679
TIL every year with a rent increase is a recession. Whenever housing prices increase faster than income that's a recession. When college tuition goes up faster than incomes that's a recession.
I'm reading this to That's Amore.
Wheeeeeen youuuuuur
Bank accounts dry
And it makes-a you cry
Thats Recessiooooon
when the world seems on fire
but you're told that it's fine
that's depression
Yeah, we've been in a recession since the 70s and never stopped.
pretty much. sometimes did not seem so since we racked up debt to offset. At one point it was considered unsustainable for a country to function with debt/gdp over 100%
load more comments
(2 replies)
Even by this definition of recession, we're not. Real wages are up since that time.
Wages have not been keeping up with productivity increases. They're going to billionaires, not the workers.
correct.
It seems like you're really close to figuring out why a massive portion of the United States is willing to vote for anything as long as it's not the status quo.
It's your own personal recession, aren't we lucky?
Your own / personal / recession
Someone to stall your sleep
Someone who creeps
Reach out, charge me!
And if real income falls, that’s called a recession.
But by that metric, rich people would never experience a recession. If that's the case, why do we allow them to cause a recession for the rest of us? Madness.
It's a huge example of the bystander effect. It would only take a handful of people to change the situation.
By doing what? Posting where the CEOs live so people can .... protest. Yea, dox them and/or track movements to organize totally non-violent protests.
Stalk the shit out of them and show up carrying signs. Work in shifts if they come to your area.
It felt like "shoot them in the streets" was plainly obvious a few months ago but that's harder than an Instagram story.
No ... just to protest, nonviolently of course. Find out where they go and when. Someone in the area may have the free time to hang out on a public street and hold a sign or flip them the bird.
A very loose posting of information so everyone knows who these "people that make the world move" are and where they will be.
Make them nervous. Force them to purchase security. They don't want to pay taxes, but will have to pay it in security.
We are all reasonable people. No one will use the information for violence no matter how deserving these heartless oligarchs are. That would be wrong.
Why indeed
we're too comfortable with life's conveniences, and then throw some apathy on top
I have had this dream for a while now that the major media networks displayed real income changes next to the Dow and other stock tickers. Just so normal people are reminded of how their money is doing compared to rich people's money.
Do you have the formula for that? I might be up for doing that here on Lemmy locally once a month or so.
holy shit! Both of you! PLEASE DO THIS! That'd be AMAZING!
I'm not much a math person or econ person. Do you have any ideas on what that would like like? The Econ professor in the video said the real income is aka GDP. He was loosely speaking though, so I don't know if that's a one to one. I guess I could put something up and people will tell me how it's wrong? I don't mind that.
lol that's the BEST way to get the RIGHT answer on the internet. Put something up, say it's X and someone will tell you you're wrong and it's Y. Easier than asking how to do X. :-D
Whelp, here you go. It only does a quarterly GDP or "real income" analysis.
I, too, am far from being either of those things, but it sounds like you could just track purchasing power to get a rough idea. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding it, but it seems to me that, if inflation or other factors have eaten into your purchasing power and you haven't gotten a corresponding raise to offset it, you can reasonably conclude that the economy is getting worse for you in your personal circumstances.
Although I think it's great to track that too, I don't think that includes wage earnings and such. Like for the Big Mac Index by the Economist listed. the price of a Big Mac doesn't say much about the income levels of who is buying it. It seems to be more focused on the cost of production instead of the person buying it. Minimum wage is still so low across the country and hasn't been raised for so long, that the price could be kept low. Again, not an economist, but that's my insecure take.
There is a variable called Gross National Income (GNI) corrected for inflation which is likely the variable Wolfers refers to. You can report it, but it will not be very different from GDP corrected for inflation which the media writes about all the time. Essentially production =income except for some small nuances.
Did you see my first crack at it? I would love your input. I think the "Real GDP" might be not adjusted for inflation? I can't tell.
Real GDP is adjusted for inflation. That’s what the term Real means. Nominal GDP is not adjusted. I always think that reporting should primarily focus on real GNI per capita, which is slightly more informative than real GDP, but in practice I think the differences won’t be shocking.
