Inflation, real income, and politics Moved from: Interesting Articles Relating to EVs

[user 22017]

But if that $100 is used to pay a plumber, who then uses it to purchase some slacks from a merchant, who then uses it to pay an electrician, who then uses it to buy some bread from a baker, who then uses it to buy some flour from a store, which then uses it to purchase flour from a farmer, who then uses it to buy seeds, etc. Well, then that $100 has in effect become worth much more than just $100, it could easily end up being worth several thousands of dollars.

Too bad more owners and CEO's don't realize what happens when wages are increased. Maybe many know, but don't care.

 

[user 22017]

That’s valid, but no one is forcing anyone to remain in any job where they are not making enough. And no one is forcing anyone to live in an area where it’s nearly impossible to afford a living such as New York or San Francisco.

That is disingenuous. You aren't stupid. You know that **** happens.

People have kids at a young age (right or wrong... doesn't matter). A big chunk of their meager income goes to child support. Worse, they receive no child support at all.

Some people can't rely on county nursing homes for the elderly parents so stay in the crappy town to care for them.

Some become addicts of one sort or another because they were abused as children and teens.

Some are born brain damaged, or with low intelligence.

NY and SF may have services for low income folks but the same can't be said for all cities and states.

Some aren't born white. Oh, yeah... you don't believe systemic racism and things like redlining exist. They do.

Of course there are success stories. But please look at the facts. The statistics.

Also, you said I was playing the victim, yet I never referred to myself. You are assuming things.

When I said people want to breathe, that is true of everyone. I don't see myself as a victim and you shouldn't be making personal attacks in a debate/discussion. Okay, I referred to you as being on "the right". Maybe that is a personal attack... not the same, tho.

 

[mpruet]

Why did consumerism lag? Because companies paid such low wages the workers could not purchase the goods they were producing. (It was on a test about the Great Depression )

Low wages were one of the main causes of the Great Depression.

Hardly. The initial issue was the Wall Street Panic which was mainly brought on by over speculation such as buying on margin. But the cause that over speculation was a danger because of significant increase in inventory. Profit margins couldn’t be kept. Initially there was just a plateau followed by a gradual decline. But then the margin calls started up which accelerated the decline as investors started panicking and trying to sell their holdings. But then the sell orders exceeded the capacity and people couldn’t even sell. That caused people to try to pull what cash they had from the banks causing runs on banks, and that caused banks to begin failing, which made it impossible to get credit, which meant that payrolls couldn’t be made. Don’t forget businesses rarely just have money on hand, even for payrolls. They usually have to take short term loans just to make daily operations.

Well that led to both layoffs and furloughs. And the farmers also couldn’t get loans to buy seed for the crops.

By this time since the banking system had largely failed, and people were hoarding what money they had, there was very little commerce. And that meant that the larger inventory couldn’t even be sold at cost. That was bad enough, but then in an attempt to protect American business, congress passed that Smoot-Hawley Tariff which drastically limited the importing of goods from overseas. And the foreign countries retaliated by passing high Tarrifs themselves on American goods, which resulted in even less purchasing of American good, reducing our GDP, and which resulted in a world wide depression.

When FDR became president the first thing he did was to declare a bank holiday to stop the runs/shutdowns of the banking system. Much of his first administration was to get money flowing again with public works, which did infuse some cash into the system, but it really wasn’t enough to get totally out of the depression. Then congress raised taxes, but taxes are really the government’s method of removing money from circulation, and that’s when we hit bottom. Finally there was massive spending with the coming of WWII which infused a lot of money into the system.

It was not that the businesses paid too little, they couldn’t even hire because the commercial system had already collapsed.

 

[mpruet]

Too bad more owners and CEO's don't realize what happens when wages are increased. Maybe many know, but don't care.

Trying to put the blame on someone else again???

 

[user 22017]

Hardly.





It was on a test in college. I probably only remember it so well, because I found it curious that we were not taught that in high school.

 

[user 22017]

Trying to put the blame on someone else again???

Hey, you said it. Not me

 

[mpruet]

That is disingenuous. You aren't stupid. You know that **** happens.

