• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    179
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    Because this isn’t a strong economy…

    The rich are making money, but they’re just hoarding it

    So amount of money in circulation keeps decreasing, and prices keep increasing because in capitalism if a company isnt increasing profit margins, the stock price isn’t going up. And they finally figured out calling corporate greed “inflation” means around 2/3s of the country will accept it

    Either we drastically raise taxes soon, or shits about to get really really bad.

    Very few people will just sit back and calmly starve to death

        • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Totally unrelated, but I’ve been teaching my friends to shoot and how to handle weapons. Also how to homestead your backyard. I pray those remain hobbies but I think im gonna live too long for that to remain true.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      The 2/3 of the country can generally be fooled to believe anything.

      However, just raising taxes in this case may have some similarity to extinguishing fire with a burnable substance.

      You have to raise some taxes (say, on realty ownership, and some other possessions, and in general discourage possession of wealth without circulation) and lower some other taxes (say, anything taxing a transaction, I’m really not familiar with the way taxes work in USA, but in Russia plenty of taxes in hard numbers simply discourage economic activity). The goal should be increasing the actual inflation (not a good or bad thing per se). That’s if you are right about the cause, which I’m in doubt about TBF.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        In the US income taxes are different at different income levels and corporate taxes are separate entirely. We can absolutely raise taxes without raising them on lower income people.

        And yes several studies over the last couple decades have shown that US money is going up and not coming back down.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Differentiating income levels is another thing.

          I’m talking about encouraging people to put in use as much as possible of what they own, which means that making interaction cheaper via lowering some taxes is important to do not only for the “lower income level” people, actually it’s most important for the “rich”. That’s the candy part of encouraging economic activity, and the boot part would be taxing properties (should be done carefully, or, say, large realty companies are going to be less affected than individual owners with only their apartment\house, which would be a complete failure).

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            That’s trickle down. You just described what we’ve been trying for the last 60 years. And in that time the only thing that’s happened is the wealthy take their tax breaks and hold on to it. They don’t create more jobs. They don’t pay their workers more. They store it in things like super yachts.

            Lowering taxes does not create more economic activity unless they were burdensome to start with. Which is not a problem American rich people and Corporations have.

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Either you are answering something else and clicked my post by error, or you haven’t paid attention to a single word except for the “lowering taxes” parts.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                I’m talking about encouraging people to put in use as much as possible of what they own, which means that making interaction cheaper via lowering some taxes is important to do not only for the “lower income level” people, actually it’s most important for the “rich”. That’s the candy part of encouraging economic activity, and the boot part would be taxing properties (should be done carefully, or, say, large realty companies are going to be less affected than individual owners with only their apartment\house, which would be a complete failure).

                This? This is the entirety of the comment, and it is the theory behind the massive tax breaks American politicians keep giving the wealthy. If you mean something else please let me know.

                • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  If you mean something else please let me know.

                  Yes, I meant what I wrote.

                  That you have to encourage circulation and discourage “hoarding”, which means that the former should be much more beneficial than the latter. For “the rich” as well.

                  “Tax breaks” are selective bullshit which shouldn’t ever happen.

    • ImFresh3x@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The amount of money in circulation isn’t decreasing though. Wages have increased more than inflation, almost every month in the last year. Especially for median wage/salaries.

      When they say strong economy they are talking about spending, jobs etc.

      The answer is in the first few sentences:

      Housing crisis

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The recent increase in wages isn’t even a patch on the vacuum the wealthy are using. If that was even remotely true then we wouldn’t be seeing this article.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          If that was even remotely true then we wouldn’t be seeing this articlle

          Did you read the article? Because it explains why

  • EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    A strong stock market is not a strong economy. The economy is the flow of money exchanging hands, which is down because people are paid less than ever compared to the cost of living. This leads to starvation.

    • TheHog@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Hahaha, if you think the stock market is strong at the moment you haven’t been paying attention. I would recommend spending a little time looking into what happened with gamestop in Jan 21 and why.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Hey NBC, an economy that’s not providing the basic necessities for working families is not a strong economy. No matter what the pretty graph says.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Not if it keeps going like this. The rich will find out really quickly that they have nothing more than funny bits of colored paper and a gentleman’s agreement with a Bank’s internet server. Strong economies start from the bottom up and die from the bottom up. Catering to the top has always been a recipe for disaster.