Thanks for taking the time to respond. IMO, economics has some easy concepts that are hidden behind terms. Every industry has it, but all this info is kind of hidden anyway for a noob like me.
load more comments
(2 replies)
GDI is supposed to be basically equivalent to GDP, so it's not a better number to use. Sometimes the numbers diverge (see here for a discussion of this issue in 2022) because they use different methodologies to determine the number, but that's usually a sign that some kind of measurement is off, not that there's some kind of actual divergence in the true numbers of what they purport to measure.
And we moved away from Gross National Product/Income to Gross Domestic Product/Income because it was a better look at the domestic economy. We care more about the production/income within national borders rather than the production/income of a particular nation's residents.
load more comments
(1 replies)
There is no formula. You're mainly interested in wages, and those are negotiated.
That isn't really the definition though. Real income can fall in a recession but it's not necessarily a recession just because incomes fell. Real income can increase or decrease both during a recession and not during a recession. It's a lot more complicated than "when your income declines there is a recession".
The U.S. has been in a recession since Reagan according to the wording right? Housing and such vs wages shows its been in downfall since.
...that isn't what a recession means. I mean decreasing buying power is concerning but there are lots of times when that can happen when the economy is hot. In fact, a weakening economy can lead to deflation which increases buying power.
…that isn’t what a recession means. I mean decreasing buying power is concerning but there are lots of times when that can happen when the economy is hot. In fact, a weakening economy can lead to deflation which increases buying power.
You can't say all that and not tell us what you think it is. Also, I think they're talking overall, not the top 10% buying power.
Well, the official definition is when GDP contracts for 2 straight quarters (although apparently the fed can fudge that a little bit if the decline is negligible and unemployment goes up, like what happened under Biden)
That's not actually the official definition. It's more complicated than that, and it's not the Fed but the National Bureau of Economic Research: https://www.nber.org/research/business-cycle-dating/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions
I edited this in, but you might have missed it. He's saying real income is equal to the GDP. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAZxLm6M_V0
load more comments
(1 replies)
Unless it’s a Democrat in the White House. Then it’s totally fine! What do you mean you can’t afford food?!! The economy has never been better!!
/s
Democrat in office: "Who cares you can't buy food and pay rent? Many people live paycheck to paycheck! The stocks are up, who cares what the plebs have?"
Republicans in office: "I don't give two shits about you, the stock must go up."
Almost like they have the same goals of "line must go up". It is baffling how people can ignore various national issues because of the economic system the government props up when their favorite group is in office.
Propaganda and wedge issues are super effective in a population of adults that peaked in the 8th grade.
Oh I know, decades of propaganda and teaching people that ignorance is strength has worked wonders for the fascists.
Found this one: https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/
I think I have seen similar or parts of that type of data before, but not all of it in one place
This is a good analysis, but it's slightly different from OP's statement.
Median real wages actually are up since 1979. It became something of a meme post-2008 to say that median wages have been flat since that time. That was true for a few years following the Great Recession, but they caught up and went quite a bit higher. It's possible the numbers will cycle around to that again, but it's not where we're at right now.
What the graphs in the article are arguing is that wages over that time are much lower than they should be given productivity increases.
Let's say you work for one hour making a widget, and you get $1 for that time. Your boss sells the widget for $5 and pockets the difference. Now there's an increase in productivity, and you can make two widgets in the same hour. You still get paid $1 for that hour, but your boss is selling those two widgets for $10 total now. You're not getting a raise just because of that productivity increase.
You might get a raise due to inflation. With 4% inflation, you get to make $1.04/hour, but your boss is now selling those widgets for $5.20 each. This is more or less the story since 1979.
That difference between productivity and real wages is what's charted out above. It tells you exactly who the real moochers are in society.
This all tracks very neatly with a decline in union membership.
load more comments
(2 replies)
That's great info, thanks. I'll pursue that angle next time.
Economics just redefines terms as needed for the moment. Recession is really a label that can't really be applied until after you're in it anyway.
Inflation has also gotten watered down to be less meaningful once it started being a problem.
Inflation got watered down, what do you mean? It's just math for inflation. Capitalism uses inflation as a tool to expand the economy but at the end of the day by the definition listed on the post they are just saying if your wage doesn't increase faster than the inflation your life resources are in recession. That's at least how I read it. If you can't buy as much shit as you used to, you're doing worse. Which happens to individuals without happening to everyone, but if the average person can't buy as much shit as they could before, then it seems like recession is an adequate term.
load more comments
(1 replies)
oh shit....
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
679 points (100.0% liked)
Today I Learned
25329 readers
725 users here now
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS