Here are what I consider the key points about negative views on the economy.
1. People are down on the economy
2. They’re fairly positive about their own finances
3. They’re relatively positive about their local/state economy
4. Views on the economy are extremely partisan 1/
Many try to explain 1 by saying that things are really bad, eg bc of interest rates. But this doesn’t explain 2,3 or 4. Others say that people are angry about past inflation, while believing that they earned their offsetting wage increases. This could explain 2 but not 3 and 4 2/
Only the view that people have bought into a narrative about bad things happening to somebody else (not people they know) explains all four. We can talk about where that narrative comes from, but it fits all the facts in a way alternatives don’t 3/
Said this before, but I wonder if people are starting to see the economy the way they see crime: it's always bad and getting worse, even when they themselves see no evidence of any crime at all.
If the concern is housing costs, it all makes sense.
Rural folks who are Rs hate the economy because partisanship
Other rural folks have kids who moved to cities and can’t afford houses but personally fine
Young urban folks can’t afford houses
Older urban folks who own houses are satisfied
That's a good point about 3.
I keep running the numbers on staples prices 2019-2024, because now that COVID "is over", people might expect that things will return to the halcyon days of 2024,and are grumpy that their prices are quite a bit higher. But that doesn't explain 3 and certainly not 4.
All things being equal avg consumers prefer low interest rates and for much of the past decade they’ve been extraordinarily low. Though personal and regional finances are OK perhaps people think they’d be a lot better if rates were lower.
It is a vibecession (ie not based on rigorous economics).
Not sure people even care that much about interest rates except those who want to buy houses, and even then prices more than rates are probably the inhibiting factor. Of course if you were born into zero interest rates then rates might seem bad I suppose.
Sure but rates have been high in the past as well, higher than today in fact. Not to say people like it but interest charges are not that much of the household budget. In fact as a percentage of income consumer debt payments are actually belong long term average.
It’s the highest it’s been since before the Great Recession. So it the highest in memory for anyone born before ~ 1990 (those who were ~adults before 2008).
1. My salary went up 3% this year.
2. My housing cost increased 16%
3. This is not sustainable
4. My CEO makes 21 million
5. Capitalism is making the planet uninhabitable
6. Revolution, not elections
Rejecting capitalist candidates, organizing and educating workers in preparation for revolution, supporting anti-capitalist organizations, blocking "vote blue no matter who trolls".
how's your whole "butchering every infant and toddler in gaza" strategy going? juicing those swing state margins yet? got a bellyful of nikki haley's sloppy seconds?
And after the revolution, how do you make things better? Do you just make people do it your way at the end of a gun? Or will we still need to do the work to build broad coalitions interested in making progress?
Sorry if my question came off as terse back there, but I think we do it largely the same way we always have. Given where the country started, we’ve made enormous progress, albeit hard won. Have we really missed a shortcut that doesn’t involve the work of winning over the opnion of large majorities?
Revolutions statistically do not result in improved conditions. Just a lot of death and maybe a change of who is in power.
We need better people in politics and reform to make that feasible and possible.
But that's hard work and it's easier to just flip the table and hope for the best I guess.
Vote your conscience, but at minimum, shouldn’t we vote for the candidates that have the better chance of advancing the interests we value? For the upcoming presidential election, the two choices will be far from equivalent. Working with or around the more democratic candidate seems a sensible move
Elections statistically do not result in improved conditions.
We need to bring down the capitalist system to make a better world possible.
But that's hard work and it's easier to just tell people to vote for your favored fascist candidate.
If all your going to do is trade some word around and essentially make fun of me by parroting instead of refuting the actual point then just block me and fuck off already
My guess is attribution error:
Rising prices are the fault of inflation/government
My income is rising to meet it, but that's because of my hard work/new skills/hard-nosed negotiations/finding a better job etc.
Tf the economy is so bad, look how much I have to do to keep up!
There's a lot of that I think. Of course when wages as well as prices were stagnant and level they were angry about that too. I think much of it comes down to seeing the attributes of a middle class life as obtainable or not. Right now those things are expensive--housing, education, cars (loans)
Throw in groceries as well. While some of those things are actually down now (cars and groceries) it takes quite a while to sink in. I mean the Germans still haven't forgotten the inflation of the 1920s.
Are statements about the economy even still a statement about the economy or a statement on whether you support Republicans or Democrats. Same for climate etc., it's not about truth, it's about who you are and how you can get what you want
First law of economics: If you measure the wrong things you make bad decisions. In the real world of our experience, all of the externalities have been fully factored in.
if i was a demonic austerity pervert with nyt inches I wouldn't account for skyrocketing homelessness, child poverty, household debt and housing insecurity either tbh.
the underlying hateful misanthropy in believing everyone is lying just to vex you is grotesque
