That’s the common narrative around inflation. It’s wrong.
The pentagon lost (not spent, just straight up had go missing) 21 trillion dollars. Inflation didn’t spike.
I’ve studied college-level economics. I’ve worked in a shop that dealt in gold and silver. I’ve been looking into interest and monetary policy since the 2008 crash. What I’ve learned: day-to-day costs of fundamentals of living is not directly connected to interest rates. It is directly connected to what capitalists charge for them.
The CEO of Kroger admitted to price gouging. Yieldstar has been fucking up the rental market for years. Gas spikes in price during elections where a Democrat is the incumbent.
You can follow the standard explanation if you want, but don’t act like it’s a mystery how a lot of people weren’t happy.
Despite your credentials I highly disagree about supply and demand. That 21 trillions was not folks buying bread and eggs. It won’t explode inflation as production will increase but its going to effect it.
You speak like economics is a science with agreement across the board instead of a collection of different philosophies with limited enough evidence that at best there are more accepted and less accepted ones that change during different time periods.
Oh, that wasn’t my intention. I disagree with Chicago School supply-side economics. I also think it’s fucking dumb that DNC leadership pointed at economic indicators that left out cost of food and rent and said “things are great!” Economics in the west has been seen as fairly monolithic so I am pretty strident in my refutation of that view. I’m also certain about the real-world pressures that lower class Americans have to face- rent and food are more expensive than ever, while wages are stagnant and benefits are slashed.
In a roundabout way, I’m trying to speak to your original comment: what voters see as similar between Trump and Sanders is that they want to change the economic policies that have left average Americans with less money.
That’s the common narrative around inflation. It’s wrong.
The pentagon lost (not spent, just straight up had go missing) 21 trillion dollars. Inflation didn’t spike.
I’ve studied college-level economics. I’ve worked in a shop that dealt in gold and silver. I’ve been looking into interest and monetary policy since the 2008 crash. What I’ve learned: day-to-day costs of fundamentals of living is not directly connected to interest rates. It is directly connected to what capitalists charge for them.
The CEO of Kroger admitted to price gouging. Yieldstar has been fucking up the rental market for years. Gas spikes in price during elections where a Democrat is the incumbent.
You can follow the standard explanation if you want, but don’t act like it’s a mystery how a lot of people weren’t happy.
Despite your credentials I highly disagree about supply and demand. That 21 trillions was not folks buying bread and eggs. It won’t explode inflation as production will increase but its going to effect it.
Ok, keep feigning ignorance, I guess.
You speak like economics is a science with agreement across the board instead of a collection of different philosophies with limited enough evidence that at best there are more accepted and less accepted ones that change during different time periods.
Oh, that wasn’t my intention. I disagree with Chicago School supply-side economics. I also think it’s fucking dumb that DNC leadership pointed at economic indicators that left out cost of food and rent and said “things are great!” Economics in the west has been seen as fairly monolithic so I am pretty strident in my refutation of that view. I’m also certain about the real-world pressures that lower class Americans have to face- rent and food are more expensive than ever, while wages are stagnant and benefits are slashed.
In a roundabout way, I’m trying to speak to your original comment: what voters see as similar between Trump and Sanders is that they want to change the economic policies that have left average Americans with less money.