US Core Inflation Jumps by Most Since 1991
confoundedinterest.net
confoundedinterest.net
Stats show that people save more cash than they did before corona. Very reasonable decision as times are more dangerous but it will be a major catastrophy when all of that money gets back into the economy.
Actually stock prices grow slower than in 1981-89 and 1991-2000 (though a bit faster than 2001-07): https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-dat...
Edit: Stocks appreciated faster than consumer prices inflated, over pretty much the whole period.
The oddball hoarding is pretty scary-though seems to have been confined to the short term across all the things people hoarded.
Back to savings, people increasing their savings is a rational choice right now. For all they know they may need that to survive in the future. Those savings will probably sit on the sidelines until we reach herd immunity. Being that could be a year away and lots of time without meaningful work the savings are likely to be spent at non-inflationary rates. It’s much more likely people need further stimulus to avoid huge booms in homeless populations through rent and mortgage shortcomings.
600K people die in the US of cancer every year. If we took your framing, that means cancer is causing a 9/11 every other day. (Edit: did incorrect math here originally)
Please try to use emotionally neutral language when communicating to others about the pandemic. It has already been distorted and politicized in the public sphere enough, in both directions.
I disagree with your trivialization of these deaths. I unironically presume that you have little empathy for individual deaths due to gun violence, accidents, and other tragedies, since those are even smaller in scope than the enormous number of people who die of cancer on a regular basis.
Edit: I also fell into the trap of not questioning your assumptions. 600k a year is 1,643 per day. So a 9/11 every two days. Closer to COVID in numbers than you presented. Still horrible. I stand by the rest of my post.
I literally “trivialized” nothing. Promoting the use of emotionally neutral language is not “trivialization.” Furthermore, the assumption that I “have little empathy for individual deaths” because I promote emotionally neutral language is both parody and shameful. Thank you for further proving my point.
In my opinion, "emotionally manipulative" is in the eye of the beholder. So in a way, you're both right. As for the underlying question of, is it helpful? I think it does help to visualize the scope of a disaster which people are asking to have trouble comprehending.
Like Stalin said, one death is a tragedy. One million deaths is a statistic.
There's no guarantee that these things will prevent deaths; if there's no vaccine relatively soon all they'll achieve is delaying deaths. And social distancing is not a "simple lifestyle" change: it's a destructive, traumatic event that's destroyed more peoples' jobs, businesses and livelihoods than anything else in the past half century, and caused a massive increase in mental health issues and suicide: https://academic.oup.com/qjmed/advance-article/doi/10.1093/q....
I'm going to assume you're an introvert in some ivory tower tech job that allows working from home, otherwise I can't imagine how you could have so little empathy for the havock lockdowns are wreaking on ordinary working people's lives.
I'm probably not much like you imagine me, but I do understand this is affecting everyone differently. That said, social distance is NOT a quarantine. It is maintaining 6 feet where possible and wearing masks. Simple lifestyle change. The fact that you are conflating it with a total lockdown, which IS very problematic (but sometimes still necessary) is part of the problem.
Let's be grownups. Ideally, we quarantine for two weeks, followed by gradual reopening with actual social distancing. As long as people have hope and a plan, they can deal with a surprising amount of discomfort. If you don't get that, I assume you're a twenty something who's never had the patience to sacrifice your comfort for something much more important.
It’s emotional manipulation and it’s causing more harm than good.
Inflation is too much spending (not "printing") for too little capacity in the economy. You could get inflation for spending more than the economy can accept (but in normal times modern economies are rarely at full utilization), or, assuming full utilization, by keeping the same spending when what the economy can produce decrease for some reason.
In fact, despise what many people says, the second way is far more common that the first, including Zimbabwe (1).