How much / how people are spending seems to reflect opinions better than surveys or polls. This CBS Sunday Morning reality check report on the economy reflects that:
5 Likes
I’m noticing that a number of large retail businesses are renovating right now, suggesting two things: that they feel ongoing consumer spending is a solid bet in the future, and that they’re expecting taxes to shift in such a way that keeping all the capital for investors/CEOs is, conversely, not a good bet in the coming year or more. (Which suggests they’re predicting a Democratic Party landslide!)
6 Likes
Federal Reserve halves proposed capital requirement rise for largest US banks
https://www.ft.com/content/86fd9a80-bf46-4711-ab33-e4dcbef5eeb4
That doesn’t sound reassuring.
3 Likes
Could a federal government crackdown on price-gouging help consumers without creating negative economic impact*?
*I mean the kind of impact caused by organizations seeking excessive/increasing profits every year.
4 Likes
1 Like
Christine Lagarde and Jon Stewart had an interesting conversation about the global economy and inflation controls:
Also, Robert Reich shares what a disaster 45 would be for the economy:
7 Likes
4 Likes
1 Like
A few things about this seemed off.
It’s not megacorporations and the megarich but your friends and neighbors, your parents and relatives, the 65% of Americans who own their own home and expect the equity value of that real estate to increase, forever, guaranteed, faster than inflation or wages.
First, that 65% homeowner number looked high. The record number referred to in the report below is 38.5%. If it’s not paid off, you don’t own it. Even if you own it, taxes must be paid to keep it. There are increasing numbers of elderly homeless people who lose their homes because of mortgages and / or taxes that increased beyond their ability to pay. Cost of living increases for people on fixed incomes do not keep pace with the actual costs of living in the US.
We live in a middle class society, with a median household income of $74,580 and assets of $166,900.
We live in a society of haves and have-nots, where more people earn less than that:
I agree that emphasis on first-time homebuyers is a mistake, though, because there are people who need assistance who might have lost their first home and don’t qualify for further aid. More affordable housing options and flexibility in financing / zoning would make a huge difference.
6 Likes
Agreed- the article creates a false dichotomy between being being anti 1% and anti rentier to push a particular part of the solution.
It’s a misrepresentation of the “populist” position that all they want to do is help first time house-buyers. Those of us on the left are advocating planning reform to get rid of single family zoning, for building more public housing, for controls on AirBNB so that housing units aren’t taken out of circulation and turned into unregulated hotels, rent control, and all sorts of policies like that. She’s just setting up a strawman so that she has somewhere to punch left.
Oh, and the inequality comparison that she scoffs at in the article- it’s accurate:
But of course, the article has to be inaccurate to fit into a platform that has defence of markets and private property as its guiding principles.
2 Likes
8 Likes
I’m watching this now…
4 Likes
It’s not just about Trump, but the whole lie of trickle-down economics.
6 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
