this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2024
208 points (96.8% liked)

World News

39446 readers
2234 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/51182148

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago

What we need is degrowth and a transition away from capitalism.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 48 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm glad this got press.

Such slowdowns tend to be good for the average person.

They're bad for speculators, investors, shareholders -- mostly rich people who are too moneyblind to see that endless growth is untenable. To those people, I say: fuck you.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Your thinking of disinflation, not deflation...

Ask the average person how great the Great Depression really was to live through.

[–] hark@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

Deflation was a symptom, not the cause, of the great depression.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 51 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Up until the 20th century it wasn't uncommon to have cycles of inflation and deflation.

https://iamkate.com/data/uk-inflation/

The reason deflation is so highly feared is because it increases the value of debt. In particular, government debt. China owns large parts of the debt of the US. Deflation makes them stronger.

[–] NIB@lemmy.world 55 points 3 days ago (7 children)

Not exactly. Deflation basically slows down the economy. If you think your money will worth more tomorrow, then you are less likely to invest/spend them.

But the whole purpose of money is to be used. Money is a tool, the oil that facilitates trade and keeps the economy going. And while too much money(oil) can overheat the economy(inflation), too little money can straight up bring the economy to a halt(deflation).

Deflation, even in small amounts, is more dangerous, thats why ideally you prefer having a small amount of inflation.

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If you think your money will worth more tomorrow, then you are less likely to invest/spend them.

I see this argument being thrown around a lot. How does it work when a fair share of people are not doing investment at all, and are unable to spend the bare minimum to live, to begin with?

I ask this because the argument of "people will spend less" only works with people that spend extra money on unnecessary things, which is becoming less and less of a thing.

[–] FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Because no matter what proportion of the population they are, many many businesses are kept afloat by discretionary spending. Be that TVs, laptops, clothing, grooming, beauty products, heath+fitness, cars, holidays, tourism, travel, even house moves.

These are all things that can be 'put off a little while' if there's serious prospect of your money going further. Which, as OP says, slows the economy and makes deflation worse.. The thing that suffers in the meantime is cash flow in these businesses (and dependent businesses) and an extended period of slow trade with no prospect of it ending would see many of them go to the wall. See: covid. Had governments not acted it would have naturally led to deflation. That's not the reason they acted though, they pumped money into the economy because long before deflation/inflation would have been a worry bankruptcy would have cut deep into thousands of regular 'good' businesses. (So they over inflated and then we had globally crap price inflation but still the risk of an economy wide shut down was that bad..)

[–] hark@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Technology is inherently deflationary in that superior versions come out for the same or even less money all the time yet people still regularly buy TVs, phones, laptops, etc.

True, they're poor examples. But discretionary spending, on the whole, is not on depreciating items.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 days ago

Humans are not rational actors. We never have been and we never will be. There are different gradations of “necessary”.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago (16 children)

"The economy" in this instance being a playground for the rich.

People won't stop paying for food or rent just because their money might be worth a little more tomorrow. They won't skip buying minor entertainments just because maybe their meager salaries might be worth a little more next week.

Deflation is poison for the owner class, not the working class.

[–] djsp@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (10 children)

"The economy" in this instance being a playground for the rich.

People won't stop paying for food or rent just because their money might be worth a little more tomorrow.

Indeed, people won't stop paying for everyday necessities, but the economy consists of more than just individual people: there's the state and there are businesses too. You conflate the latter with “the rich”, which is generally true for corporations, but corporations are not the only form of business; there are cooperatives, partnerships, and others which can distribute profits more fairly. In any case, deflation affects all businesses, including fair ones, and the state itself. As another commentator suggested, money is meant to change hands and should never become an asset worth holding.

[–] c10l@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (5 children)

money is meant to change hands and should never become an asset worth holding.

Forgive my admitted ignorance. If money should never become an asset worth holding, how can inflation be better than deflation for the working class?

Proportionately, the rich hold a lot more money assets than the poor, who generally don’t hold any or very little.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 3 days ago (7 children)

If you have debt, inflation eats away at that debt. If you're paying 5% per year on that debt, but inflation goes up 3%, you're actually only paying 2% on that debt. That's good for people who have debt, and bad for the people who invested the initial money for that debt. With deflation, it's the opposite.

This assumes your wages go up with inflation, though. Over the long term, that does tend to happen, but there are certainly periods where that is not true.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 16 points 3 days ago (14 children)

Deflation, even in small amounts, is more dangerous, thats why ideally you prefer having a small amount of inflation.

This is only accurate if you measure economic success by "Corporate profits".

Deflationationary phases are very helpful for the working class, as their dollar now buys MORE things. Like food. And housing. And health care.

[–] dondelelcaro@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Deflationary periods may be helpful to those with large amounts of cash or cash equivalents, which generally isn't the working class. Wage growth outpacing inflation helps the working class more.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Mammothmothman@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

Whinnie the pooh whinnie the pooh...

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 59 points 4 days ago (2 children)

While consumers can benefit from falling prices, persistent deflation can also lead to a downward spiral for spending and investment.

This seems like an absolute win.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 47 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (5 children)

Until your company, your salary and your job start deflating too.

[–] ME5SENGER_24@lemmy.world 63 points 3 days ago (14 children)

The obsession with companies needing to post increasing profits every single year is frankly baffling. Let's say a company makes X amount in profits in 2024, and everyone—employees, shareholders, stakeholders—are happy and well-compensated. Why should the expectation be that profits must increase in 2025, even if the company is already performing well? The only explanation that comes to mind is greed. It seems like the focus is less on long-term sustainability or fairness and more about feeding the insatiable hunger of CEOs and executives who just want more—more profits, more bonuses, more power. It’s as if they’re modern-day dragons, hoarding wealth for the sake of hoarding, rather than for the health of the business or the people within it.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Isn't it great that we also have people who do know about economics?

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago (9 children)

"The people are tired of experts" stupidity apparently knows no political borders.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] oce@jlai.lu 29 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I think the usual issue with deflation that people will wait for prices to keep going down and therefore keep buying less which feeds the deflation.

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 9 points 3 days ago (2 children)

People buying less, ie being more risk averse, and not wanting to take on debt, is a net benefit for everyone. Buying less means less ecological impact. Being more debt averse means fewer wage slaves.

The only people who suffer from "buying less" are corporate owners.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 days ago

It's one of those vicious cycles - it's really hard to stop once it starts.

Also, bear in mind that China's recent economic growth has been mainly internal consumer driven (external infrastructure investments have slowed down noticeably as belts are tightened) so while they aren't as fucked as America would be they could see a dramatic rapid decline.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cyd@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I mean, it's a fair question for a political leader to ask his economic advisors, no? Pretty sure Obama would have asked his advisors the same question back in 2009.

The issue, by the way, is a lot less settled than a lot of people think. Macroeconomics still seems to do a surprisingly bad job at understanding the links between inflation, interest rates, and economic activity, beyond giving some rough guidelines.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Obama would have been president for one year in 2009 and I still would hope he understood the problem with deflation.

Xi Jinping has been in power for over 12 years now.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›