為什么美國人對當前經濟的看法大相徑庭?
The Economic Theory That Explains Why Americans Are So Mad譯文簡介
有些美國人覺得目前的生活還不錯,有些美國人抱怨這個社會太糟糕,為什么人們的看法大相徑庭?
正文翻譯
There’s something weird happening with the economy. On a personal level, most Americans say they’re doing pretty well right now. And according to the data, that’s true. Wages have gone up faster than inflation. Unemployment is low, the stock market is generally up so far this year, and people are buying more stuff.
現在的經濟狀況有些奇怪。在個人層面上,大多數美國人說他們現在做得很好。根據數據,這是真的。工資的增長快于通貨膨脹。失業(yè)率很低,今年到目前為止股市普遍上漲,人們購買更多的東西。
And yet in surveys, people keep saying the economy is bad. A recent Harris poll for The Guardian found that around half of Americans think the S. & P. 500 is down this year, and that unemployment is at a 50-year high. Fifty-six percent think we’re in a recession.
然而在調查中,人們一直說經濟很糟糕。哈里斯最近為《衛(wèi)報》進行的一項民意調查發(fā)現,大約一半的美國人認為標準普爾500指數(s&p 500)今年會下跌,失業(yè)率處于50年來的最高水平。56%的人認為我們正處于經濟衰退之中。
然而在調查中,人們一直說經濟很糟糕。哈里斯最近為《衛(wèi)報》進行的一項民意調查發(fā)現,大約一半的美國人認為標準普爾500指數(s&p 500)今年會下跌,失業(yè)率處于50年來的最高水平。56%的人認為我們正處于經濟衰退之中。
There are many theories about why this gap exists. Maybe political polarization is warping how people see the economy or it’s a failure of President Biden’s messaging, or there’s just something uniquely painful about inflation. And while there’s truth in all of these, it felt like a piece of the story was missing.
關于為什么會有這種差距,有很多理論。也許政治兩極分化正在扭曲人們對經濟的看法,或者是拜登總統(tǒng)的信息傳遞失敗,或者只是通貨膨脹帶來了一些獨特的痛苦。雖然所有這些都是真實的,但感覺好像缺少了一部分故事。
關于為什么會有這種差距,有很多理論。也許政治兩極分化正在扭曲人們對經濟的看法,或者是拜登總統(tǒng)的信息傳遞失敗,或者只是通貨膨脹帶來了一些獨特的痛苦。雖然所有這些都是真實的,但感覺好像缺少了一部分故事。
And for me, that missing piece was an article I read right before the pandemic. An Atlantic story from February 2020 called “The Great Affordability Crisis Breaking America .” It described how some of Americans’ biggest-ticket expenses — housing, health care, higher education and child care — which were already pricey, had been getting steadily pricier for decades.
對我來說,那缺失的部分是我在大流行之前讀到的一篇文章。2020年2月的一個大西洋故事,名為“打破美國的巨大負擔能力危機”,它描述了美國人的一些最大的費用——住房,醫(yī)療保健,高等教育和兒童保育——已經非常昂貴,幾十年來一直在穩(wěn)步上漲。
對我來說,那缺失的部分是我在大流行之前讀到的一篇文章。2020年2月的一個大西洋故事,名為“打破美國的巨大負擔能力危機”,它描述了美國人的一些最大的費用——住房,醫(yī)療保健,高等教育和兒童保育——已經非常昂貴,幾十年來一直在穩(wěn)步上漲。
At the time, prices weren’t the big topic in the economy; the focus was more on jobs and wages. So it was easier for this trend to slip notice, like a frog boiling in water, quietly, putting more and more strain on American budgets. But today, after years of high inflation, prices are the biggest topic in the economy. And I think that explains the anger people feel: They’re noticing the price of things all the time, and getting hammered with the reality of how expensive these things have become.
當時,價格并不是經濟中的大話題,人們更多地關注就業(yè)和工資。因此,這種趨勢更容易被忽視,就像一只在水中沸騰的青蛙,悄悄地給美國預算帶來越來越大的壓力。但如今,在經歷了多年的高通脹之后,價格是經濟中最大的話題。我認為這解釋了人們的憤怒:他們一直在注意東西的價格,并被這些東西變得多么昂貴的現實所打擊。
當時,價格并不是經濟中的大話題,人們更多地關注就業(yè)和工資。因此,這種趨勢更容易被忽視,就像一只在水中沸騰的青蛙,悄悄地給美國預算帶來越來越大的壓力。但如今,在經歷了多年的高通脹之后,價格是經濟中最大的話題。我認為這解釋了人們的憤怒:他們一直在注意東西的價格,并被這些東西變得多么昂貴的現實所打擊。
The author of that Atlantic piece is Annie Lowrey. She’s an economics reporter,, and also my wife. In this conversation, we discuss how the affordability crisis has collided with our post-pandemic inflationary world, the forces that shape our economic perceptions, why people keep spending as if prices aren’t a strain and what this might mean for the presidential election.
《大西洋月刊》的作者是安妮·勞瑞。她是一名經濟學記者,也是我的妻子,在這次談話中,我們討論了負擔能力危機如何與我們的后流行性通貨膨脹世界發(fā)生沖突,塑造我們經濟觀念的力量,為什么人們繼續(xù)消費,好像價格不是一種壓力,以及這對總統(tǒng)選舉可能意味著什么。
《大西洋月刊》的作者是安妮·勞瑞。她是一名經濟學記者,也是我的妻子,在這次談話中,我們討論了負擔能力危機如何與我們的后流行性通貨膨脹世界發(fā)生沖突,塑造我們經濟觀念的力量,為什么人們繼續(xù)消費,好像價格不是一種壓力,以及這對總統(tǒng)選舉可能意味著什么。
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 3 )
收藏
Americans are facing a tough time with their finances, especially concerning housing affordability and retirement savings.
美國人正面臨財務困境,特別是在住房負擔能力和退休儲蓄方面。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
I'm getting worried about the rising housing prices. It seems like it's becoming harder to afford a home these days.
我越來越擔心房價上漲。如今似乎越來越難以負擔得起房子了。
Yeah, it's a real struggle. With the rising housing prices and stagnant wages, it's becoming increasingly difficult for many to afford homes, let alone save for retirement.
是的,這確實是個難題。隨著房價上漲和工資停滯,許多人越來越難以負擔房子,更不用說儲蓄退休金了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Absolutely. And with the fear of not being able to retire comfortably, people might be tempted to make risky investments or neglect proper financial planning, which could spell trouble for their portfolios in the long run.
完全正確。由于擔心無法安穩(wěn)退休,人們可能會冒險投資或忽視適當的財務規(guī)劃,這從長遠來看可能會給他們的投資組合帶來麻煩。
It's a vicious cycle. If people can't afford homes, they might delay retirement savings, but if they focus solely on saving for retirement without considering their housing situation, they might miss out on potential investment opportunities.
這是一個惡性循環(huán)。如果人們買不起房子,他們可能會推遲退休儲蓄,但如果他們只專注于為退休儲蓄而不考慮住房情況,他們可能會錯過潛在的投資機會。
And let's not forget how the global economy plays into all of this. Economic instability, inflation, and market fluctuations can further complicate matters and add to people's financial worries.
不要忘記全球經濟在這其中的作用。經濟不穩(wěn)定、通貨膨脹和市場波動可能會進一步使問題復雜化,并增加人們的財務擔憂。
Most times it all comes down to proper financial planning cause most people don’t realize how important financial planners are until they messed up. Staying productive with the latest strategies and analysis really pays off. With professional help I turned $220k into $880k despite the market ups and downs.
大多數時候,這都歸結于適當的財務規(guī)劃,因為大多數人直到搞砸了才意識到財務規(guī)劃師的重要性。保持最新的策略和分析真的很有回報。在專業(yè)幫助下,我把22萬美元變成了88萬美元,盡管市場有漲有跌。
Why are you saying this before the election? We need to pretend everything is fine until November.
為什么在選舉前說這些?我們需要假裝一切都好,直到11月。
that in competitive markets businesses are not price setters but price takers. The fact that businesses are setting prices higher because they can reflects that the markets are not accepting new competitors, because there is a vision of profit, and existing businesses in the market have political or otherwise power to set prices. Home insurance market, pharmaceuticals, defense industry, Medical insurance…. The list goes on and on. We have just had 44 years of suppression of the enforcement of Anti Trust Laws.
在競爭性市場中,企業(yè)不是價格制定者而是價格接受者。企業(yè)提高價格的事實反映出市場不接受新競爭者,因為有利潤的前景,而市場上的現有企業(yè)有政治或其他權力來制定價格。房屋保險市場、制藥業(yè)、國防工業(yè)、醫(yī)療保險……名單還在繼續(xù)。我們剛剛經歷了44年反托拉斯法的執(zhí)行被壓制的情況。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Bingo!
說得對!
100%
完全正確。
If it’s true, you could call it shadow cartel behaviour. But how can you prove it…
如果這是真的,你可以稱之為影子卡特爾行為。但你怎么能證明呢……
We're also not talking about the dramatic decrease in the number of players in basically every market.
