2021 - Is inflation finally back in the conversation?

[52-80 19,377]

Duplicate on mobile

Edited August 2, 2022 by 52-80

[52-80 19,377]

1 hour ago, Trey3216 said:

JOLTS job opening #'s came in about 300k lower than expected, and 600k lower than last month.  While that can be a good thing (hiring) it can also be a bad thing (companies eliminating jobs or taking offers offline).  We'll see with Friday's jobless claims #'s and some other data coming out over the next few weeks.  

Most of the signaled slowdown have been concentrated in tech sector (atleast publicly), and more of reduced-hiring than straight RIF. 

If theres broad based layoffs across the economy, then that would be indeed a strong confirm of recession…but so far thats not been signaled in the major earnings calls so far. 

And fewer people in tech earning their outsized pay isn’t necessarily a bad thing in terms of distorted consumer demand and pricing !

 

1 hour ago, Trey3216 said:

Edited August 2, 2022 by 52-80

[Incredulity 11,876]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/americas-biggest-warehouse-running-room-100525503.html

SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. (Reuters) - America's largest warehouse market is full as major U.S. retailers warn of slowing sales of the clothing, electronics, furniture and other goods that have packed the distribution centers east of Los Angeles.

 

 

 

[Cheeseweasel 26,439]

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

east of Los Angeles.

[Incredulity 11,876]

33 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

[bschoolprof 6,341]

Can we get some buildup in fucking car inventory?

[Incredulity 11,876]

6 hours ago, bschoolprof said:

Can we get some buildup in fucking car inventory?

Will you take patio furniture and lava lamps?

[washparkhorn 9,973]

OPEC+ signals oil consumers can puns sand on production increases. 
https://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/press_room/6984.htm
 

Quote

Adjust upward the production level for OPEC and non-OPEC Participating Countries by 0.1 mb/d for the month of September 2022 as per the attached table. This adjustment does not affect the baselines decided on the above-mentioned Meeting on 18 July 2021.

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by washparkhorn

[Humble Beast 258]

Big Stassney energy from the Fed here. 
 

 

[Humble Beast 258]

@StassneyHorn

Edited August 3, 2022 by Humble Beast
Double post

[Cheeseweasel 26,439]

"Fuck the poors" - Mary Daly

[52-80 19,377]

They did ask her “where are you personally seeing the impact of inflation in your own actual daily life”

 

She says she visibly sees it in gas prices, but she hasnt made trade offs, and its the same for many other people. 
 

Which is fair. I personally only notice it in my electric bill from 150 —> 500, but it doesn’t impact my lifestyle either

[Parliament 14,594]

1 hour ago, Humble Beast said:

Big Stassney energy from the Fed here. 
 

 

Let them eat cake.

[Cheeseweasel 26,439]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

They did ask her “where are you personally seeing the impact of inflation in your own actual daily life”

 

She says she visibly sees it in gas prices, but she hasnt made trade offs, and its the same for many other people. 
 

Which is fair. I personally only notice it in my electric bill from 150 —> 500, but it doesn’t impact my lifestyle either

"Fuck the poors" - Mary Daly

-52-80

 

[StassneyHorn 6,767]

2 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

Big Stassney energy from the Fed here. 
 

 

Where should I be feeling pain? Tell me.
 

Do I need to start buying you groceries? Got a good deal for having the free card they give out. Had lunch for four days on $2.89.

[StassneyHorn 6,767]

But I did spend about 80 dollars on drinks last night. Didn’t phase me though

[StassneyHorn 6,767]

Show me your fast food diary @Humble Beast

[Incredulity 11,876]

11 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Where should I be feeling pain? Tell me.
 

Do I need to start buying you groceries? Got a good deal for having the free card they give out. Had lunch for four days on $2.89.

DOUBLE COUPONING!

DRINK!

[Humble Beast 258]

9 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Show me your fast food diary @Humble Beast

I eat free most days at work. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,439]

3 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

I eat free most days at work. 

Eating out of the garbage can?

[StassneyHorn 6,767]

16 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

DOUBLE COUPONING!

DRINK!

You think having a loyalty card is a slam? You’re getting desperate.

14 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

I eat free most days at work. 

And you still can’t get ahead?

[washparkhorn 9,973]

Pitchforks getting warmed up. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,439]

She's not pumping her gas at the local Mini Mart. 

[52-80 19,377]

42 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Pitchforks getting warmed up. 

