Is it time to start using the scary “d word” yet? … depression
It’s been half a year of ostrich like behaviour and borderline paradoxical (but understandable though certain lenses) stock market responses while economies around the world are sliding downhill like they are all practicing for the Winter Olympics.
It’s sort of hard to look at the situation and think “this won’t end up with economic depression” … it’s looming up on the horizon as we get deeper into the reality of a global recession (can we call it a global one yet?) maybe not in the USA, but perhaps the UK, or somewhere else that feeling the current situation more acutely.
I've been thinking about how these economic conditions, while they meet every criteria of a severe recession, are vastly different for the average person than any I can think of in modern history.
In a typical recession GDP is down, unemployment is up, wages are being driven down, and companies have stockpiles of unsold inventory because nobody has money to buy things. In this recession GDP is down, we're at full employment, wages are being driven up, companies have empty inventory due to supply chain issues, and consumers are standing around holding cash waiting for someone to offer products for sale.
I think GDP is down because a lot of workers retired or otherwise left the workforce at once so companies don't have enough people to get work done. Supply chain issues mean manufacturers and retailers don't have products to sell, which also impacts GDP. Cost of living is certainly up which impacts the average person, but honestly that wouldn't be such a problem if companies were setting wages in response to market conditions as opposed to stubbornly keeping them low as if a bunch of people who want to work for minimum wage will magically appear.
It's a common misconception because of crappy media that that alone is how to determine a recession. There was a good Planer Money on it a month or so ago. Either way the goal right now IS a recession. That's why interest rates are up but despite this we keep buying shit we don't need.
By the classic definition and trends in our industries like layoffs, I think we all know it's already here regardless of the election related word games.
buy a single share of Gamestop on Computershare. you will be able to sell it for over $100 million after MOASS. you do not want to be holding IOUs when banks and brokers get liquidated.
[+] [-] techdragon|3 years ago|reply
It’s been half a year of ostrich like behaviour and borderline paradoxical (but understandable though certain lenses) stock market responses while economies around the world are sliding downhill like they are all practicing for the Winter Olympics.
It’s sort of hard to look at the situation and think “this won’t end up with economic depression” … it’s looming up on the horizon as we get deeper into the reality of a global recession (can we call it a global one yet?) maybe not in the USA, but perhaps the UK, or somewhere else that feeling the current situation more acutely.
[+] [-] LarsAlereon|3 years ago|reply
In a typical recession GDP is down, unemployment is up, wages are being driven down, and companies have stockpiles of unsold inventory because nobody has money to buy things. In this recession GDP is down, we're at full employment, wages are being driven up, companies have empty inventory due to supply chain issues, and consumers are standing around holding cash waiting for someone to offer products for sale.
I think GDP is down because a lot of workers retired or otherwise left the workforce at once so companies don't have enough people to get work done. Supply chain issues mean manufacturers and retailers don't have products to sell, which also impacts GDP. Cost of living is certainly up which impacts the average person, but honestly that wouldn't be such a problem if companies were setting wages in response to market conditions as opposed to stubbornly keeping them low as if a bunch of people who want to work for minimum wage will magically appear.
[+] [-] slowwwclap|3 years ago|reply
Bloomberg is 100% right.
[+] [-] stevenhubertron|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] roflyear|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] norwalkbear|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] roflyear|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] doctat|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 1270018080|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SamReidHughes|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] __turbobrew__|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] badinsie|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] metadat|3 years ago|reply
Has bloomberg claimed to know the future 1 year in advance with 100% probability before?
[+] [-] codefreeordie|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theknocker|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]