我們還沒有討論幾乎每個市場中的參與者數量急劇減少的問題。
...This means that people ARE correct to ultimately blame corporate greed and Washington, D.C. for these economic problems, then, right? And from what I've seen it doesn't matter much which party is in power: the corporate greed continues unabated.
……這意味著人們確實應該最終將這些經濟問題歸咎于企業(yè)貪婪和華盛頓特區(qū),對嗎?從我看到的情況來看,哪個黨執(zhí)政并不重要:企業(yè)貪婪仍在繼續(xù)。
@stephenbonaduce7852 yeah this if the Neo liberal regime since Reagan.
是的,這是自里根以來的新自由主義政權。
How to do business like an American corporation-
Step 1: Buy politicians and lobby for regulations, tariffs, and subsidies to protect your monopoly and destroy domestic competition
Step 2: Cut costs by using cheaper materials and ingredients, cut employee wages and compensation, and refuse to innovate or do R&D so you can maximize shareholder value
Step 3: Outsource any remaining American jobs to the developing world and hire immigrants to work for less
Step 4: Act bewildered and wonder why line no go up when you gut your business operations and destroy the buying power of the American consumer at the expense of shareholder value
Step 5: Cry for more tariffs and regulations when China (or any competitor) surpasses the value offered by shoddy American products and services
Step 6: Lobby to weaponize the US dollar when other countries refuse to be exploited
Step 7: Watch American industry wither and die and the economy implode
Step 8: Blame China
像美國公司那樣做生意的方法——
第一步:收買政客并游說法規(guī)、關稅和補貼以保護你的壟斷并摧毀國內競爭
第二步:通過使用更便宜的材料和成分來削減成本,削減員工工資和補償,拒絕創(chuàng)新或研發(fā),以最大化股東價值
第三步:將剩余的美國工作外包給發(fā)展中國家,雇傭移民以較低的工資工作
第四步:當你削減業(yè)務運營并以犧牲美國消費者購買力為代價來最大化股東價值時,裝作困惑并想知道為什么業(yè)績線沒有上升
第五步:當中國(或任何競爭對手)超過劣質美國產品和服務提供的價值時,哭喊要求更多的關稅和法規(guī)
第六步:當其他國家拒絕被剝削時,游說將美元武器化
第七步:看著美國工業(yè)枯萎,經濟崩潰
第八步:指責中國
Insurance, utility prices.....
保險,公用事業(yè)價格…..
Pretty much. And then we blame Joe on the inflation thing.
差不多是這樣。然后我們把通貨膨脹的問題歸咎于喬。
It's not a cost-of-living crisis. It's an OMG-I-Am-Fucking-Poor crisis.
這不是生活成本危機。這是“天啊,我真窮”危機。
The widening wealth equity gap is not a new theory.
財富不平等差距擴大并不是新理論。
true but doesn't mean it isn't an issue NOW. Even more so, it needs to include the fiscal dominance in this talk to make sure we all see the holistic view.
確實如此,但這并不意味著它現在不是一個問題。更重要的是,這需要包括財政主導地位,以確保我們都能看到整體情況。
No, but everybody is wise to it now vs the old "boot straps" ideology
不是,但與舊的“自力更生”意識形態(tài)相比,現在每個人都看透了。
@johnwu7 I said it wasn't a new theory, not an invalid one. The point is even respected news sites engage in clickbait. But, you know what Hearst said.
@johnwu7 我說這不是一個新理論,而不是一個無效的理論。關鍵是即使是受人尊敬的新聞網站也在做點擊誘餌。但你知道赫斯特說過什么。
Economists and media keep telling us that the economy is fantastic, but we can't afford anything, so then they just tell us we're bad with money. Executives and landlords are cheering them on while raising prices and rent. You don't need a new economic theory to explain this, it's painfully obvious.
經濟學家和媒體不斷告訴我們經濟很好,但我們什么都負擔不起,然后他們只是告訴我們我們不會理財。高管和房東在漲價和加租的同時為他們歡呼。你不需要新的經濟理論來解釋這一點,這是顯而易見的。
More pillow talk. Less economics
更多的是空談。更少的是經濟學。
The traditional unemployment rate does not capture real unemployment. You do not cite the labor participation rate which is dramatically lower than its peak in the 1990s.
傳統(tǒng)的失業(yè)率未能反映實際的失業(yè)情況。你沒有提到勞動參與率,它遠低于1990年代的峰值。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
“The United States of America has gone from an open, competitive marketplace to an economy where a few politically powerful companies dominate key industries that affect our daily lives.” — Denise Hearn (2018)
“美國已經從一個開放、競爭的市場轉變?yōu)橐粋€少數政治強大的公司主導關鍵行業(yè)的經濟,這些行業(yè)影響著我們的日常生活?!?——丹妮絲·赫恩(2018)
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Bravo! Exactly!
好極了!完全正確!
Millennial parents up in here Childcare expense is why I stopped teaching and changed careers. All under a political regime that is supposed to help civil servants.
千禧一代的父母在這里,育兒費用是我停止教學并轉行的原因。這一切都在一個應該幫助公務員的政治制度下。
Some things you might be interested in looking at are historic housing prices. Look at cities. In my case, while things have levelled off, my house in Colorado Springs more than doubled in value from 2016 to 2020. Rents have followed suit. Inflation? I suggest you look at historical inflation in France, Germany, England, pick five random first-world countries.
Yeah, Biden failed in some areas. Every president fails in some ways. Maybe an autocracy would help? Look at Hungary, Turkey, other places of your choice. Ignore things like Duerted massacring homosexuals and focus on the benefits.
Keep in mind the saying, "when the Fed taps on the brakes, someone goes through the windshield". Do some research. Don't just focus on USA.
你可能感興趣的一些事情是歷史房價??纯闯鞘?。就我而言,雖然情況已經穩(wěn)定下來,但我在科羅拉多斯普林斯的房子從2016年到2020年價值翻了一倍多。租金也隨之上漲。通貨膨脹?我建議你看看法國、德國、英格蘭的歷史通脹,隨便挑五個發(fā)達國家。
是的,拜登在某些方面失敗了。每個總統(tǒng)在某些方面都會失敗。也許專制會有幫助?看看匈牙利、土耳其,你選擇的其他地方。忽略像杜爾特殺害同性戀這樣的事情,專注于好處。
記住這句話,“當美聯儲踩剎車時,有人會撞上擋風玻璃”。做一些研究。不要只關注美國。
Would things be better for teachers under Trump or Biden, in your opinion? My mom was a teacher.
在你看來,在特朗普還是拜登的領導下,教師的情況會更好嗎?我媽媽是一名教師。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Cheapness of food? Ezra leave the NYC bubble once in a while
食品便宜?埃茲拉,偶爾離開一下紐約市的泡泡。
It very cheap now that I eat 1/3 what I used to. :)
現在我只吃以前的三分之一,所以很便宜。 :)
Quality of life decline.
生活質量下降。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
You rely on false data. Unemployment does not measure people who are not looking for work. Those who have given up looking for work and are not registered at a state unemployment office are not counted. Housing costs are not in the measure of inflation. Millions work for minimum wage which is not a livable wage. College costs are not included. Moreover, people harken back to the 50s when one income could support a family. Wages have been stagnant for a long time.
你依賴錯誤的數據。失業(yè)率沒有衡量那些不找工作的人。那些放棄找工作并且沒有在州失業(yè)辦公室登記的人不被計算在內。住房成本不在通貨膨脹的衡量范圍內。數百萬人以最低工資工作,而最低工資無法維持生計。大學費用不包括在內。此外,人們回想起50年代,當時一個收入可以養(yǎng)家糊口。工資長期停滯不前。
If you're a Harvard grad the economy is great
如果你是哈佛畢業(yè)生,經濟狀況很好
Are Harvard grads the only people that take these polls?
哈佛畢業(yè)生是唯一參與這些民意調查的人嗎?
the numbers don't lie but liars use numbers
數字不會撒謊,但騙子會利用數字
She is Harvard grad
她是哈佛畢業(yè)生
Summary: “The economy isn’t bad. People are just mad because they are frequently reminded that things cost way more than 4 years ago, and their wages haven’t gone up.”
Let’s talk consumer credit card debt.
總結:“經濟并不差。人們只是因為經常被提醒物價比四年前高得多,而工資沒有上漲而感到憤怒?!?br /> 讓我們談談消費者信用卡債務。
A simpler explanation; the economy is terrible and the statistics you're referencing to claim otherwise are not actually relevant.
一個更簡單的解釋;經濟很糟糕,你引用的統(tǒng)計數據實際上并不相關。
I talked to a 50 years old guy who owns a contractor business building pole buildings and barns. He said he was so busy he won't answer the phone anymore. The next thing he talked about was how the country is going to hell. He is so busy making money he won't answer the phone but thinks the country is going to hell. Just goes to show you the power of media
我和一個50歲的家伙聊過,他擁有一家承包商業(yè)務,建造柱狀建筑和谷倉。他說他太忙了,不會再接電話了。他接下來談論的是國家如何走向地獄。他忙于賺錢,不接電話,卻認為國家走向地獄。這恰恰說明了媒體的力量。
My plumber said the same thing, but he also said that 80% of his business is to fix poor quality band-aid jobs done by the last plumber. And just because the barn building business is booming doesnt mean all sectors of the economy are booming.