Ugh, that low-grade clickbait-engagement account to shill its services. 

As long as her transactions were executed with adequate advance notice, and do not involve single equities or job-relevant securities like bonds, then theres no restrictions that she broke  

Again, her comment were directed towards her personal spending behavior, which was truthful….better than lie and be performative like an elected official probably would have  

 

 

[washparkhorn 9,973]

I never pegged you as a Mary Daly fanboi @52-80    Bravo  

 

[52-80 19,377]

37 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

I never pegged you as a Mary Daly fanboi @52-80    Bravo  

just tryin to be fair my man

[babysdaddy 2,731]

2 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

Where should I be feeling pain? Tell me.
 

Do I need to start buying you groceries? Got a good deal for having the free card they give out. Had lunch for four days on $2.89.

[Captainant 28,531]

5 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

Big Stassney energy from the Fed here. 
 

 

[babysdaddy 2,731]

that gif will always get a pos rep.  It's perfect

[washparkhorn 9,973]

[statsman 5,693]

14 hours ago, Captainant said:

This gif is great, because the Bluths didn’t actually have the money to be so blasé about costs and prices; they were running a shell game, living on investors’ contributions and hoping for a windfall before the debts come due. IOW, just exactly the kind of people that get wiped out. 
Inflation really changes things. For example, people that retire with private sector pensions don’t get COLA. A 65 year old retiring with a $70k annual pension, with $33k of SS added on, is probably doing ok (kids out of college and home paid off). Give him five years of 9% inflation and he’s 70, and getting by on a third less income, and unable to re enter the labor market. 
Who does ok with inflation? People that own things with intrinsic value (real estate). The lesson? Live within your means and accumulate wealth, same as always. 

[babysdaddy 2,731]

23 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

OPEC+ signals oil consumers can puns sand on production increases. 
https://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/press_room/6984.htm
 

 

there are only two ways to look at that production 'increase'.   It's either a 'fuck you' to Biden or an admission they have no additional capacity.  

[52-80 19,377]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

The lesson? Live within your means and accumulate wealth, same as always. 

F b****, get money

18 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

there are only two ways to look at that production 'increase'.   It's either a 'fuck you' to Biden or an admission they have no additional capacity.  

By pure coincidentally the administration just approved $5b of arms sales to KSA.
 

“This has been the worst trade deal in the history of trade deals. Maybe ever”

[52-80 19,377]

I hear the saudis have a regional enemy who just happens to have a buttload of oil but has been sanctioned/embargoed out of the general market for a few decades

[Storm the Field 5,366]

Things you don't usually hear in a recession:

 

[statsman 5,693]

So, no (non-CR) talk about The Inflation Reduction Act, which the CBO says will raise taxes in the near term in order to reduce the deficit a few years down the road? What do we think about it?

[Humble Beast 258]

28 minutes ago, statsman said:

So, no (non-CR) talk about The Inflation Reduction Act, which the CBO says will raise taxes in the near term in order to reduce the deficit a few years down the road? What do we think about it?

As a rule, any big bill in DC generally accomplishes the opposite of its name, but I haven’t seen anything that says it will reduce inflation. 
 

It’s in large part a environmental spending bill, green new deal etc. They gave it a flashy, topical name to help garner support for its passage. No clue if it’s going through or not. 

Edited August 4, 2022 by Humble Beast

[Captainant 28,531]

Lmao it's a hoot seeing the people you choose to read, GRUvibes. Totes no CR 😉

 

[statsman 5,693]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

Lmao it's a hoot seeing the people you choose to read, GRUvibes. Totes no CR 😉

 

In rhetoric, an ad hominem argument (I.e. “I reject your argument, not on its merits, but because you are an unreliable arguer”) is a loser

[Captainant 28,531]

1 minute ago, statsman said:

In rhetoric, an ad hominem argument (I.e. “I reject your argument, not on its merits, but because you are an unreliable arguer”) is a loser

I didn't say anything about the content, just that it's remarkable how GRUvibes always manages to find nakedly partisan sources and present them as unbiased. In this case, it's a political commentator making a political argument against pending legislation and linking it to other political buzzwords like "green new deal". 

I think it's fair to point that out as it's introduced to the discussion. Especially when it's from a poster who's been crowdsourced and banned multiple times. 

[Trey3216 15,452]

6 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I didn't say anything about the content, just that it's remarkable how GRUvibes always manages to find nakedly partisan sources and present them as unbiased. In this case, it's a political commentator making a political argument against pending legislation and linking it to other political buzzwords like "green new deal". 

