mozz

Right, I know. This is a fundamental disagreement in how we see "the right economy" and the right type of structure for a country.

Honestly, I don't even really have a problem with what you're saying here. I think the answer to the problem you're describing is strong unions to be able to claw back the fruits of all those gains in productivity for the working class, pretty much by force, and then a democratic-enough government in place that it won't squash or undo that whole effort on behalf of capital. That's very different from anything we currently have.

I think that the US economy as it existed for white people between about 1940-1970 was a very clear example of how things can work well, and if we could deploy that, extended to all races instead of just the whites, and replacing oppression of the third world on a massive scale with technological improvements, I think that would be good.

One thing incredibly notable to me about that FDR economy that I like, is that it didn't come from some political class coming down from above and saying "here you go we fixed it" -- it only was able to happen because people banded together into unions and fought multiple generations' worth of literal bloody battle to demand the type of economy they deserved, and then after the fact the politicians took credit for having "given" it all to them. But whatever.

I don't really expect you to agree with me on that, but I don't have the type of intense disagreement with you if you're saying that Biden isn't putting us on track for real communism which is what's required. My real intense disagreements are reserved for other people who are pretending that Biden is doing a Clinton-style neoliberal betrayal of even my preferred within-the-capitalistic-model progress, and so even people who want that FDR economy should vote against him.

I'm not saying anything against someone who for one reason or another (like that they are 2 years old or something) isn't taking part in fighting, or just wants to live and not to be a part of the killing on either side.

I'm saying that if you don't "align" yourself mentally against the invaders while they're killing your family and blowing up your country, then yes, I think you're a piece of shit. Meaning, it makes no sense to punish ordinary Palestinians or treat it as anything wrong with them if they are "aligned" against the Israelis or willing to take part in anti Israeli activities, no matter who they are. That may make them "not civilians" legally, but to remain a fully unaligned-with-the-conflict civilian, all the way up until your house is the one getting blown up and you and your family are the dead ones, is unequivocally wrong. In my opinion, and maybe I have no right to say that. You're right that I'm just saying it from the outside without the slightest idea of the reality of what I'm talking about.

The solution is to stop the Israelis from brutalizing Palestine in a way that anyone with a shred of human spirit would try to resist against. The solution is not to decide that now that they've done that, any Palestinian who doesn't like it isn't a civilian anymore, so it's okay to kill them too.

(And if someone in Palestine doesn't care and just wants to get away and be safe, then that is fine. Not saying anything against that. And if they want to work for peace, and that's their resistance, then great. That is much better. But I'm saying you can't blame someone for fighting back in a situation this desperate and unfair.)

It's not all Biden's fault, but he's currently the one enacting those policies that have slowly degraded economic mobility for 80 years.

This is where it breaks down for me. All the rest of it, I pretty much agree with completely. But Biden's been busting his ass to strengthen unions, bring domestic manufacturing back, and make corporations pay their fair share. He routed like a trillion dollars from corporations to working people, and it had a little tiny bump of an effect, and it may be a few drops in the bucket but it's still a good thing. They're making about 35% more (un inflation adjusted) than they were before. If we weren't still digging out from Covid inflation it would have been an economic revolution, but even as it is, they're comfortably clearing over the 20% inflation and getting a tiny bit more breathing room.

If you want to extrapolate from that statement to "but rent is a huge missing piece of that, with specific things he should be doing to address that, too" then sure. I'd 100% agree with you. But, on the other hand, if you want to extrapolate to "and so none of that union stuff happened and he's still a piece of shit just like all the generations of politicians that created the gilded age nightmare we've been drowning in ever since 2008/1995/1980/whenever", then I'll disagree with you.

Maybe you aren't saying that second thing, and I'm angling a certain amount of heat at you because there are other people who are, and it's easy to become tribal about this type of disagreement. But, that's how I feel about it.