我的水管工也說了同樣的話,但他還說他80%的業(yè)務是修復上一個水管工做的質量差的臨時修補工作。而且,僅僅因為谷倉建筑業(yè)務蓬勃發(fā)展并不意味著所有經濟部門都在蓬勃發(fā)展。
Biden should say: "me and Obama made the 2010's great economy, Trump inherited it, then screwed it up by not taking the pandemic seriously because he doesn't listen to the experts. Now I'm cleaning up his mess."
拜登應該說:“我和奧巴馬創(chuàng)造了2010年代的偉大經濟,特朗普繼承了它,然后因為他不聽專家的話而沒有認真對待疫情,把它搞砸了?,F在我在收拾他的爛攤子?!?/b>
The biggest line item on everyones budget (especially younger people) is their rent/mortgage. Housing prices have gone up drastically. So yeah you might have gotten a 7% raise and your 401k is doing OK but big goals like home ownership and starting a family are getting more and more out of reach.
每個人預算中最大的一項(尤其是年輕人)是他們的租金/抵押貸款。房價大幅上漲。所以是的,你可能得到了7%的加薪,你的401k也還可以,但擁有房子和組建家庭這樣的重大目標越來越難以實現。
Indeed. And these are some of the main reasons that people aren't having kids, and the birthrate is well below replacement. We'll be looking at a cratering population--just when the worst effects of climate change are hitting us, I think!
確實如此。這些是人們不生孩子的主要原因之一,出生率遠低于更替水平。我認為,當氣候變化的最壞影響襲擊我們時,我們將面臨人口暴跌的問題!
When will someone write an article that captures mortgages in 2024? Visual Capitalist took a step in the right direction by comparing median house price to median household income (the ratio by year). That's good for the third of home buyers that buy in cash (probably trading up to a nicer house).
They should compare the ratio of lifetime mortgage cost (principle + interest) to median household income. Or, annual new mortgage cost as a share of annual median household income.
什么時候會有人寫一篇文章,談一談2024年的抵押貸款情況?視覺資本家通過比較中位房價和中位家庭收入(按年份的比例)朝著正確的方向邁出了一步。對于三分之一的現金購房者(可能換一棟更好的房子)來說,這很好。
他們應該比較終身抵押貸款成本(本金+利息)與中位家庭收入的比例?;蛘?,年度新抵押貸款成本占年度中位家庭收入的比例。
and then there are tens of millions with a fixed rate mortgage like me who's housing costs remain flat.
還有數千萬像我一樣有固定利率抵押貸款的人,他們的住房成本保持不變。
@MrSteeDoo Fair point. It is also fair to say expensive housing impedes workforce mobility and makes it tough for first time homebuyers like couples.
公平的觀點。同樣可以公平地說,昂貴的住房阻礙了勞動力的流動性,并使像夫婦這樣的首次購房者變得困難。
@MrSteeDoo Your home insurance, property taxes, utilities, and maintenance/repair costs are not flat. My house is paid off, but all other costs are going way up every year. God forbid that I need a new air conditioner or roof.
你的房屋保險、物業(yè)稅、公用事業(yè)和維護/維修費用并不固定。我的房子已經付清了,但所有其他費用每年都在大幅上漲。天啊,希望我不需要新的空調或屋頂。
@mackiej Yes, thanks to Biden's student debt reductions, my 40-ish son and his wife (both holding decent jobs) were finally able to buy a small house, but the payments are crippling.
是的,多虧了拜登的學生債務減免,我40多歲的兒子和他的妻子(都有不錯的工作)終于能買一棟小房子了,但房貸還款讓人難以承受。
It isn't complex. The news media is awful. Housing costs, Health care, education costs, cast a pall over otherwise good numbers.
這并不復雜。新聞媒體很糟糕。住房成本、醫(yī)療保健、教育成本,使得其他原本不錯的數據蒙上了陰影。
A CEO of a hardware supply company said to me we raised prices (and our margins) significantly during the pandemic and we're not backing down. Or as an economist would say, prices are sticky and slow to adjust, meaning they do not respond quickly to changes in supply and demand. Just walk around a Home Depot or Lowes and prices haven't dropped even as the pandemic ended and supply chains recovered.
一家硬件供應公司的CEO對我說,我們在疫情期間大幅提高了價格(和利潤率),我們不會退縮?;蛘哂媒洕鷮W家的話來說,價格具有粘性并且調整緩慢,這意味著它們不會迅速對供需變化做出反應。只需在Home Depot或Lowes走一圈,即使疫情結束,供應鏈恢復,價格也沒有下降。
He'll back down when customers refuse to pay and look for better deals. Ultimately consumers fighting back is the only way to solve this problem.
當客戶拒絕付款并尋找更好的交易時,他會退縮。最終,消費者的反擊是解決這個問題的唯一途徑。
Voice from the Ground here, my wife and I can't afford our two bedroom apartment let alone a house to start a new family. If our elites can't solve this for us it's time for them to go. You can build all the houses you want If they are all bought buy slum lord companies it won't solve it.
基層聲音在此,我和我妻子連兩居室公寓都負擔不起,更不用說買房子來組建新家庭了。如果我們的精英不能為我們解決這個問題,那是他們該走的時候了。你可以建所有你想要的房子,如果它們都被貧民區(qū)的公司買走了,這也解決不了問題。
Inflation is a direct result of income inequality. Simple math, those with extra money buy assets and that raises rents and mortgages. Same with equities (as CEOs raise prices to get the P/E into less crazy territory).... Without tax there is no mechanism to remove money.
通貨膨脹是收入不平等的直接結果。簡單的數學,有多余錢的人購買資產,這就抬高了租金和抵押貸款。股票也是如此(因為CEO提高價格以使市盈率進入不那么瘋狂的領域)……沒有稅收就沒有機制來移除資金。
Being a busy contractor doesn’t mean you’re making money.
Inflation is a major factor in higher prices and lower profits.
You can be insolvent and very very busy.
The media problem is ‘they’re mostly a dumb and inexperienced as a box of rocks.
作為一個忙碌的承包商并不意味著你在賺錢。
通貨膨脹是價格上漲和利潤下降的主要因素。
你可能忙得不可開交,但仍然無力償債。
媒體問題是‘他們大多和一盒石頭一樣愚蠢和缺乏經驗’。
The hard news orgs still do a pretty good job: Reuters, AP, BBC, and many local newspapers.
Turn off cable news channels; it is often opinions-first infotainment. Don't use an article written by the summer intern or an opinion columnist to paint the whole news company with a broad brush. Beat reporters--like traffic reporters who have covered the same thing for years--have a good idea what is going on in their specialty. The specialization creates value for the reader.
嚴肅的新聞機構仍然做得很好:路透社、美聯社、BBC以及許多當地報紙。
關閉有線新聞頻道;它通常是意見優(yōu)先的信息娛樂。不要用一個暑期實習生或意見專欄作家的文章來概括整個新聞公司。資深記者——比如多年來報道同一事件的交通記者——對他們的專業(yè)領域發(fā)生的事情有很好的了解。專業(yè)化為讀者創(chuàng)造了價值。
Where did you take your figures? Did the data included the homeless and the low economic class? It sounds unreliable, all that bla bla!
你是從哪里得到這些數據的?數據是否包括無家可歸者和低經濟階層?聽起來不可靠,都是廢話!
Inflation inflation inflation. Since 2019 your cost of living has risen 30%.
通貨膨脹通貨膨脹通貨膨脹。自2019年以來,你的生活成本上漲了30%。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Fairly easy to get wages up for rich people ya think?
對于富人來說,工資上漲相當容易,你認為呢?
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Every year, my Social Security check is increased. Then, my Medicare premiums go up by an amount equal to the increase in my Social Security check. So an extra $100.00 per month comes in, then it goes right back out, then I have to pay income tax on the $100.00. Thus, I end up poorer after getting a raise.
Why would anyone be surprised that I am mad?
每年,我的社保支票都會增加。然后,我的醫(yī)療保險保費上漲的金額等于我的社保支票增加的金額。因此,每月多出100美元,然后它又馬上流出,然后我必須為這100美元支付所得稅。因此,加薪后我反而變得更窮。
為什么有人會對我生氣感到驚訝呢?
what has not been talked about is drilling into unemployment more. More specifically, UNDER-employment. Yeah sure unemployment (by the survey's limited qualifiers) is low. But... The quality of jobs has gotten worse. The gig economy and part time job economy is lowering these unemployment numbers, while screwing the workers whose total compensation is terrible (no benefits). Additionally, we have companies going more lean (see tech layoffs) to squeeze profits. We have a white collar job recession. Unemployment may be relatively low, but the quality of jobs is trash.