People have kids at a young age (right or wrong... doesn't matter). A big chunk of their meager income goes to child support. Worse, they receive no child support at all.

Some people can't rely on county nursing homes for the elderly parents so stay in the crappy town to care for them.

Some become addicts of one sort or another because they were abused as children and teens.

Some are born brain damaged, or with low intelligence.

NY and SF may have services for low income folks but the same can't be said for all cities and states.

Some aren't born white. Oh, yeah... you don't believe systemic racism and things like redlining exist. They do.

Of course there are success stories. But please look at the facts. The statistics.

Also, you said I was playing the victim, yet I never referred to myself. You are assuming things.

When I said people want to breathe, that is true of everyone. I don't see myself as a victim and you shouldn't be making personal attacks in a debate/discussion. Okay, I referred to you as being on "the right". Maybe that is a personal attack... not the same, tho.

I grew up in a very rural area. The racial mix was about 50/50. We had good health care and all of the other infrastructure and services that you are saying that places outside of NY and SF don’t have. That is simply not true. We had handicapped folks, both physically and mentally, and yet they have had good lives and with some form of employment. The only person I can think of that had to be institutionalized else where was a lady born with Spina Bifida.

I’ve never denied that, as you put it, **** happens. I’ve only said that it’s the individual who determines how to respond to it. Some turn it into a positive, but some just become bitter.

 

[bullfrog !]

^^^I think your experience is very limited. There are areas of the country where good hygiene is not possible due to lack of water never the less any timely health care. Where I have lived in rural areas there were very few options if any for good health care. Even now on the reservations and rural areas in the southwest it is difficult to get good health care especially if you happen to be a minority. There have been several documented cases where that has occurred.

 

[mpruet]

^^^I think your experience is very limited. There are areas of the country where good hygiene is not possible due to lack of water never the less any timely health care. Where I have lived in rural areas there were very few options if any for good health care. Even now on the reservations and rural areas in the southwest it is difficult to get good health care especially if you happen to be a minority. There have been several documented cases where that has occurred.

I’m sure thats true, but there are a lot of places other than San Francisco or New York where you could get the help you needed. You don’t have to go live in the most expensive places in the nation. ;-)

 

[user 22017]

I grew up in a very rural area. The racial mix was about 50/50. We had good health care and all of the other infrastructure and services that you are saying that places outside of NY and SF don’t have. That is simply not true. We had handicapped folks, both physically and mentally, and yet they have had good lives and with some form of employment. The only person I can think of that had to be institutionalized else where was a lady born with Spina Bifida.

I’ve never denied that, as you put it, **** happens. I’ve only said that it’s the individual who determines how to respond to it. Some turn it into a positive, but some just become bitter.

That is not what you were saying. You said nobody is forcing anyone to stay where there are no good jobs. You have said it more than once .

 

[mpruet]

That is not what you were saying. You said nobody is forcing anyone to stay where there are no good jobs. You have said it more than once .

Not quite what I said. I said that no one is forcing anyone to remain at a job i they are not getting a good salary. They can always find another job.

And this post was made in reference to you saying that people had to live in SF or NY because that was where medical health and support infrastructure was.

 

[Happy Camper]

I would love to fix everyone's problems, but it's probably not feasible. What I can do is fix my own. Whether it's income, medical, housing, etc.

Some areas will never be the best place for humans to live. But the humans want to be there. Choices are a real thing, as is deciding what trade-offs you can live with.

If living in an area with few prospects income or healthcare wise is your decision, you should respect and understand the results of your decisions. Most everyone here has made a choice that requires significant trade-offs. More for some than others. Staying closer to healthcare. Living where shopping is better. They are all decisions you make every time you move to a new spot on the map.

If you live in a place where good hygiene isn't possible, change the situation or change your location. Easier said than done you say? If I had kids in that situation I would move and figure out the rest as I went. You don't have to stay where you are. You don't have to accept your current situation. You can choose to have and do better. But some can't overcome the risk factor. I get it. But that's not my fault or problem.

We can always bring up extreme cases. But most cases aren't super extreme. And the decisions don't have to be extreme either. There are usually multiple solutions for every problem. You just have to choose something that works better than what you have. If it's a mistake, make a new decision.

