• uphillbothways@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s really unreasonable how I continue to require food each and every single day despite many attempts to just not.
    Sorry everyone! Didn’t mean to let you all down. Will try harder next time.

    • VolunTerry@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, haven’t you ever tried not eating? Or better still, what about just not living! Don’t knock 'til you’ve tried it serfs.

    • NotSpez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Again!? One more time and we’re going to have a serious conversation!

    • Pipoca@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      People hate inflation, just not enough to spend less: This is one of the central tensions of today’s economy, in which things are going great yet everyone is miserable. And in some ways, Americans have nobody to blame but themselves.

      The article is mostly paywalled, but seems based on the opposite idea, that inflation is “too much money chasing too few goods”, I.e. demand-pull inflation. Inflation would go down if people just bought less stuff, the idea is.

      • bibic_jr@lemmy.whynotdrs.orgM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I always hear the argument that to help the economy, people need to spend more. I am also seeing that some people just go further into debt in order to not compromise their quality of life. Both are bad and not helping apparently 😂

        It’s like households being told to stop wasting water, or petrol, when companies aren’t held accountable to the same degree. The average person simply cannot tip the scales in the same way that a multinational corporation can. Or the 1% or 0.1% even.

      • eskimofry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t accept any assertion based on theories whose base assumption is that Humans are rational.

        • MozooZ@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eh, touche. Though, that’s a bit extreme and binary, I’d say. Sometimes humans are rational and sometimes (a lot) they/we are not.

          • eskimofry@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            When some difficult concepts are explained to me (cryptography, quantum mechanics, Quaternions, etc. Are some concepts i recently visited) the gears grind in my head. I understand SOMETHING at the end of the ordeal.

            But you try to explain me economic theory, various instruments for holding wealth, how stocks with voting powers work and I come out of it convinced it’s an elaborate obfuscation invented to dodge taxes, launder ill-gotten gain, confuse normal people so they lose money to the hedge funds, trap companies and take them over.

            Everything about financial markets is anxiety inducing and give off a “Hey, this thing has weird loopholes… pretty sure some rich dude is making good use of it to siphon money out of the general population” vibe.

            • MozooZ@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well put. I can relate and think you articulated the problem well. When it’s all said and done, the greater “stock market” and Wall Street network is simply irrational, unreasonable, opaque, and illogical - largely by design and on purpose. The only way it becomes “rational” and “reasonable” and “logical” is when viewed through a lens of corruption and deception.

    • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not what the last article is saying at all. It’s saying the opposite. I know you didn’t make this meme, but do you kids even know the definition of inflation.

  • ApeNo1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Try the Australian method. Raise interest rates with the hope that a lot of the population will have less money now and this will lead to spending habit changes that force prices down. That is bound to work especially when it comes to essentials like groceries. Actual outcome

    https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/how-are-big-banks-making-profits-in-a-cost-of-living-crisis/2kdw48sml

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/03/coles-and-woolworths-to-face-senate-scrutiny-amid-claims-of-profiteering

    But yes it does mean that people have less money now.

    Edit: fixed links

    • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s how literally every central bank works. If there’s too much money chasing not enough goods, you get inflation. The only way to solve it is to either make more things or reduce the amount of money. Central banks can’t do anything about the former, so they concentrate on the latter by raising interest rates.

      • HardNut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re not wrong about interest banks, but in regards to inflation you actually have it backwards. Inflation is the expansion of currency, not the rise of prices. Definitions get entangled because inflation causes a rise in prices, and people don’t know better. Expanding the currency increases the market availability of said currency, thus making it less valuable relative to other goods.

        Think about the word inflation. If you inflate something, are you raising it, or making it bigger? Inflating a balloon with helium is not the act of raising the balloon, but rather expanding the balloon. That expansion triggers a rise when it’s helium. Likewise, inflating the currency is to expand the amount of currency.

        Inflating the currency too much causes there to be too much money chasing not enough goods, as you describe

        • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We can debate semantics, but the practical reality is that it is how it’s measured and for inflation that’s CPI, which is a measure of prices.

    • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Italian method is even better. Explicitly write on the annual budget law that a priority of all measures is to avoid any increase of salaries. Because it would “add inflation”. Italy has the lowest salaries in EU after Greece…

      • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Suppressing salaries as a response to unsustainable market dynamics is like eating rocks to help you swim upstream

      • HardNut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Inflation doesn’t come from employee salaries or wages. Inflation is an expansion of the currency, and the only thing that can increase the amount of currency is the central bank that generates it.

    • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      People hate inflation, just not enough to spend less: This is one of the central tensions of to

      Rest is paywalled. Anyone have the rest?

      Sounds US centric though while inflation is global.

      • Notsure@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I totally read this a ‘rest (as in relaxation) is paywalled’. And yes it is. When moass happens, I’m doing something I have not done in over a decade. Taking a vacation.

      • VolunTerry@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe they’re becoming aware that their currency is being inflated away and losing purchasing power every day and are grabbing as much as they can before it vanishes? Dunno, just a thought.

    • FrankTheHealer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well tbf, some of their stuff is good. But this one is from ‘the Atlantic, Ideas’ which is probably an opinion piece. Opinion pieces are more a reflection of the author than the publication. So fuck who ever wrote this. But don’t hate the entire company

    • MozooZ@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ha! Eh, kinda sorta.

      This is more related to the corruption on Wall Street and associated regulating agencies.

      The fact of the matter, at the end of the day and what this community is primarily focused on, is that if you/someone you know holds stocks/retirement securities with a brokerage (TD Ameritrade, Robinhood, Schwab, etc…), you do not - unequivocally - actually own those shares. That lack of true ownership equates to gargantuan loopholes and widespread fraud. It’s known as “street name” registration.

      Street name

      Registration under which securities maybe held by a broker on behalf of a client but be registered in the name of the Wall Street firm.

      https://www.nasdaq.com/glossary/s/street-name

      About 83% of people in the markets have “their” stocks in “street name” registration.

      Cede owns 83% of all issued stocks in the United States.[6] The other 17% of all issued stocks is owned by directly registered holders through the direct registration system.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cede_and_Company

    • AnimorphFan1996@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      @Zuberi is allowed to post memes related to the broader economy –– they don’t have to be specifically about GameStop. If you want, I can make a connection though: supply and demand. Refer to the comment and citation by @Pogogunner on the increase in M1.

      The banks have been printing more money (demand), but there is still the same amount of stuff to buy (supply) –– so everything costs more. Short sellers print more shares of companies (supply), but there is still the same number of shareholders (demand) –– so the shares cost less. The high price at the grocery store and the low price of GameStop are both fake –– to the detriment of everyday people who shop and invest.