還沒有討論更多的失業(yè)問題。更具體地說,是就業(yè)不足。是的,按調查的有限資格,失業(yè)率很低。但是……工作的質量變得更差。零工經濟和兼職經濟正在降低這些失業(yè)數據,同時搞垮了那些總薪酬很差(沒有福利)的工人。此外,我們還有公司在裁員(見科技行業(yè)裁員)以壓榨利潤。我們有一個白領工作衰退。失業(yè)率可能相對較低,但工作的質量很差。
I agree with this completely. You're only as secure as your current job, and you can't count on keeping it, because you can be laid off at a whim. Corporate management likes to tell you that your career is under your control, but that like most of what corporate America peddles, is a lie.
我完全同意這一點。你的安全性只取決于你當前的工作,你不能指望保住它,因為你可能會隨時被解雇。企業(yè)管理層喜歡告訴你你的職業(yè)生涯在你的掌控之中,但這就像美國企業(yè)推銷的大多數東西一樣,是一個謊言。
Low tax rates on wealthy investors mean they search for investment opportunities like buying up housing and renting it out to you. That lowers the supply and keeps those assets up in price.
It's all about wealth inequality.
對富有投資者的低稅率意味著他們尋找投資機會,比如購買房屋并出租給你。這降低了供應量,并保持這些資產的價格上漲。
這一切都與財富不平等有關。
@MrSteeDoo No, in my little town and in the big city, people bought up the homes at 0% and at 5.5%. If they could flip or rent the homes for less than the cost to own the home they do. A hard working handy man who can fix up or maintain homes will buy a second home as income and investment. He is not rich. He is merely making money on his skill. The rich guy who rents his house may chose Vegas vacations instead of saving. Nothing in the bank, but he has a high paying job. Wealth inequity will always grow because zero is flat and some people always make and have zero. With inflation, others will make and have more. So depression is the only way to cause wealth equity, everyone has zero. But as long as there are more and more government employees, they always benefit when high taxes and depression kill everyone who does not make money through the government.
不,在我的小鎮(zhèn)和大城市,人們以0%和5.5%的利率買房。如果他們可以翻新或出租房屋的成本低于擁有房屋的成本,他們會這樣做。一個勤勞的手工藝人可以修理或維護房屋,會購買第二套房作為收入和投資。他不富有。他只是靠自己的技能賺錢。那個出租房子的有錢人可能會選擇去拉斯維加斯度假而不是儲蓄。銀行里沒有錢,但他有一份高薪工作。財富不平等將永遠增長,因為零是平的,有些人總是掙零或擁有零。隨著通貨膨脹,其他人會掙更多。所以蕭條是導致財富平等的唯一途徑,每個人都沒有。只要政府雇員越來越多,當高稅收和蕭條殺死所有不通過政府賺錢的人時,他們總是受益。
@gladyskravitz1000 I am a government employee. I do Survey work on road construction. Are you telling ;me that I am the problem? LOL
我是一個政府雇員。我在做道路建設的調查工作。你是說我是問題所在嗎?哈哈
At work about every other month they post a letter in the break room praising all of the employees for record monthly sales. But when you get your review, well 3% is all they can give you, sorry its the budget you know. But hey they bought us pizza on Friday . I can think if a couple places id like to stick that pizza 9:53
工作中,每隔一個月他們就在休息室里貼一封信,贊揚所有員工創(chuàng)下月銷售記錄。但是當你得到你的評價時,嗯,他們只能給你3%,對不起,你知道的預算。不過嘿,他們在星期五給我們買了披薩。我能想到幾個地方我想把那個披薩塞進去。
How many times did Donald Trump declare bankruptcy?
唐納德·特朗普宣告破產了多少次?
Politics determines how wealth is distributed within a country, while wars and diplomacy determine how wealth is distributed between countries.
The citizens of the world's richest country with the most expensive military are enjoying these benefits: Economic inequality, inflation, stagnant real wages for the last fifty years, costly healthcare, an expensive education system, student loan debt totaling $1.7 trillion with an average balance of $38,000, poor public transportation systems, racial inequality, mass incarceration, the militarization of police, deteriorating infrastructure, housing affordability, homelessness, the opioid epidemic, and gun violence.
Instead of prioritizing the welfare of its people, the US meddles in other countries to spread its version of democracy.
政治決定了一個國家內部的財富分配,而戰(zhàn)爭和外交決定了國家之間的財富分配。
世界上最富有的國家,擁有最昂貴的軍事力量,其公民正在享受這些好處:經濟不平等、通貨膨脹、過去五十年實際工資停滯、昂貴的醫(yī)療保健、昂貴的教育體系、總計1.7萬億美元的學生貸款債務,平均余額為3.8萬美元、糟糕的公共交通系統(tǒng)、種族不平等、大規(guī)模監(jiān)禁、警察軍事化、基礎設施惡化、住房負擔能力差、無家可歸、阿片類藥物流行和槍支暴力。
美國沒有優(yōu)先考慮其人民的福利,而是干涉其他國家,傳播其版本的民主。
If I still have student loans in November I'm staying home on election day.
如果到11月我還有學生貸款,我將在選舉日待在家里。
Hate for immigrants is weird. Here in Desantis's fascist Florida, even apart from agriculture, life would STOP without the quiet brown guys who build/repair our streets/sewers/bridges, construct our buildings, replace our roofs, etc. The Hispanic females who care for our children, staff our big-box stores, etc.
對移民的仇恨很奇怪。在德桑蒂斯的法西斯佛羅里達,即使不談農業(yè),如果沒有那些建造/修理我們的街道/下水道/橋梁、建造我們的建筑物、更換我們的屋頂的安靜的棕色人種,生活將停止。照顧我們孩子的西班牙裔女性、在我們的大型商店工作的員工等等。
Education, health, housing, and child care are the difficult to globalize sectors. They increased in price relative to everything else because they could not be off-shored to China. In addition to being domestically anchored, they are the traditionally feminized sectors, which are ‘care’ services, requiring emotional ‘work’, and human connection. Until the 20th century, these social needs were met as part of household management, as gendered work. Often this was supplemented by the church delivering services to local communities. In most advanced economies, as religion declined in importance and women joined the workforce, welfare states took over responsibility for those sectors, and transformed them into modern public services.
教育、醫(yī)療、住房和兒童保育是難以全球化的部門。它們的價格相對于其他所有東西都上漲了,因為它們不能被外包到中國。除了在國內有基礎外,它們還是傳統(tǒng)上女性化的部門,是需要情感“工作”和人際聯系的“關懷”服務。直到20世紀,這些社會需求作為家庭管理的一部分得到滿足,作為性別化的工作。通常,教會提供的服務補充了當地社區(qū)。在大多數發(fā)達經濟體中,隨著宗教重要性的下降和女性進入勞動力市場,福利國家接管了這些部門的責任,并將其轉變?yōu)楝F代公共服務。
@Rnankn Accurate. In America, the rearing of healthy, well socialized, educated and emotionally intelligent, emotionally stable children is dued as are the roles around caregiving and mental health. I would like to see a change. There is too much emphasis on pure economics, not enough on well being and human flourishing.
準確。在美國,撫養(yǎng)健康的、社會化良好的、受過教育的、情商高的、情緒穩(wěn)定的孩子的價值被貶低了,照顧和心理健康的角色也是如此。我希望看到改變。過于強調純經濟,而不是福祉和人類的繁榮。
Part of the problem... Our brains are distorted by the flood of social media that constantly shows us friends on holiday, buying something cool, having a great meal, attending a concert or other exciting event. We see the icing on their cake, not the reality of their workdays, childcare, housework, etc. But we are fooled, and feel less-than.
問題的一部分……我們的腦子被社交媒體的洪流扭曲了,社交媒體不斷向我們展示朋友們度假、買酷東西、吃美食、參加音樂會或其他令人興奮的活動。我們看到的是他們蛋糕上的糖霜,而不是他們工作日、育兒、家務等的現實。但我們被欺騙了,感到自卑。
People will feel more optimistic when they start to see more crypto influencers toss money in the air.
當人們開始看到更多的加密貨幣影響者在空中撒錢時,他們會感到更樂觀。
people can't afford groceries and rent. look at the amount of credit card debt in America...record highs...
人們買不起食品和房租??纯疵绹男庞每▊鶆铡瓌?chuàng)下歷史新高……
It isn't that hard i have kept receits for the past 4 years i can clearly see my expenses have skyrocketed buying same things.
這并不難,我過去四年一直保存收據,我可以清楚地看到買相同的東西,我的開支飆升了。
Nobody talks about how medical bills no longer effect your credit scores. That’s huge for mortgages, loans..ect
沒有人談論醫(yī)療賬單不再影響信用評分。這對抵押貸款、貸款等是個巨大的利好。
an exile Russian talked about what is happening inside Russia right now. Basically, he said that the wealth in Russia was going to the war and to the oligarchs who kept Putin in Power. This left no money for the ordinary citizens. The same thing is happening here just slower and in a less dramatic fashion. There is only so much money, and as the inequality increases -- i.e. the rich get richer, the money has to come from somewhere. Where it comes from is the ordinary citizens who gets poorer.