I think it's fair to point that out as it's introduced to the discussion. Especially when it's from a poster who's been crowdsourced and banned multiple times. 

Yep, these two from Penn Wharton seem nakedly partisan and overtly political...

https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/experts#jon-huntley

https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/experts#john-ricco

 

[Captainant 28,531]

3 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

Yep, these two from Penn Wharton seem nakedly partisan and overtly political...

https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/experts#jon-huntley

https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/experts#john-ricco

 

The same group also argued that the build back better plan to dump trillions of stimulus into the economy would have minimal impact on inflation, only .2% in short term and none long term. So I'm not sure if they'd consider anything responsive to inflation, considering every classical model for inflation isnt really working anymore. My point is: posting a political commentators tweet on a study is significantly different from just posting the study and your opinion. 

 

[Humble Beast 258]

19 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I didn't say anything about the content, just that it's remarkable how GRUvibes always manages to find nakedly partisan sources and present them as unbiased. In this case, it's a political commentator making a political argument against pending legislation and linking it to other political buzzwords like "green new deal". 

I think it's fair to point that out as it's introduced to the discussion. Especially when it's from a poster who's been crowdsourced and banned multiple times. 

My God you’re an intellectually stunted individual. The tweet linked contains only, ONLY, a direct quote from and a link to the analysis. No editorial comments. I found it on a Twitter search because I knew I had seen it before. I chose it specifically because there was no commentary included. I thought naively that it would be enough to prevent the kind of response you served up instinctively. 
 

It’s not my fault no one from your approved list of content sharers linked the analysis. It’s not a surprise either is it?

 

Actually, don’t bother responding. This is a perfect time to place you on ignore. I will not miss these pointless arguments. Ciao. 

Edited August 4, 2022 by Humble Beast
Bye bye Capitan

[52-80 19,377]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

So, no (non-CR) talk about The Inflation Reduction Act, which the CBO says will raise taxes in the near term in order to reduce the deficit a few years down the road? What do we think about it?

1. it has a net tax-increasing effect, which i generally support 

2. it’s essentially another attempt at the same bill as before

3. it has a new name serving only to politically-pander, which i abhor, since it achieves no such thing (in the near future)

4. details of it are not perfect, but nothing ever is

[babysdaddy 2,731]

The guy that I've read a lot from on the bill is Liam Donovan and Burgess Everett.  They don't seem to be partisan to me.  The main thing in the bill that I'm not a very big fan of is the additional $80 billion or so to the IRS.  They aren't just going after rich folks with that kinda fire power.  I also do not like that it changes depreciation rules for capital investment.  You'd think the government would want to encourage more investment rather than punish.  It's going to pass, too.  The Senior Senator from Arizona will get what she wants and it will pass.  Manchin gets his pipeline finished which can unfuck natgas prices.  Intention is to migrate the country to more renewables while supporting traditional hydrocarbons, which is the rational approach.  We will see.

As for the thing actually reducing inflation, I'll take the opposite because government.

[Guest]

Oil trading in the $80s. Lumber down sharply:
 

Great things if you're worried about inflation. A little worrying if you're worried about recession.
 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, statsman said:

So, no (non-CR) talk about The Inflation Reduction Act, which the CBO says will raise taxes in the near term in order to reduce the deficit a few years down the road? What do we think about it?

I know zero about it at the moment, but I'm all for deficit reduction. That's what worries me more than just about anything. At some point -- who knows where -- too much debt is too much debt. We need to get it down so that when shit does come up, we know we have the firepower to get through it.

Personally, I'd much prefer see a certain increase -- say 1% on marginal rates -- that goes directly to paying off national debt until it's below 60% of GDP and then is lifted. Or reigning in spending, lol.

 

[Incredulity 11,876]

21 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

Personally, I'd much prefer see a certain increase -- say 1% on marginal rates -- that goes directly to paying off national debt until it's below 60% of GDP and then is lifted.

So forever 

[jimmyjazz 47,153]

56 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

So forever 

Clinton got it down to 55%, but there's a long way to go to get there.

[gmr548 16,696]

So, no (non-CR) talk about The Inflation Reduction Act, which the CBO says will raise taxes in the near term in order to reduce the deficit a few years down the road? What do we think about it?

The name is political pandering. Its not a tax increase for the vast majority of people and isn’t going to be inflationary. Both can be true.