Remix.run Logo
stego-tech 2 hours ago

Hot take, but I don’t think it should recover. If anything, I think a combination of low unemployment, higher wages, and a labor force participation rate of ~45-55% would be a sweet spot to aim for:

* It would indicate more single income households able to make ends meet and live higher quality lives

* It would suggest more stay-at-home parents to rear children, which is only possible in a safe and stable economic environment

* It’d also suggest a higher amount of community engagement, rather than mere working and resting.

* A rise in successful single-income households would also suggest improvements in cost of living affordability

In our current world, where we expect both parents to work full-time jobs to survive (because the cost of everything assumes a married couple employed full-time, especially in cities), this number is bad; in a healthier society, it might be a good thing.

I’d argue in favor of deflating costs or raising wages instead of increasing labor force participation, but that’s my personal soapbox.

22 minutes ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
chrisweekly an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I love this vision. What do you think might be required to make it real?

snypher 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

The return of the proceeds of labor to the people who performed the labor.

Edit: my CEO owns ~125 houses.

gruez 10 minutes ago | parent [-]

>The return of the proceeds of labor to the people who performed the labor.

It's funny you bring that up, given the statistics on this shows that it's been trending down, but nowhere close to the amount you'd expect from the popular discourse.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LABSHPUSA156NRUG