一位流亡的俄羅斯人談論了俄羅斯現在的情況?;旧希f俄羅斯的財富都用于戰(zhàn)爭和維持普京掌權的寡頭。這使得普通市民沒有錢。同樣的事情也在這里發(fā)生,只是速度較慢,戲劇性較低。錢是有限的,隨著不平等加劇——也就是說,富人更富,這些錢必須來自某個地方。這些錢來自變得更窮的普通市民。
“Your dollar will be worth just as much tomorrow as it is today.” — President Richard Nixon (R), August 15, 1971
"Ronald Reagan proved that budget deficits don't matter." -- fmr. Vice President Richard Cheney (R), October 2002
“I have abandoned free market principles to save the free market system." -- President George W. Bush (R), December 16, 2008
“你的美元明天的價值將和今天一樣?!?——總統(tǒng)理查德·尼克松(共和黨),1971年8月15日
“羅納德·里根證明了預算赤字無關緊要。” ——前副總統(tǒng)理查德·切尼(共和黨),2002年10月
“為了拯救自由市場體系,我放棄了自由市場原則?!?——總統(tǒng)喬治·W·布什(共和黨),2008年12月16日
We have WORSE health outcomes than Europe. We do not have a real budget deficit. We have homelessness, poor health care, etc. because our elected officials in WA knowingly refuse to finance basic needs. We have unused economic resources and we knowingly do not use them. Modern monetary theory tells the story and apparently you guys can't afford the time or energy, despite your jobs, to learn about it.
我們的健康狀況比歐洲更糟糕。我們沒有真正的預算赤字。我們有無家可歸者,糟糕的醫(yī)療保健等,因為我們在華盛頓的民選官員故意拒絕為基本需求提供資金。我們有未使用的經濟資源,我們故意不使用它們。現代貨幣理論解釋了這一切,顯然你們盡管有工作,卻沒有時間或精力去了解它。
Americans are always caught between their belief in 'entitlement' for 'cheap goods' and their belief that Business should be deregulated and government should not interfere with Business. This produces an insane economy. 'Cheap goods' come from overseas countries with 'cheap labor' and often no environmental concerns. On the other hand, there is a belief that everything should be privatized to keep government out of our business ... so to speak. And, the business model of Business shifted to profits for shareholders and high CEO salaries and therefore, prices such as medical care, housing, and child-care all become 'for-profit' and not for wellness or affordability and therefore off the wall expensive. When everything is 'privatized' with such a business model, then expect to have your money sucked out and aggregated upwards.
美國人總是陷入“享有廉價商品”和“企業(yè)應當放松管制,政府不應干預企業(yè)”的理念之間。這導致了一個瘋狂的經濟。“廉價商品”來自“廉價勞動力”的海外國家,而且往往沒有環(huán)境問題。另一方面,人們認為一切都應該私有化,以便政府不干預我們的事務……可以這么說。而且,企業(yè)的商業(yè)模式轉向股東利潤和高管薪酬,因此,醫(yī)療、住房和兒童保育等價格都變成了“盈利性”而不是為了健康或負擔得起,因此價格高得離譜。當一切都以這種商業(yè)模式私有化時,預計你的錢會被吸走并向上聚集。
Our evolved system has destroyed competition, and we have moved from pure competition to oligopoly to duopoly to monopoly and we are now in a condition of corporate aristocracy where the corporations are the new kings and we are the new peasants.
我們演變的制度已經摧毀了競爭,我們從純競爭走向了寡頭壟斷,再到雙頭壟斷,現在我們處于企業(yè)貴族統(tǒng)治的狀態(tài),公司是新的國王,我們是新的農民。
Hey, guys, didn't Uncle Karl have a point about paying attention to the balance between people's needs and their abilities?
嘿,伙計們,卡爾叔叔關于關注人們需求和能力平衡的觀點難道沒有道理嗎?
Can anyone spell GASLIGHTING. There is factors that have intentionally not been accounted for, simply for the optics of it for political purposes. I don’t need my Finance Degree in Economics to obxtively analyze this. Deferring your Critical Thinking skills to “the experts and institutions” we have in this time in history is simply a Fools Errand.
有人能拼寫“煤氣燈效應”嗎。有些因素故意沒有被考慮進去,純粹是為了政治目的的表面文章。我不需要我的經濟學金融學位來客觀分析這個。把你的批判性思維技能交給我們這個歷史時期的“專家和機構”簡直是愚蠢的差事。
Around an hour and 11 minutes in it was said the public feels like they're being gaslighted. That is the only thing they got correct.
在大約1小時11分鐘時,有人說公眾覺得自己被操控了。這是他們唯一說對的事情。
Why are people unhappy with the economy? It’s obvious, right? A lot of places are having layoffs, salaries haven’t kept up with inflation, and prices are out of control. Why is it a surprise that people are unhappy?
為什么人們對經濟不滿?這顯而易見,對吧?很多地方都在裁員,工資沒有跟上通貨膨脹,價格失控。人們不滿有什么好驚訝的?
Unemployment data doesn't cover freelancers and contract workers, which are said to make up a third of the workforce. I freelance and went from working hours of almost 2 full time jobs to almost nothing. And what is out there, the rates are really low for tedious, time-consuming work.
失業(yè)數據不包括自由職業(yè)者和合同工,據說他們占勞動力的三分之一。我做自由職業(yè),從幾乎兩份全職工作時間到幾乎沒有。而且外面的工作,報酬真的很低,對于單調、耗時的工作來說。
I'll slow you one stat from my county where I live that's more than makes up for any reduced inflation or even dropping in prices. Home in my county (very poor area in northern NY) went from avg of $78k to just under $200k in 3 years and mortgage rates doubled and housing inventory is down 92%. So that means the average mortgage here went from $330 a month in 2020 to $1,500 a month in 2024 and it's actually worse than that because there's no homes for sale in the market of home I would be looking at buying would would have been in the rage of $225,000 before the pandemic and now it's $600,000 even up here. So the mortgage on a house I would have got would have been about $900 a month now it's about $4,500 a month and insurance and tax's would be much higher as well. So no the lower of the gain in inflation doesn't do anything compared to that. But anyone that owns assets like a home with a 2.8% mortgage like all my older siblings they all got almost a half million dollars in equity gained in their house some even more in my home state of Massachusetts for doing nothing..
讓我慢慢告訴你一個我所在縣的統(tǒng)計數據,這個數據足以彌補任何減少的通貨膨脹甚至價格下跌。我所在縣(紐約北部非常貧困的地區(qū))的房價在三年內從平均7.8萬美元漲到剛剛低于20萬美元,抵押貸款利率翻了一番,房屋庫存下降了92%。這意味著這里的平均抵押貸款從2020年的每月330美元漲到2024年的每月1500美元,實際上情況更糟,因為在我看房的市場上沒有房子出售,疫情前價格會在22.5萬美元左右,現在甚至在這里也漲到了60萬美元。所以我本來可以買的房子的抵押貸款大約是每月900美元,現在大約是每月4500美元,而且保險和稅收也會高得多。因此,通貨膨脹的降低與此相比毫無意義。但任何擁有資產的人,比如擁有2.8%抵押貸款的房子,就像我所有年長的兄弟姐妹一樣,他們都在房屋中獲得了近50萬美元的權益,有些人在我的家鄉(xiāng)馬薩諸塞州甚至更多,而他們什么都沒做。
It’s ridiculous that “prices” don’t include housing or healthcare. Sure, “prices” are in line with wages. That doesn’t matter when basic rent and healthcare have doubled.
“價格”不包括住房或醫(yī)療保健是荒謬的。當然,“價格”與工資一致。當基本房租和醫(yī)療費用翻倍時,這并不重要。
Mad angry or mad insane. For many it seems to be both.
憤怒或瘋狂。對許多人來說,這兩者兼而有之。
I like Joe Rogan much more than this guy. I call him "Better Than Ezra."
我更喜歡喬·羅根,而不是這個人。我稱他為“比以斯拉好”。
termites. Not literal termites, but economic termites: businesses that worm their way into some small niche of the economy and start slowly devouring it. A lot of this has been made possible by the abandonment of antitrust policy by the Reagan administration. Considering that businesses can now just buy up all their competitors, it's not surprising that prices are stubbornly high.
白蟻。不是真正的白蟻,而是經濟白蟻:企業(yè)蠶食經濟中的某個小利基市場并開始慢慢吞噬它。這在很大程度上是由于里根政府放棄了反壟斷政策??紤]到企業(yè)現在可以收購所有競爭對手,價格頑固地居高不下也就不足為奇了。
You don't mention the purchase price of new and used cars, or the cost of maintenance/repairs. Transportation is a necessity.
你沒有提到新車和二手車的購買價格,也沒有提到維護/修理的成本。交通是必需品。
We have not yet come to grips with the elephant in the housing market.
Homeowners have both the political power and the financial incentive to restrict supply and drive up prices. Universal homeownership is a chimera, and a particularly destructive one to pursue, because once a majority of people own homes, they can shut down construction for the rest. And that is exactly what has happened. The result has been a massive transfer of wealth from younger generations to the Boomers.
There is no way to keep housing affordable in the long run except to limit homeownership to about 1/3 of the population. If 2/3 of people rent, they will demand sufficient construction.