Honestly I have to admit I’ve become a little bit jaded with hundreds of times looking some particular claim up and learning about things and finding that someone who was swearing some particular thing, was lying; and I’ve gotten lazy about it as a result

It’s almost as if all the “Biden ruined the economy” trolls are consistently not being 100% truthful and straightforward about things

I didn’t actually know that, thank you. Yeah, I know there is some commonly cited “inflation” number that excludes some volatile categories but over the last couple years that actually doesn’t change the bottom line - but yeah, it makes sense that CPI would include all the common consumer goods regardless of volatility.

We’re in a weird economic time right now where the median is actually misleading.

Wages at the bottom are going up hugely (beating inflation by 12 percentage points). Wages at the middle (median) are pretty much unchanged as you noted. Wages at the top are falling behind inflation. I.e. inequality is going down for the first time in God knows how long.

I talk about it elsewhere in the thread and link to a couple articles, but the short answer is that you’re not wrong but median real wages aren’t the whole picture right now.

And yes corporate profits are a huge problem. There was a huge corporate tax increase in 2023 that funded some of the stuff the led to the 12% wage increase at the bottom end, but it’s nowhere near enough.

figures that fall outside the norm

I wasn’t real explicit about it, but my point was more that the results he cited were coming from places where the “before” picture was rent of $600/mo during the pandemic, and so it’s not reasonable to say it went up by 57% after that, and so that’s the rate of housing inflation.

For 2016-2020 the metric was stock indexes and GDP, for 2020-present it seems to be CPI and unemployment

I’ll take wages at different percentiles, and average wages, as a pretty good metric. Your criticisms of the other metrics I’ll agree with. In particular, unemployment gets a ton of play for how shitty a metric it is overall if you really look at how it’s calculated.

Your implication that if they only were looking at the other metrics (in particular hours worked as an explanation for why rising wages may not mean anything)… I mean, it makes sense, but do you know that that’s actually happening? As opposed to, if it were happening then it’d paint a different picture?

There are a growing number of ways people fall through the cracks of economic instability and the averages are designed to throw those out as exceptions.

I partly agree and partly don’t. So, the fed actually does keep track of a survey that tries to get at this stuff -I think this is it. Like, okay forget the metrics, what’s the average financial reality look like for the average American. It’s actually pretty fascinating reading, both because it agrees with you in parts (shows places where the metrics aren’t showing the full picture), and because it’s a way of getting at that idea without abandoning the idea of being rigorous.

But also, you can’t set economic policy because “hey my brother’s out of work and he’s struggling, isn’t that important? Don’t tell me things are good.” You have to try to get at the broad scale of what’s going on. Like am I supposed to not care about a million truck drivers, and stop doing the stuff that got them another $6/hr? The point is let’s pick the right metrics and try to help the most people, not just say my brother’s doing bad so let’s not use metrics anymore.

So what are you saying we should do instead? If anything I’m saying sounds like “let’s not give them another $20/hr instead”, that is not at all what I am saying.

Idk ma, I feel like I’m just rehashing all my bullet points again. Me saying, wages went up and that’s good, is meaning to be yelling at and disagreeing with the people who say NO THEY WENT WAY DOWN AND THE GUY WHO MADE IT HAPPEN IS EVIL. It’s not at all meaning, they’re high enough or things are good for working people.

Being rigorous isn’t always meaning the metrics are wrong or you don’t care about the individual behind the aggregate. Saying you don’t want to be rigorous and focus on anecdotes instead, is usually a sign of something pretty dishonest though. That isn’t helping anyone who’s struggling, it is in service of something that is hurting them.

That’s pretty much exactly what he said, he just took a long time to say it, which was what led to the deep, deep regret on the part of the doctor. He was dusting up on a ladder, drinking tea, totally naked, and then he fell, and oh no look what has happened now.

A guy came into the ER with a teacup up his ass.

The doctor asked how it happened.

The doctor said, in the writing where I was reading about this whole event: “What followed was a long and startling story that I immediately regretted asking for.”

I didn't say it wasn't necessary

Going back to pick off that one wounded guy was cold