this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
57 points (90.1% liked)

politics

19138 readers
5938 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] candyman337@sh.itjust.works 40 points 11 months ago (2 children)

who gives a fuck about a solid economy if I can't afford anything? Who is it solid for? The fucking shareholders??

[–] jandar_fett@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

DING DING DING. The 10 or so mega corporations that are left after all the consolidation 2 Electric Boogaloo are making BANK so yeah... We good. /s

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

wages are finally rising faster than inflation

This is macroeconomics, not microeconomics.

Personally, I don't really feel much of a difference. I pay a bit more for goods and services and I get paid a bit more as well.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

the micro econ is me no moneyhave, therefore I don't buy shit.

[–] jandar_fett@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm no fucking expert, but I've been around this shit show of a world long enough to realize that "economy good" equals Stockmarket is good which translates to rich people are still getting richer so fuck NBC

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My company is expanding, and my career is actually going in a direction I want, but I haven't seen an equivalent rise in my pay.

So the economy might be good, but my income remains the same, and that doesn't make me feel like the economy is all that great.

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

I've gotten about 10% more the last three years but I've changed jobs once, changed positions twice at the original job, interviewed a dozen times for jobs where no one would commit on a salary.

It just took a lot of work. Work that I did and was a fight the entire way. If I'd stuck around in my original position I'd be at 2.5% raise each year give or take a half point. That's not beating inflation 10 years ago let alone today.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 25 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The vast majority of Americans are worse off economically than they were before the pandemic. This was in the news just last week. NBC says "good economy" and the people say "pull the other one".

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 19 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Are low wages and high rents not part of the economy being good or bad?

[–] BloodSlut@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Silence peasant, go back to buying overpriced necessities and don't question how an 11% inflation rate translates to a 100%+ markup on products.

[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Voting like it? Who the fuck changes how they vote based on the current economy

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 14 points 11 months ago

You'd be surprised how many Americans literally switch their votes based on the gas prices in the week leading up the the general election.

[–] quicklime@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sure, the train track ends shortly at a cliff, but why aren't Americans enthusiastic about how the train is currently moving swiftly over a good solid trestle?

[–] jandar_fett@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

That is a wonderful analogy!

[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 13 points 11 months ago

Look you can't just declare we have a good economy.

[–] Endorkend@kbin.social 10 points 11 months ago

It's because this "solid economy" is only filling the pockets of a select few while everyone else isn't even keeping up with inflation.

[–] tiredofsametab@kbin.social 9 points 11 months ago

Why get paid in cash to buy food, rent, etc. when you can be paid in ~~exposure~~ economy!

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

People expect the cost of things to go back to what they were before COVID.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

I love how they put this bit at the end like it's not the entire story:

And of course, the country’s yawning economic inequality means that robust overall consumer spending figures can’t help but mask wide disparities in households’ finances. (“There’s no one, monolithic ‘consumer,’” Hamrick noted.)

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


In fact, in a note to clients Wednesday, Goldman Sachs declared “the hard part is over” for efforts to shore up the global economy, predicting that inflation would continue to ease in 2024.

The bank’s researchers now expect a mere 15% risk that the United States will tip into a recession next year, following a spate of forecasters, including those at the Federal Reserve, voicing growing economic optimism.

Republican presidential candidates who debated in Miami Wednesday night looked to reinforce these views, making the case — sometimes by misrepresenting how gas prices and wages have trended — that the economy isn’t working well with a Democrat in the White House.

The likely explanation is a gloomy soup of two major wars, ongoing domestic political divisions, a still-recent pandemic and price pressures that have slowed down dramatically but rarely reversed.

President Joe Biden has been pounding the pavement to trumpet $5 billion in new investments to juice rural economies, hoping that voters will reward him and fellow Democrats for infrastructure projects ramping up across the country.

Meanwhile, Republicans have raced to pin voters’ frustrations over high prices on “Bidenomics,” the term that the White House has used to try — with uncertain success — to brand the administration’s economic policies.


The original article contains 880 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!