我們還沒有真正解決住房市場中的大問題。
房主既有政治權力又有經濟激勵來限制供應并推高價格。全民擁有住房是一種幻想,而且是一種特別具有破壞性的追求,因為一旦大多數人擁有房屋,他們就可以停止其余的建設。這正是發(fā)生的事情。結果是財富從年輕一代大規(guī)模轉移到嬰兒潮一代。
從長遠來看,除了將房屋所有權限制在大約三分之一的人口外,沒有其他辦法可以保持住房的負擔能力。如果三分之二的人租房,他們將要求足夠的建設。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
The cost of a mortgage, the rising interest rates for loans of any kind, the cost of insurance for both homes and cars, have skyrocketed; I can't really say the same about wages. As someone on the lowest end of the wage scale I can tell you that despite what Ezra says, my wages have NOT kept pace with my rent, my car payment, my insurance, gasoline, the groceries, etc etc. I'm not young and not looking to buy a home at this point, but any thought I had of retiring has vanished along with my 401k. I'm not alone. I'm part of a growing segment of the population. And we are NOT being discussed here - it's like we don't exist or they think we're making this up. But you can't, you know. You can't make this up.
抵押貸款成本、任何類型貸款的利率上升、房屋和汽車保險成本都飆升了;我不能說工資也一樣。作為工資最低端的人,我可以告訴你,盡管Ezra這么說,但我的工資并沒有跟上我的房租、車貸、保險、汽油、食品雜貨等的步伐。我不年輕,目前也不打算買房,但我曾經考慮過的退休計劃已經隨著我的401k消失了。我不是一個人。我是人口中一個不斷增長的部分。我們在這里沒有被討論——好像我們不存在,或者他們認為我們在編造故事。但你不能,你知道的。你不能編造這些。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
These guys are missing the mark. If the government doesn't balance the budget we pay the price. Fiat/corporate slavery. The empire is falling.
這些人沒有抓住重點。如果政府不平衡預算,我們就要付出代價。法幣/公司奴隸制。帝國正在崩潰。
It's about disposable income. The economy seems solid because of the violent increase of debt at all levels. This too shall end.
這關乎可支配收入。經濟看似穩(wěn)固,因為各級債務大幅增加。這也將結束。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Greedflation is a huge problem when the goods and services in question are necessary goods. I'm poor enough that I spend all of my money, living paycheck to paycheck. As prices for everything rose, I had to put the excess cost of my life on credit cards. That debt still exists even as things change for the better (not nearly fast enough).
當所涉及的商品和服務是必需品時,貪婪通脹是一個大問題。我足夠窮,我花光了所有的錢,靠薪水生活。隨著一切價格的上漲,我不得不把生活的額外成本放在信用卡上。即使情況有所好轉(速度不夠快),這些債務仍然存在。
Builders are concentrating on building apartment units and senior multi housing units. Health care costs going up while we send billions of money to other countries. We need to take care of Americans first. One reason why Americans are pissed off. As far as food, we have too many individuals having children who can barely take care of themselves, yet they expect society to help feed their children.
建筑商專注于建造公寓單元和老年人多戶住宅單元。醫(yī)療費用上漲,而我們向其他國家送出數十億美元。我們需要首先照顧美國人。這就是美國人生氣的原因之一。至于食品,我們有太多個人有孩子,他們幾乎無法照顧自己,但他們期望社會幫助養(yǎng)活他們的孩子。
Fascinating discussion - my perspective (I am 69): Your discussion was rife with comments about interest rates as being really high. Well it depends how old you are. My parents (who lived through the Depression) bought their first home after WWII and paid 6% interest! During my working life interest rates were NEVER that low and were 10-19% for cars, housing, education borrowing, etc. I lived through what was thought at the time to be very high unemployment - 8%. Now we have 3.2% unemployment. The recent home loans for 4% were an amazing gift to me. I chased (kept refinancing) my home loans while they went down -how low can they go? Now they have bottomed out and have gone up a small amount. 5% home loans are a huge gift (if you are 69). My two oldest children have bought homes with 4-5.5% notes. They think they are very high interest rates. I do understand but both myself and my children are in the same economy and have different perspectives.
引人入勝的討論——我的觀點(我69歲):你的討論充滿了關于利率非常高的評論。好吧,這取決于你的年齡。我父母(經歷過大蕭條的人)在二戰(zhàn)后購買了他們的第一套房子,并支付了6%的利息!在我的工作生涯中,利率從未如此之低,汽車、住房、教育借款等的利率為10-19%。我經歷了當時被認為是非常高的失業(yè)率——8%?,F在我們的失業(yè)率是3.2%。最近的4%的住房貸款對我來說是一個驚人的禮物。我在利率下降時不斷重新貸款——它們能降到多低?現在它們已經見底,并略有上漲。5%的住房貸款是一個巨大的禮物(如果你是69歲)。我的兩個大孩子以4-5.5%的利率買了房子。他們認為利率非常高。我理解,但我和我的孩子們在同一個經濟體中,卻有不同的看法。
Appreciate that you actually say what is unwritten. As I save for a house, it is always running away from me. ... and health care? Very good and thank you. Now, if only the politicians would finally see that they haven't given a darn for about 30 years!!!!!
感謝你說出了未寫的東西。當我為買房存錢時,它總是離我而去。...醫(yī)療保?。糠浅:?,謝謝。現在,只要政客們終于看到他們30年來根本不在乎?。?!
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
For younger and/or lower income people, the situation is horrible for the upward life trajectory that they might expect. Even if the jobs/wage data is 100% as wonderful as it's made out to be, those aren't even close to making up the gap in housing costs and interest rates. The stock market also doesn't really matter unless you have tens of thousands to throw at 1 or 2 tech stocks.
This is also likely the main reason why Biden is losing lower income minority voters. It's aspirational.
對于年輕人和/或低收入人群來說,他們可能預期的向上生活軌跡的情況是可怕的。即使工作/工資數據是100%美好的,也無法彌補住房成本和利率的差距。除非你有數萬美元投入1或2只科技股,否則股市也不重要。
這也可能是拜登失去低收入少數族裔選民的主要原因。這是有抱負的。
You gus ignore corporate profits and the growing income & wealth gaps. our STANDARD of living is going down and you dance around this with government economic speak.
你們忽略了企業(yè)利潤和日益擴大的收入和財富差距。我們的生活水平正在下降,而你們用政府的經濟言論對此避而不談。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Trickle down economics and trickle down morality in religion are based on the patron-client relationship, or the divine right of power to control the good fortunes of dependents, jobs from corporations and self-righteousness privilege from God. Neither are based on the natural rights of humanity to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness (a good life well lived).
涓滴經濟學和宗教中的涓滴道德基于恩客關系,或掌控附庸命運的神圣權力,來自企業(yè)的工作和來自上帝的自以為是的特權。兩者都不是基于人類對生命、自由和追求幸福(美好生活)的自然權利。
Swedish tax rates on lower middle class people are 3x higher that's the trade off. Child care is very simple there are over a billion woman around the world that would love to come to America with a special worker visa and make $15 per hour. Like the Au Pair programs when they live with the family and get all the expenses paid are the best example. But no that's illegal. There is no way you can pay childcare workers more and lower the cost to parents unless childcare workers become much more productive and that's not going to happen. Or you can subsidize it like Sweden does but we still have the pay the same amount for it just through our taxes. We already have a labor shortage and childcare is pretty low productivity and low paying so no way you will get enough workers if your only hiring Americans. It's unsolvable unless you get workers from outside of America.
對低收入中產階級的瑞典稅率是美國的三倍,這是權衡。兒童保育非常簡單,世界上有超過十億的女性愿意持特殊工作簽證來美國,每小時賺15美元。像互惠生計劃,當他們與家庭同住并支付所有費用時,就是最好的例子。但不,這是非法的。除非兒童保育工作者變得更有生產力,否則你不可能支付更多的費用給兒童保育工作者并降低父母的成本,這不可能發(fā)生?;蛘吣憧梢韵袢鸬淠菢友a貼它,但我們仍然通過稅收支付相同的費用。我們已經有勞動力短缺的問題,兒童保育的生產率和工資都很低,所以如果你只雇用美國人,你不可能找到足夠的工人。除非你從美國以外的地方找到工人,否則這是無法解決的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Why do we let the capitalist class organize the people to serve their economic interests, rather than the people organizing capital to serve their economic interests?
為什么我們讓資本家階級組織人民為他們的經濟利益服務,而不是人民組織資本為他們的經濟利益服務?
I thought that the 2% inflation target was arrived at when modeling the sheep at market in New Zealand.
我以為2%的通貨膨脹目標是在新西蘭市場建模羊群時得出的。
It's about disposable income. The economy seems solid because of the violent increase of debt at all levels. This too shall end.
這關乎可支配收入。經濟看似穩(wěn)固,因為各級債務大幅增加。這也將結束。
While that is no small amount for most consumers, producing the phone in America would cost more than double. One report found that producing an iPhone in the U.S. would cost around $2,400.
雖然這對大多數消費者來說不是一筆小數目,但在美國生產手機的成本將是現在的兩倍多。一份報告發(fā)現,在美國生產一部iPhone的成本約為2400美元。
If you think people are angry now, wait until people start going hungry. That's when the torches and pitchforks come out. I think it's past time for that honestly. Read or reread Grapes of Wrath.