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s a great economy if you’re already rich.

      Since all elected officials are either rich or grabbing everything they can to become so, they can’t understand what it’s like for people on minimum wage or a fixed income.

      We need more attention on stats like “what percentage of people have zero savings”, “what percentage of the median worker’s income is consumed by basic expenses”, “how many people didn’t eat yesterday”…

    • sawdustprophet@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I remember reading another factor is that food which people donate is often expired, nearly expired, or undesirable and unlikely to be used before it expires, so often ends up getting thrown away anyway.

  • BandDad@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    7 months ago

    In a household of four with two full time incomes (both teachers, so take that with a grain of salt), we are at the point that the food budget is the only thing left to cut. We have canceled any subscriptions, cut all other spending, and often skip lunch/breakfast or eat Ramen noodles to save the bulk of our money for the kids and feed them better. I’m sick of beans and rice, BTW. Due to the nature of our jobs and the outside of school hours (which we are compensated for), side hustle is not an option. We would like to actually be present and part of our kids lives. I keep getting told “it gets better,” but the stress of making the bills and feeding the family is relentless, and that says a lot since we are way more fortunate than most. We need change.

    • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      “It gets better” is just a bullshit comment to keep you complacent. It doesn’t get better unless we make it better.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      two full time incomes (both teachers, so take that with a grain of salt)

      Sorry but they counts as one income tops. It’s shameful how little teachers are paid. I hope you and your family find a better situation somehow.

    • skeezix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      There is often change. But it never gets better. It has never gotten better and it never will.

      • vivadanang@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        factually inaccurate. look man, I’m a cynic, but saying the New Deal didn’t improve people’s lives is bullshit.

      • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Almost everything is better for almost everybody now compared to 100 years ago. It obviously requires systematic efforts and economic growth, but it’s just as obviously possible.

  • brothershamus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    7 months ago

    You mean how can some people barely survive while others have millions or even, wtf, billions? NBCnews? That’s your question?

    Boy that’s a question right there NBCnews. Yessir a real head-scratcher. Hmm! Boy howdy, the mind reels at what could be the cause of such a huge imbalance in our society. I suppose we’ll just never FUCKING KNOW.

  • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    7 months ago

    Same reason I hate it when the housing market is described at “strong” in Australia? In what way? Is the market providing housing for all who need it? No?

    Then it’s weak and I’ll have none of this “strong” housing market bullshit.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      The housing market being strong means homes are selling. Homes selling means prices rising.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s not a euphemism, you’re just not the person benefiting from the strong market because you are not currently a homeowner.

  • Wooster@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Utilities have also been on the rise, and this year Ortigoza isn’t planning on turning on the home’s heater, even with temperatures dipping into the 30s at night. Instead, she plans to wear extra clothes around the house and bundle her daughter in blankets.

    I just want to say… Don’t do that.

    If you want burst water pipes, then that is how you do it.

    Instead, let your house drop to uncomfortably cold temperatures, but with still a buffer above freezing. The thermostat is only accurate for wherever it’s placed in the house. It’s not able to tell you what temperature your pipes are at the distant ends of the house.

    If you’re going to turn the heat off at below freezing, then you need to empty your pipes first, and no one is going to do that.

    But yeah… I felt I needed to get that out of the way first.

    Anyway, wages and unemployment are getting ‘better’, but that means very little if it’s still not a living wage.

  • paddirn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s a strong hoarding economy, the rich and ultra-rich are hoarding wealth and companies are raising prices for everyone else to feed their insatiable demands for profit. There’s nothing strong about this economy for the majority of people.

  • quams69@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The economy isn’t strong, for one. Rich people getting richer isn’t indicative of a healthy economy. The entire working class can barely afford their god damned groceries, 40 hours a week isn’t even enough to live on for most people.

    The economy is dogshit right now. Fuck these corpo ghouls.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      The economy is dogshit right now.

      It’s not so much the economy that’s dog shit as it is the policies regulating the economy that are dog shit. Better redistribution of wealth would go a long way to alleviate the economic inequality of the US economy.

      Of course, that would require implementing policies that many, especially conservatives, are not willing to implement.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    As we all know, the word “economy” means “rich people’s yachts”.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Good economy: Rich people get much richer. Poor people stay poor despite the good economy.

    Bad economy: Poor people pay to keep rich people rich, despite the bad economy.