 

[user 22017]

Not quite what I said. I said that no one is forcing anyone to remain at a job i they are not getting a good salary. They can always find another job.

And this post was made in reference to you saying that people had to live in SF or NY because that was where medical health and support infrastructure was.

Yeah. I don't know who mentioned SF and NY. Wasn't me

 

[mpruet]

NY and SF may have services for low income folks but the same can't be said for all cities and states.

Some aren't born white.

Yeah. I don't know who mentioned SF and NY. Wasn't me

Oh really?

 

[user 22017]

Oh really?

You were replying to Bullfrog, not me.

 

[mpruet]

You were replying to Bullfrog, not me.

But what of it? What is your point?
My comment to you were about the following. And yes, no one is forcing any one to live where they can’t afford to make a living or in a job where they have a poor income.

 

[user 22017]

Nonsense. First of all Amazon is not the producer of products. They are a reseller. They resell or just ship items produced by other companies. So they have to deal with how much it cost from the manufacture. If any company that had a similar market plan couldn’t compete because of price, then they were charging way too much to begin with and didn’t consider Amazon as a viable competitor.

No, Amazon’s business strategy was too take one market and gradually expand their business. They were initially only a book reseller. As they were profitable, they gradually expanded into other markets because their real niche was to make it very easy for any person to purchase an item online and have it delivered to them without having to leave their home. They were in the business of convenience.

The only company that I know of that got hurt by Amazon was Sears and that is because Sears totally ignored online purchasing, which is really ironic because Sears was so strong in the Catalogue business, and the catalogue was nothing more than the online business before the internet. Sears failed because they refused to adapt, not because of any price war.

Looks like Amazon is still doing it

 

[mpruet]

Looks like Amazon is still doing it

Anybody can sue anybody. I tried to get to the articles, but the only thing I found was that some of the people using the Amazon platform were balking at having to follow the rules that Amazon had set up in order to use the platform. So how is that criminal?

 

[Happy Camper]

Y'all are arguing in circles. The system is the system at this time. Some do better in this system than others. I'm not talking about the 1%. I'm taking about just regular folks. If the system is changed, it'll work better for some than it will for others. It's the nature of the beast.

Those that can adapt to changes in the system will do better overall. At the end of the day we're all just doing our best with what we have been dealt. And the ability of some to adapt is better than others. Survival of the fittest is a real thing. In the real jungle, the urban jungle, or whatever jungle you find yourself in.

There is no perfect system. And you can't save everybody from themselves.

Here in California a kid I know is applying for jobs. A friend of his is a manager at one of the far food places and told him they aren't hiring. Because of the new minimum fast food wages law they have to cut down on staff or hours at least.

Everyone says the rich companies can afford to pay. But every company has a business model. When you change the model something has to change to accommodate that. Now I keep seeing articles on how there's no value in fast food anymore. And the prices are too high.

As a business owner you have to adapt. And if your margin needs to be a certain amount to make the numbers work then do be it. I would wager that not one person that pushed for a $20/hr for fast food works here is planning on opening a fast food business in California. And if I open a business, it's up to me what I want my margins and profit to be. I might fail if I'm taking too much, but it's my call. Unintended consequences, again.

 

[user 22017]

But what of it? What is your point?
My comment to you were about the following. And yes, no one is forcing any one to live where they can’t afford to make a living or in a job where they have a poor income.

My point is that I never brought up SF or NY, as you said I did. When I said it wasn't me, you replied, "Really?"

You don't respond to posts. Instead you post a screed about financial investing. Completely off topic. Invest money if that is your thing. Not everyone is interested. You are not wrong for doing so. Others are not wrong for NOT doing it.

What is wrong is when companies do not pay a living wage. Minimum wage became law because companies were not paying enough to raise a family on. No, there are not teenage jobs. Men did not strike and/or sacrifice their lives to guarantee a minimum wage for teens. They put their lives on the line for themselves and/or their families.

Corporations would not exist. CEO's would not make millions. If not for the workers. Workers should not be forced to move across the country IF they want decent pay. It wouldn't be happening if politicians would do their jobs and stop being bought by corporations.

https://time.com/5663465/labor-day-union-history/