如果你認為人們現在很生氣,等到人們開始挨餓時情況會更糟。那時候火把和干草叉就會出現。我認為現在該做些什么了。讀或重讀《憤怒的葡萄》。
I live in one of the most affordable apartment buildings in my city (that isn’t designated for low income). Here’s the thing, though… I’m not low income. I earn $90k or more per year. The rent is comfortable for my budget ($1,800/ month).
I have no idea how people are able to afford the average rent in my area for 2 bedroom apartments is around $2300 a month. Obviously, I could afford a higher priced unit, but I need to save for retirement and I’m over 50 so health insurance is quite expensive for my age demographic.
我住在我市最實惠的公寓樓之一(不是專為低收入者設計的)。但是,我并不低收入。我每年賺9萬美元或更多。這個租金對我的預算來說很合適(每月1800美元)。
我不知道人們是如何負擔得起我所在地區(qū)兩居室公寓的平均租金大約為每月2300美元的。顯然,我可以負擔更高價位的單元,但我需要為退休儲蓄,而且我已經超過50歲,所以健康保險對我的年齡段來說相當昂貴。
我真的不知道人們如何負擔得起更大物業(yè)的租金。比如,我所在地區(qū)有多少人年收入超過15萬美元?隨著房價中位數上漲到50萬美元,家庭住房的租金大約為每月4-5千美元,有些東西不對勁。
People will buy what they need. If people don't buy things that they don't need until two weeks or two months later, how is that a problem? It's only a problem in a world where natural wealth is not shared. [Not sharing natural wealth means that poor people get EVEN poorer, as the rich get richer due to their heightened ability to maneuver into the most advantageous positions from which to gain more wealth / exploit a free ride on the Commons. (We are not accounting for externalities, so much of the opportunity the economy provides for amassing wealth / making profit is related to instances where environmental costs are foisted onto the larger society, future generations and the larger community of life.)]
人們會買他們需要的東西。如果人們不買他們不需要的東西,直到兩周或兩個月后,這有什么問題嗎?只有在自然財富不共享的世界里才是問題。[不共享自然財富意味著窮人變得更窮,因為富人由于他們更能操縱到最有利的地位來獲得更多財富/利用公共資源的免費機會而變得更富。(我們沒有考慮外部性,因此經濟提供的積累財富/盈利的許多機會都與環(huán)境成本被推給更大的社會、后代和更大的生命共同體有關。)]
如果自然財富是共享的,人們將保證有一個實質性的最低標準。中央銀行將減少通過增加貨幣供應量來“刺激經濟”的壓力。如果自然財富是共享的,系統(tǒng)可以在不通過政府操縱利率的情況下實現動態(tài)穩(wěn)定。
Prices are going up because there is not enough competition and too much regulatory capture by companies through lobbying. The government can’t afford to spend more on social services because the defense budget sucks out about half of government receipts. America could make different choices if the political will was there. Political parties seem more interested in culture wars and manufactured problems than solving actual problems faced by ordinary people. There is a general lack of clarity on cause, effect and possible solutions.
價格上漲是因為競爭不足,企業(yè)通過游說獲得了太多的監(jiān)管控制。政府不能在社會服務上花更多的錢,因為國防預算耗盡了大約一半的政府收入。如果有政治意愿,美國可以做出不同的選擇。政黨似乎更感興趣于文化戰(zhàn)爭和人為制造的問題,而不是解決普通人面臨的實際問題。對原因、影響和可能的解決方案普遍缺乏清晰認識。
I get the feeling that phones are a huge part of the issue. People are primed to be emotional. They keep buying the same products that are getting more expensive cause they’re addicted to them. I think that’s probably the biggest change that we’ve experienced as a society maybe ever, and just in the last 10/15 years.
我感覺手機是問題的很大一部分。人們很容易情緒化。他們繼續(xù)購買越來越貴的相同產品,因為他們對這些產品上癮。我認為這可能是我們作為一個社會經歷過的最大變化,也許就在過去的10/15年間。
Compared to other factors, I don't think phones are a big part of the squeeze that people are feeling right now. We don't spend as much on mobile phones per month as we do on groceries, or rent, or house payments, or car payments.
與其他因素相比,我不認為手機是人們現在感受到的壓力的一大部分。我們每月在手機上的花費不像在雜貨、房租、房屋貸款或汽車貸款上的花費那么多。
Increased fiat money supply. They diluted the dollar 40% in 18 months. All this on top of monopolies. If you don't own assets, including real estate, stocks, gold, and Bitcoin,yes, Bitcoin, you may be screwed.
增加的法定貨幣供應。他們在18個月內稀釋了40%的美元。這一切都在壟斷之上。如果你沒有資產,包括房地產、股票、黃金和比特幣,是的,比特幣,你可能會倒霉。
This was very disappointing and expected; stop worshiping the vagaries of economists understanding. The food, ag, retail price gouged you can see their profits explode. So yes there is a problem guys you just can't understand what's happening. We need old retired regulator-lawyers to come back and do some anti-trust action.
這非常令人失望但預料之中;停止崇拜經濟學家理解的變幻莫測。食品、農業(yè)、零售價格欺詐,你可以看到他們的利潤爆炸。所以是的,有問題,伙計們,你們只是無法理解發(fā)生了什么。我們需要老的退休監(jiān)管律師回來采取一些反壟斷行動。
This is the best good faith conversation I've heard regarding the current state of our economy. I feel Biden's issue with taking advantage of good economic numbers is the following: capitalism works really well if you're rich or upper middle class. It does not work well for you if you happen to be poor or lower middle class. The stock market being at an all-time high doesn't really matter if you don't own any stocks. Housing prices going through the roof was pretty great if you already owned a house...not great otherwise.
這是我聽過的關于我們當前經濟狀況的最誠實的對話。我覺得拜登利用良好的經濟數據的問題如下:如果你是富人或中上階層,資本主義運作得很好。如果你恰好是窮人或中下階層,它對你來說并不好。股市創(chuàng)歷史新高并不重要,如果你沒有任何股票。房價飆升如果你已經擁有房子是很好的……否則就不好了。
why does everyone assume the interest rates won't stay high for a long time?
為什么大家都認為利率不會長期保持高位?
The idea that greedflation is off the mark because it implies something evil about corporations only holds up if one believes that capitalism is not somewhat evil in and of itself. It might be a necessary evil—I don’t know enough economics to say whether other systems could work adequately at the scale of industrial societies—but capitalism provides considerable incentives for the people and organizations which comprise it to behave in ways that are morally repugnant. That’s why, for example, selling organs for transplant had to be outlawed, and why Medicaid provides free dialysis for people with inadequate kidney function (because otherwise survival to reach the front of the transplant queue would be determined by ability to pay). At least as presently constituted, capitalism doesn’t price in externalities like ‘people dying from circumstances imposed on them by others’, and by default punishes entities that would prefer not to create harmful externalities by making them less competitive. That’s evil, plain and simple.
認為貪婪通脹觀點偏離目標的想法是因為它暗示了企業(yè)的邪惡,只有在相信資本主義本身不是某種程度上的邪惡時才成立。這可能是一種必要的邪惡——我對經濟學了解不足,無法說其他系統(tǒng)在工業(yè)社會規(guī)模上是否能夠充分運作——但資本主義為組成它的人和組織提供了相當大的激勵,以道德上令人厭惡的方式行事。這就是為什么,例如,賣器官移植必須被禁止,以及為什么醫(yī)療補助為腎功能不足的人提供免費透析(否則到達移植隊列前線的生存機會將由支付能力決定)。至少在目前的情況下,資本主義沒有將外部性如“人們因他人強加的環(huán)境而死亡”納入價格,并且默認懲罰那些不愿制造有害外部性的實體,使它們的競爭力下降。這是邪惡的,簡單明了。
Also. I will believe that the economy is “good” for ordinary Americans when poor and working-class people in my city don’t commonly live in shantytowns.
此外,當我所在城市的窮人和工人階級不再普遍住在貧民窟時,我才會相信經濟對普通美國人來說是“好的”。
Telling us what we already know. Even when inflation comes down the price of goods remain at the same higher price; example car insurance has gone up some 30% over the last few years.
告訴我們已經知道的事情。即使通貨膨脹下降,商品價格仍保持在同樣的高價;例如,汽車保險在過去幾年上漲了約30%。
One of the problems with inflation is that a person's wage increases lag monthly cost increases. At the end of the year, the company owner looks at your paycheck, says, "inflation has been 6% this year, and we'll throw in a 2% raise". Well, for 364 days of the year you've been running your household on last year's wages but prices have gone up 6%. Not only that, your savings account, which last I looked gains less than 1%/year, has lost 5% of its value.
通貨膨脹的一個問題是,一個人的工資增長滯后于每月成本的增加。在年底,公司老板看著你的薪水說,“今年通貨膨脹率為6%,我們將增加2%的工資”。好吧,全年364天你用去年的工資維持家計,但價格上漲了6%。不僅如此,你的儲蓄賬戶,最近我看到的年收益不到1%,已經失去了5%的價值。
If you are spending more while your income lags then you are a fool.
