Economics Thread

nsacpi said:
btw in the past year compensation of employees is up 8.0% and the price deflator for consumer spending is up 6.3%. So compensation in inflation-adjusted terms is up 1.7%. This is due to the job growth we've seen in the past year. In real terms hourly earnings are down, but the fact that more people are working means real income growth has been positive. It is possible to have real income growth even while real hourly earnings are flat to down. For those of you looking to make a critique of the current economic situation, the decline in real hourly wages is a good place to start.
Click to expand...

This is just a fancy way of saying that non farm payrolls are up which is a good thing! Im curious how resilient these job numbers will be next year given the number of hiring freezes and planned layoffs.

More importantly I’m not sure your individual worker in this country is happy that they are working less hours and their paycheck isn’t going as far.
 
chop2chip said:
This is just a fancy way of saying that non farm payrolls are up which is a good thing! Im curious how resilient these job numbers will be next year given the number of hiring freezes and planned layoffs.

More importantly I’m not sure your individual worker in this country is happy that they are working less hours and their paycheck isn’t going as far.
Click to expand...

I will try to put it in a non-fancy way. There are three things that contribute to nominal wage growth: hourly wages, the length of the average workweek and the number of jobs. All three matter.

As far as policy goes, there are tradeoffs. With less fiscal stimulus there would be less inflation but a longer period before employment recovered to pre-pandemic levels.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
I will try to put it in a non-fancy way. There are three things that contribute to nominal wage growth: hourly wages, the length of the average workweek and the number of jobs. All three matter.
Click to expand...

I get the math. I referenced all three of those in my post.

But I ask… Matter to whom?

John next door only cares about two of those.
 
sturg33 said:
I am curious what the EEA plan is for servicing the interest on the debt moving forward.

If employment and economy remain strong, the fed will keep raising rates to slow inflation.

Rates this hight will make debt interest over a trillion dollars.

What do the EEA propose we do? I suspect they will print
Click to expand...

bumping again for the EEA perspective
 
chop2chip said:
I get the math. I referenced all three of those in my post.

But is ask… Matter to whom?

John next door only cares about two of those.
Click to expand...

We could have gone with a different policy mix that would have resulted in less inflation. But it also would have resulted in less job growth. I leave it to you to deduce the tradeoffs involved. Let's not pretend there are none.
 
nsacpi said:
We could have gone with a different policy mix that would have resulted in less inflation. But it also would have resulted in less job growth. I leave it to you to deduce the tradeoffs involved. Let's not pretend there are none.
Click to expand...

ahh yes the "inflation is good" argument from the EEA.

Gotta have it finance MOAR WAR
 
chop2chip said:
I get the math. I referenced all three of those in my post.

But I ask… Matter to whom?

John next door only cares about two of those.
Click to expand...

"Reports"

But John ain't happy about it.

That is why there will always be a disconnect between "academia" and the real world.
 
nsacpi said:
We could have gone with a different policy mix that would have resulted in less inflation. But it also would have resulted in less job growth. I leave it to you to deduce the tradeoffs involved. Let's not pretend there are none.
Click to expand...

False.

You could have let people work without vaccination or boosters, or stopped the nonsense shutting down restaurants without outdoor dining, schools, etc...
 
thethe said:
Pretty obvious
Click to expand...

That was the gimme.

It created a dire need as supply was short. Coupled with paying peoples rent and unemployment extras (and student loans), no one wanted to fill those previously held jobs.

I talk to employers every single day, to act like these are jobs created is complete nonsense.
 
A reminder that nsacpi was a YUGE advocate for the printing press to pay people to stay at home, not work, and produce nothing.

His stupid ideologies are what is currently driving massive inflation - which is crushing middle class and poor Americans. His stupid ideology is what is causing the Fed to drive interest rates to 15 year highs... making housing unaffordable to middle class and poor Americans.

The EEAs are truly dreadful in getting things right... and millions have to suffer due to their ineptitude.
 
Tapate50 said:
That was the gimme.

It created a dire need as supply was short. Coupled with paying peoples rent and unemployment extras (and student loans), no one wanted to fill those previously held jobs.

I talk to employers every single day, to act like these are jobs created is complete nonsense.
Click to expand...

If you didn't fire people for taking a useless vax or send people home cowering in fear of a flu we wouldn't have needed 50% of the stimulus that was sent out.

Its not hard to figure this out. Our reaction (or planned reaction) to the plandemic destroyed the world economy.

Question is was that all intentional.
 
sturg33 said:
A reminder that nsacpi was a YUGE advocate for the printing press to pay people to stay at home, not work, and produce nothing.

His stupid ideologies are what is currently driving massive inflation - which is crushing middle class and poor Americans. His stupid ideology is what is causing the Fed to drive interest rates to 15 year highs... making housing unaffordable to middle class and poor Americans.

The EEAs are truly dreadful in getting things right... and millions have to suffer due to their ineptitude.
Click to expand...

I don't think even BL would argue against this being the case.
 
chop2chip said:
Before getting into policy, let’s start with calling a spade a spade. This economy sucks.
Click to expand...

I dunno. Relative to what? A steady state economy with no commodity price shocks, pandemic or ensuing supply chain disruptions. Sure. Strikes me as a not-terribly-enlightening benchmark.

There are only a couple hundred countries out there. Perhaps there is one you would like to hold up as having adopted wise policies during the past three years.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
I dunno. Relative to what? A steady state economy with no commodity price shocks, pandemic or ensuing supply chain disruptions. Sure. Strikes me as a not-terribly-enlightening benchmark.

There are only a couple hundred countries out there. Perhaps there is one you would like to hold up as having adopted wise policies during the past three years.
Click to expand...

You keep trying to make this a discussion about policy when I’m not quite ready to move on from the label part.

Honestly, I’m mostly just triggered reading Justin Wolfers today argue passionately that we are in the middle of a strong economy. There’s no use discussing remedies/policy if we can’t agree on a diagnosis.

[TW]1588509347340234752[/TW]
 
I suppose the EEA isn't interested in answering my questions about 2023 predictions and how to service the interest on our debt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top