Not inflation, more about Job Market correlation. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-red-states-hiring-much-185822971.html 3 possible reasons.
Wait...how are hiring and quits related to "job security?" Are there layoffs/firings/business closings I'm missing? And, in another context, I was thinking about the education part. From the outside, middle-class experience and above, education seems like the panacea. But those with the least education are in poverty, and there are many, many issues related to poverty even before one gets to education. But, if one treats low education outcomes as part of poverty, and not separately, then changes the spotlight, and helps bring education into a more complete context.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/29/opinion/inflation-groceries-pricing-walmart.html Times article about grocery inflation. The reporting is bullshit FTFNYT
How does greed differ from the normal profit motive of companies charging what the market will stand?
Anecdotally, went to a craft fair on the boardwalk this past weekend and chicken fingers with fries & 2 empanadas set me back $32
If this is a reply to my post, my answer is it’s not relevant. My post is about inflation. Is inflation systemic, or is it temporary? If companies are raising prices irrespective of rising costs, the. the Fed is hurting the economy because they’re bad at their jobs.
I think he’s pointing out that our system is not geared for efficiency, nor is it efficient, as most models seem to assume. The Fed is using the tool it has, right? It would be better if we passed legislation regulating markets and windfall profits during crises, but we don’t. So the Fed uses its hammer, and the poor suffer.
No, it would be better if the Fed stopped trying to tank the economy because of delusions about our inflation risks. My overall point is long ago I came to believe that a) economists are worse at economics than historians, because historians work in facts and economists work in theories and b) modern American capitalism and politics wildly, wildly overrate the fears and risks of inflation, and as a result make America a worse place to live than it would be with a competent, data-driven Federal Reserve Board.
Economist Joke: A guy is traveling around the world in an aerostatic balloon and one day a gust of wind throws him out of curse. His GPS is giving him weird readings so he decides to go low and ask the locals. He waves to a passer by and asks “where am I?”, to which the local replies “You are in a balloon, about 30 feet of the ground”. The traveler replies “Economist, right?”, to which the pedestrian replies “correct! How did you figure it out?” “Well, I asked you a simple question and you replied with accurate, verifiable and obvious information that doesn’t help me at all!”
That's too simple. Basically, you are talking people looking forward ("What will happen?") versus people looking backward ("Why did it happen?") There are plenty of economist who look at what happened historically. That's great, but when they try and use that to posit a theory of what will happen, that is no different than trying to figure out who will become the next President, or win the World Cup, any other predictive outcome. Conversely, historians don't predict the future. Regarding inflation, I heard a discussion about that sometime in the last year (maybe longer than that) in which the 2% to 3% target rate was arbitrary. And it was asked if 4% was not unreasonable. In terms of the Fed, they are all data-driven. The problem is that they, along with elected politicians, focus too much on fear. So they respond with actions that stoke fear.
Not exactly. Historians compare current circumstances to past circumstances and make predictions, sort of like how weathermen make predictions. Economists use models.
Next you are going to tell me you do not believe in the Global warming models. . Talking about weather people, them like economist, get it right most of the time, but people only remember the times they get the forecast wrong.
They what now? You might argue that the predictions are implicit, especially if they're coming from the Hegelian and/or Marxist schools of history that were all the rage in the 20th Century. But any historian that makes explicit predictions about the future is full of ducking shot, as my phone would say.
Is it not obvious that many companies are raising prices well ahead of costs? I just find the greed word stupid.
Plus a massive energy crisis. And that then created an environment where you could just mess with prices hugely. Oddly I've followed some of this in detail because i bulk buy since the pandemic. Mostly just to be more efficient but then cost savings became huge Some inflation was absolutely structural e.g Flour and Milk prices. Same prices everywhere. But on other items, you can often find then at the old prices if you are prepared to wait, which suggests to me its all jam for the vendors. e.g on one luxury item - our favourite biscuits - i routinely find a 50% differential on them. Numerous other items the same. e.g proper eco washing powder (which we need for our ponds) I found at the old price, so snapped up 6 months worth. I think a lot of stuff is priced to the pain point now - but many just pay it, because 10-20 extra on your bill is not life or death