You can complain all you want but for RIGHT NOW you need to cut spending. Maybe skip getting that sweet new tattoo? How about skipping the daily $7 lattes? How about learning how to make your own sandwich at home instead of eating out? How about giving plasma to build up an emergency fund?
如果你的收入落后而你還在花更多的錢,那么你就是個傻瓜。
你可以盡情抱怨,但現在你需要減少支出。也許跳過那個新甜美的紋身?如何跳過每天7美元的拿鐵?如何學會在家做自己的三明治而不是外出就餐?如何獻血以建立應急基金?
Many Americans don’t know that no developed economy has really grown for decades, except the U.S. The growth in the U.S. has been concentrated in some sectors and some metro areas, and that’s how capitalism typically works. For those who want to be a part of the growing sub-economy get relevant education and move to cities. Some others don’t make the right move and complain. The rest of the world knows how lucky those people are to be born in the U.S. We have a lot of economic freedom in the U.S., and blaming that the game is rigged and trying to destroy the institutions and democracy is so childish and irresponsible. White supremacy, racism, and nativist prejudice breed misguided entitlement mindsets. Basic rules, assumptions and shared preferences are where it all starts, and we need to build back shared core values and principles.
許多美國人不知道,除了美國,沒有哪個發(fā)達經濟體在幾十年內真正增長。美國的增長集中在某些行業(yè)和一些大都市地區(qū),這就是資本主義的典型運作方式。對于那些希望成為增長子經濟一部分的人來說,獲取相關教育并搬到城市。一些其他人沒有做出正確的舉動并抱怨。世界其他地方的人都知道那些人出生在美國有多幸運。我們在美國有很多經濟自由,責怪游戲被操縱并試圖摧毀制度和民主是如此幼稚和不負責任。白人至上主義、種族主義和本土主義偏見滋生了誤導的特權心態(tài)?;疽?guī)則、假設和共同偏好是一切的起點,我們需要重建共同的核心價值觀和原則。
Greed: insatiable desire for food or wealth.
貪婪:對食物或財富的無盡欲望。
As of June 2024, next year's Social Security cost-of-living increase will be 2.66%. Laughable! And it's likely the Medicare Part B premium (subtracted from Social Security) will increase.
截至2024年6月,明年的社會保障生活成本增長將為2.66%??尚?!而且很可能醫(yī)療保險B部分的保費(從社會保障中扣除)會增加。
There was so much unneeded stimulus including "the build better" (or whatever it was called) that I am surprised that inflation was just 9%. Too bad this was not mentioned as a reason for the inflation...
有太多不必要的刺激措施,包括“建設得更好”(或其他名稱),我很驚訝通貨膨脹率僅為9%??上н@沒有被提及為通貨膨脹的原因……
Well somebody got that money. They must be doing OK.
嗯,有人得到了那筆錢。他們一定過得不錯。
In Europe, we had ever longer lockdowns, everyone had their wages covered, and there is not the same rampant inflation as in the USA. I don't understand how inflation was caused by a couple of $1,500 checks, that doesn’t even cover a month's expenses.
在歐洲,我們有更長時間的封鎖,所有人的工資都得到了保障,而不像美國那樣有肆虐的通貨膨脹。我不明白通貨膨脹是怎么由幾張1500美元的支票引起的,這甚至不夠一個月的開支。
First of all - the checks were given to everyone, and not the only those who needed it. My family got the checks even though we continued to work remotely. Then there was also money to businesses with some of these loans forgiven. So you have it.
首先——支票發(fā)給了每個人,而不僅僅是那些需要它的人。我的家人也得到了支票,盡管我們繼續(xù)遠程工作。然后還有一些企業(yè)獲得了部分貸款豁免。所以你有了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
the housing crisis is the everything crisis. It drives up the cost of everything from policing to medical care, because the people who provide those things need a place to live too. But then they start talking about building codes and zoning - yes do this, but realize that the effects are marginal, you won't get 5 million units (I bet it's really 10m+ for 45 year olds to not need roommates to stay indoors) in the urban supermetros where people need to live to get decent jobs from zoning reform, at least not before the demand rises to a 20m unit deficit.
住房危機就是一切危機。它推高了從警察到醫(yī)療保健的一切成本,因為提供這些服務的人也需要一個住處。但是當他們開始談論建筑規(guī)范和分區(qū)時——是的,做這些,但要意識到其效果是邊際的,你不會在需要人們居住以獲得體面工作的城市超級大都市中通過分區(qū)改革獲得500萬套單元(我敢打賭,對于45歲以上的人來說,真的需要1000萬套以上的單元,不需要室友才能住在室內),至少在需求上升到2000萬套赤字之前不會。
(1) slow national population growth to let the housing supply catch up
(2) geographically diversify economic activity to regions where housing exists or it's cheaper/easier to build, through industrial planning and incentives.
在人口稠密的地區(qū)建房是一個緩慢的過程,除非你有極權控制,可以驅逐大量人群以清理建筑區(qū)域。唯一的真正解決方案是
(1)減緩國家人口增長,讓住房供應趕上
(2)通過工業(yè)規(guī)劃和激勵措施,將經濟活動地理上多樣化到已經有住房或建房更便宜/更容易的地區(qū)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.top-shui.cn 轉載請注明出處
Having people live in tents or under bridges is not good. So 2 is the best answer, along with policies that bring economic development.
讓人們住在帳篷里或橋下是不好的。所以2是最好的答案,加上帶來經濟發(fā)展的政策。
Note there's a huge amount of land tied up in parking in many cities. This is set by local zoning rules. Lower the minimum parking space counts and bulldoze some one-story strip shopping centers and suddenly there's significantly more space for building.
If land is truly scarce like in Boston, the parking can be integrated into the same building for a price.
注意,許多城市有大量土地被用于停車。這是由當地的分區(qū)規(guī)則決定的。降低最低停車位數量,推倒一些單層帶狀購物中心,突然之間就有了更多的建筑空間。
如果像波士頓那樣土地真的稀缺,停車場可以以一定價格整合到同一棟建筑中。
Greedflation is a huge problem when the goods and services in question are necessary goods. I'm poor enough that I spend all of my money, living paycheck to paycheck. As prices for everything rose, I had to put the excess cost of my life on credit cards. That debt still exists even as things change for the better (not nearly fast enough).
當所涉及的商品和服務是必需品時,貪婪通脹是一個大問題。我足夠窮,我花光了所有的錢,靠薪水生活。隨著一切價格的上漲,我不得不把生活的額外成本放在信用卡上。即使情況有所好轉(速度不夠快),這些債務仍然存在。
The Scandinavian Welfare System removes some concerns for people who are low-income and less educated. It is less greedy than the USA and we have simplified some aspects of daily life for the majority of people. You have still the ability to follow your dream but worries about health care, education, child care, and social events are very reduced.
斯堪的納維亞福利系統(tǒng)消除了低收入和受教育程度較低人群的一些擔憂。它比美國少了些貪婪,我們簡化了大多數人日常生活的某些方面。你仍然可以追隨你的夢想,但對醫(yī)療、教育、兒童保育和社會活動的擔憂大大減少。
Stimy cheques, Quantitative easing money printing, deficit spending….where does this money end up ? There is a reason why the stock market and real estate went up first then food went up last. A recession is needed for all these prices to go down….sorry.
刺激支票、量化寬松印鈔、赤字支出……這些錢都到哪里去了?股市和房地產首先上漲,然后食品最后上漲是有原因的。需要一場衰退才能讓這些價格下降……抱歉。
The idea that greedflation is off the mark because it implies something evil about corporations only holds up if one believes that capitalism is not somewhat evil in and of itself. It might be a necessary evil—I don’t know enough economics to say whether other systems could work adequately at the scale of industrial societies—but capitalism provides considerable incentives for the people and organizations which comprise it to behave in ways that are morally repugnant. That’s why, for example, selling organs for transplant had to be outlawed, and why Medicaid provides free dialysis for people with inadequate kidney function (because otherwise survival to reach the front of the transplant queue would be determined by ability to pay). At least as presently constituted, capitalism doesn’t price in externalities like ‘people dying from circumstances imposed on them by others’, and by default punishes entities that would prefer not to create harmful externalities by making them less competitive. That’s evil, plain and simple.
認為貪婪通脹觀點偏離目標的想法是因為它暗示了企業(yè)的邪惡,只有在相信資本主義本身不是某種程度上的邪惡時才成立。這可能是一種必要的邪惡——我對經濟學了解不足,無法說其他系統(tǒng)在工業(yè)社會規(guī)模上是否能夠充分運作——但資本主義為組成它的人和組織提供了相當大的激勵,以道德上令人厭惡的方式行事。這就是為什么,例如,賣器官移植必須被禁止,以及為什么醫(yī)療補助為腎功能不足的人提供免費透析(否則到達移植隊列前線的生存機會將由支付能力決定)。至少在目前的情況下,資本主義沒有將外部性如“人們因他人強加的環(huán)境而死亡”納入價格,并且默認懲罰那些不愿制造有害外部性的實體,使它們的競爭力下降。這是邪惡的,簡單明了。
這是我經歷過的最好的經濟,我開心得像只百靈鳥。
I love the husband and wife team.
我喜歡這對夫妻團隊。