on operating costs versus combustion vehicles. Lots of folks interested in EVs when fuel is $5-6/gallon, which will remain for some time. Gotta scale up faster, build the machine that builds the machine and whatnot. https://e360.yale.edu/digest/new-analysis-suggests-we-have-p... https://abou…

I think you're underestimating the long tail, the average age of a vehicle is 12.2 years old, we're probably 15-20 years from where 50% of vehicles on the road are electric. I'm 39, and I do not see a point in my expected lifetime (around another 35 years) where gasoline and diesel fuel will not be common and available.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#362

Post by jmcgough »

bko wrote: post #203
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> personal preference is to trigger a recession and reduce inflation These aren't binary outcomes. Tight money does nothing to ease supply-side bottlenecks. It does little to target demand displaced by rising energy prices. If those are the principal drivers of inflation, tightening could depress non-energy demand in a way that causes a recession without alleviating inflation. Stagflation. (To be clear, we're not at…

> If those are the principal drivers of inflation, tightening could depress non-energy demand in a way that causes a recession without alleviating inflation You don't think the inflation has anything to do with printing $14 trillion out of thin air, or increasing the M1 money supply from ~4tn in march 2020 to over $20tn today? https://www.covidmoneytracker.org/ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M1SL

Most economists don't think it's related, or at least a minor cause. Inflation is happening on a global scale right now.

The biggest problem we've had is a breakdown of our supply chain because of the pandemic.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#363

Post by Aloha »

vel0city wrote: post #257
Aloha wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mind you, I think the electric future s 15-30 years away, not 8-15 - but the lifetime of a refinery is 40-50 years. Thats the issue, it wont pay for itself on a conventional amortization schedule.

> I think the electric future s 15-30 years away, not 8-15 This definitely varies on the definition of "the electric future" is. Are we in the electric future when the number of total passenger miles driven increases or stays the same while the gallons of gas combusted for passenger car travel decreases? Is it when >50% of cars on the road are electric? 100% of passenger cars?

50% of the cars on the road, is the metric I use, I'm 39, and I do not see a point in my expected lifetime (around another 35 years) where gasoline and diesel fuel will not be common and available.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#364

Post by maxerickson »

ren_engineer wrote: post #340
jmyeet wrote: post #251

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…

>Oil hasn't gotten more expensive to produce a huge chunk of oil has been taken off the global market and refining capacity can't be increased instantly >After going into massive debt for college college used to possible to be paid for with a part time job before the government started handing out loans which jacked up prices

The number of people attending college massively increased and government funding stayed about the same or declined.

Easy to get loans certainly have an impact on prices, but non tuition spending has declined on a per student basis.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#365

Post by TheBlight »

JasserInicide wrote: post #346
TheBlight wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of homes available for https://www.zillow.com/detroit-mi/

You're arguing in bad faith and you know it. The same phenomenon has been happening has been happening in rural places as well.

I'm not arguing anything. I'm pointing out that there are affordable places to live and the issue isn't supply but it's that you don't want to live there.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#366

Post by bullen »

dillondoyle wrote: post #355
bullen wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think wages only can go up with abundant energy. This time around interest is lagging inflation by atleast 1 year. In the 70s the rate and salaries increased BEFORE the inflation occured = inflation was rate/salary driven and because debt level was lower. Today salaries are not increasing 10% per year for most people. So I actually think the interest rate hike increases the scarcity inflation eventually since energ…

How is it possibly true that ZERO companies will be created if interest rates go up. How many businesses are equity funded in the first place? We did not have capital to start our business. Most small businesses starting from zero can't get capital in the first place (excluding personal funds, family funds which aren't usually charging interest tied to the Fed benchmark) Those tech companies that do get tons of capit…

It's deflationary (atleast on what you can borrow for), so usually people wait.

Just like you would not buy a house now, you wouldn't start a business.

I'm talking statistically, not like a rule. ZERO relative to lower rates.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#368

Post by RspecMAuthortah »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #17

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.

> You can argue either side to this, and make a good case.

Here is an argument. Fed is a thief. First it recklessly bailed out all the toxic banks and derivatives in 2008, then kept the interest rates low for too long propping up the asset prices, then basically printed money as if there is no tomorrow, and then the moment middle class started to see wage growth they gave the asset owning class opportunity exit with big margin as they retired and then started raising the rates. End the Fed.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#369

Post by TheBlight »

flyandscan88 wrote: post #324
TheBlight wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of homes available for https://www.zillow.com/detroit-mi/

I hope you get shown similar sympathy when your house value crashes

I don't view housing as an investment. I look at it as I need a place to live. If I make money on it after I'm done living there then that's great.

Re: Federal Reserve raises rates by 0.75%

#370

Post by imtringued »

ren_engineer wrote: post #156
mark_l_watson wrote: post #17

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.

takes guts to do this and it was needed. Problem is that it will expose that most of the US economy is a sham that needed 0% interest rates to even fake growth. our "leaders" have been kicking the can down the road for a long time. US economy used to grow even with very high interest rates, now even a slight increase puts us into a recession.

Why do people assume that an economy will grow forever. If that were the case, how come the Roman empire failed to conquer the galaxy? 3% over 2000 years is a lot of growth, a lot, I can't stress how unimaginably large that amount of growth is.
Post reply on HN