| ▲ | AznHisoka 6 hours ago |
| Someone gets bailed out and the cycle starts again. Isnt this how it works? |
|
| ▲ | timacles 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| We are basically dealing with the fallout of the 2008 GFC bailout to this day. The fiat economic system is irreparably broken, and we are circling the drain. Another bailout is _probably_ inevitable. But the cycle sure as hell isnt resetting and we are speeding towards something... what it is is unclear though, and when is also unclear. The part people cant wrap around is the scale of it and the time it takes to go through the super cycle. Theoretically, it all started with the Dot com bubble, which indirectly cause the housing bubble, which caused the GFC. Which caused whatever happened in 2019, which caused QE in 2022 under the guise of COVID, which is causing whatever the hell is happening now. Capitalism has become uncorked, and money is irreversibly flowing to the top at an increasing rate. The logical next stage is that like 75% of the world's population is literally not even part of any economy. And that doesnt really make any sense |
| |
| ▲ | azan_ 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You've made lots of (wild) claims, but provided zero support for them. Also didn't bottom income quartile see the largest growth in last few years? | |
| ▲ | philipallstar 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sigh, no. Money is not flowing; company valuation might be, but that's temporary and only works if the company keeps delivering insane amounts of value. | | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 an hour ago | parent [-] | | So the founders sell plenty of stock while the price is high and then when their valuation crashes sure they "lost" half their net worth but the other half is still there. I'm not saying that's what's happening, just making it clear that company valuation not being permanent is not a valid argument against money flowing to the top. |
| |
| ▲ | mannanj 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | yeah I intuitively have felt something like this has been happening, too. And finding the evidence is such an immense task, and feels way out of my current energy level. When COVID was ongoing there was a term floating around I liked, "Psychosis" was it. The spell is like that of, denial? Terror & shock? Trauma might be better? Looking at trauma responses and how to detect it in humans is an interesting perspective to look at all this with. Personally, if I look at it from "people are afraid, traumatized, defending themselves" and use that to extrapolate how most people (the masses, the non-rich) would act and also the rich - that points me to why theres such a sudden hastening of action and pace of wealth up towards the top in the name of AI & war. |
|
|
| ▲ | shmel 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| or, hear me out, we can try the Irish way? Just let them fail ffs |
| |
| ▲ | vitally3643 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Unfortunately, the entire US economy is being propped up on AI stocks. If they are allowed to crash, the consequences would be extreme all across the board. See the recent worming into index and pension funds. If they collapse now, a lot of regular people are going to get wiped out. Should the government bail them out or somehow stop the collapse? Arguable. Will they anyway? Almost certainly. These companies have engineered themselves into a position where being allowed to fail would wreak catastrophic damage to the national (and global) economy precisely so that the taxpayer will be left holding the bag if and when it all comes crashing down. Capitalism is rotten to the core and there's no fix for it. | | |
| ▲ | fc417fc802 an hour ago | parent [-] | | > These companies have engineered themselves into a position where being allowed to fail would wreak catastrophic damage Where is this assumption of malicious intent coming from? This has all been fueled by a global AI hype that might or might not prove to be justified in the end. The overall economic situation looks (IMO) quite similar to that of the railroads in the US and those did ultimately fail and were nationalized(ish). The current situation is hardly limited to the US and capitalism. China also appears to be actively reorganizing their economy around AI. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | downrightmike 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Hyperinflation to make the needed bailout money |
| |
| ▲ | staplers 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's done quietly behind the scenes so leaders can blame something else for inflation. See "M2SL" or "TOTBKCR" on tradingview if you want to see inflation live. | | |
| ▲ | gruez 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >See "M2SL" or "TOTBKCR" on tradingview if you want to see inflation live. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TOTBKCR And you would have been massively wrong. People have been complaining about quantitative easing since post GFC, and if you took the figures at face value, those would imply inflation was nearly 100% between the end of GFC and before the pandemic. Whatever you thought about the post-pandemic inflation, the period between GFC and pre-pandemic definitely did not see the level of inflation implied by those figures. | | | |
| ▲ | barrenko 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Banks not needing people's money is quite a bad thing. EDIT: M1 looks like a damn sigmoid. | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don’t understand how to read those charts. | | |
| ▲ | smallmancontrov 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Any time you see a price denominated in $, divide by that chart. | | |
| ▲ | stymaar 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | The idea that inflation and the money supply are linked is one of the most dumb one in folk economics. Just look at these charts: they were declining when inflation was raging on in 2022-23 … | | |
| ▲ | ryan_j_naughton 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > "The idea that inflation and the money supply are linked is one of the most dumb one in folk economics" "folk economics" implies it is by untrained people. Milton Friedman's famous quote of "inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" shows that he deeply believed the relationship between inflation and money supply, and one certainly cannot call Friedman a "folk economist" considering he won the Nobel prize in economics and was a professor at the University of Chicago. Note: I am not saying he is right or supporting his belief. I am merely stating that such a belief is not a "folk economics" belief. This belief is still very prevalent in the freshwater schools of economics. [1] As a personal anecdote, at Ronald Coase's 100th birthday party, I personally got Gary Becker and Richard Posner debating a very related topic (whether and by what degree the velocity of money of fluctuates and whether helicopter drops of cash would have been better during the early days of the money supply collapse in 2008/2009 than just giving money to the banks). In a room full of Nobel Prize winning economists in 2010, there was a very rigorous debate on the topic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saltwater_and_freshwater_econo... | | |
| ▲ | stymaar 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > "folk economics" implies it is by untrained people. The problem is mostly its appropriation by untrained people though. > Milton Friedman's famous quote of "inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon" shows that he deeply believed the relationship between inflation and money supply Creationists theoreticians believe in creationism too. The problem arise when their theory reach the mainstream… (Influential people inside the Swedish Central bank making a fake Nobel prize to promote these ideas didn't help of course…) |
| |
| ▲ | smallmancontrov 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Lagged processes are one of the most fundamental concepts in economics. If merely recognizing the possibility that one could be at play here is throwing you for a loop, you need the simplified monetary model more than most. | | |
| ▲ | stymaar 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Where's the hell is the lag on these graphs though!? The money supply grows both before, and after the inflationary spike. (And the fact that it stops increasing when inflation is high is not surprising at all, by the way, high inflation make the central bank raise interest rates, which reduce credit, which is where money comes from). | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
