0 points

so i read the article and all the coments here, as well as most of the cited links and some other articles i thought would help. im not an economist but i know most of you aren’t either.

are we just allergic to admitting the economy might just be mid?

why are we so horny to say JOE BIDEN GOOD or JOE BIDEN BAD? when really it’s quite clear that many many things are bad, many people lost jobs, people are struggling, people are scared AND ALSO it could be a lot worse, because we’ve seen it be a lot worse in recent history?

and everyone railing against Biden in these comments: so are we cool with voting third party? letting the spoiler effect spoil? shudder voting Trump? what are your intentions? the primaries are over. the time to set up a third line to the trolley problem is past.

what are we doing? maybe we should pick a better struggle.

go unionize your workplace. go help out your neighbors and friends, go and participate in local government. vote for biden to minimize the violence that will inevitably occur. plant a garden for your community. support local artists who might be disabled or unable to work. tip your waiter. be decent? be kind. i don’t know im literally just a girl. whatever

permalink
report
reply
0 points

In this thread: “Biden did not have a 1-on-1 conversation with my manager that resulted in a massive raise, so I declare these statistics invalid!”

This seems to happen a lot on Lemmy, makes me miss the Economics subreddit.

I know that not everyone has had the opportunity to take classes in economics, but the amount of people who are unable to see past their own nose is incredible.

How would we prefer our leaders to make policy decisions? Should they pick a random 10 people and ask what they think, or would it be better to gather a wide range of data on the topic to build an understanding of the economic impacts for 300M+ people? I’d argue that it would be irresponsible for policymakers to ignore the aggregate statistics, but commenters in this thread seem dead set on asserting that because their personal circumstances don’t follow the narrative, the statistics must be a lie.

permalink
report
reply
0 points

Sorry, but Lemmy is full of libertarian chodes. They got no clue, just a sense of moral superiority.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Good luck trying to explain to working-class people that the struggle they’re feeling is only because they don’t understand economics well enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Good luck trying to explain to tech-savvy upper-income Lemmy users that average income adjusted for inflation, at the bottom end of the scale, has actually been rising faster than the grocery prices, and that that’s a good thing.

I’ve been trying for a couple of days now with apparently no success.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

edit glitched double comment sorry

permalink
report
reply
0 points

I guess the economy really is doing great. Which is somehow worse, because if this is what a good economy looks like I don’t want to imagine what a bad one looks like.

Two thirds of people can’t handle a $500 expense. Three quarters don’t have a month of expenses saved. And a third of people making over $100,000 a year are living paycheck to paycheck. (Source 2023)

So maybe the problem isn’t that the economy is broken and needs fixed, but that it’s working correctly and needs replaced.

permalink
report
reply
0 points
*

maybe i am dumb so please help me out here but

35% of people making more than $100k per year are living paycheck to paycheck

how is this an indication of a significant struggle? $100k is a shit ton of money, no? that’s the fabled six figures? and that includes people making more? could not “living paycheck to paycheck” be chalked up to maxing out IRAs and 401ks followed by a decent chunk of using disposable income?

edit thanks 4 the downvotes to my genuine question you guys are truly amazing 😻😇😎 my time on this website is better because of you ✨💫🤩

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Once you get that fabled six figures you start doing things like getting married, buying a house, and starting a family. Child care is expensive. Health care for children is expensive. Houses are expensive, especially maintenance.

If someone has a family of four and is making $100,000 a year I can definitely see them living paycheck to paycheck.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

my opinion has already been swayed by other comments but this is not one of them, sorry haha

i know many people with families, children, and houses who make less than half of six figures, who may never hope to get six figures

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Because many ppl that earn that kind of cash live in high col area…where ur expenses eat up everything unless u are dual income. In bay area u pay 3k a month for an apartment…and food/gas bills easely add up to 2k…its rough…

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

thanks for the response this makes a lot of sense

i guess my mind cannot comprehend the finances of someone making more than i’ll ever hope to see 😭 so i have a hard time feeling bad for that population segment but maybe that’s something i should self reflect on

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 187K

    Comments