Qasim Rashid, Esq.
With news today that the stock market is down, & MAGAs alleging the Biden economy is bad, your PSA that the stock market is not the economy. The top 10% own 93% of stocks.
Meanwhile, 78% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, 27% of Americans are house poor, & USA has the worst wealth & income inequality in developed nations. All slightly better than under Trump—but not enough.
Stop letting stocks be a measure of economic health—start demanding economic justice for all people in this country.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
@QasimRashid Stocks are in fact an excellent measure of economic health. In fact the correlation between mean income, GDP, and the stock market (when indexed correctly) is very very tightly correlated.
youshouldknowthis
Means mean very little when you have huge inequalities.
Prisons and car accidents also improve GDP and they are not good measures of how *well* the economy is doing.
Of course, the stock market goes with the economy, but it's not the president that commands either directly (or even indirectly, to any so great extend).
Can we please stop measuring our well-being with how much we destroy the planet? https://youtu.be/QB8fjehyxfo
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Means mean very little when you have huge inequalities.
No doubt those inequalities are important to address. But having a healthier economy corresponds with fewer inequalities. Largely because you need a healthy financial situation to even address inequalities at all.
Prisons and car accidents also improve GDP and they are not good measures of how well the economy is doing.
No, they dont. While Prisons and Car accidents make certain people money (the owners of car repair shops and prisons) it also takes away significant amount of wealth that would have been produced by the people who are taken out of the work force. So no, in fact having more people in prison or in car accidents overall would reduce the GDP not increase it.
Of course, the stock market goes with the economy, but it’s not the president that commands either directly (or even indirectly, to any so great extend).
Absolutely agree on the point that it isnt the president in complete control of the stock market, so he is not 100% responsible for it. One must look at the nuance of the situation to figure out what effect he has had on it, we cant just assume. That said, he has been doing a poor job on economy in most of his time in office, so I think there is a pretty fair argument here to say Biden is shit on the economy, but thats a bit of a tangent and not really the important part here for me.
Can we please stop measuring our well-being with how much we destroy the planet?
Thats not what the stock market is, and long term even economic damage would hurt the stock market, so quantifying things based on economy, at least if you have a pretty good long-term outlook still works out even if we prioritize the environment (as we should).
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Its all relative.. +/- 5% is pretty huge (even on equality) over the right time period... A change of that amount in anything on the order of a year or less is pretty big.
GDP is a measure of what is produced, with more people in jail or with injuries then those people are not int he workforce, not able to produce things, so GDP goes down, not up. This is true both int he long and short runs, people pulled out of the workforce has **immediate** effect on our ability to produce new foods and produce new wealth.
youshouldknowthis
1 of 2:
+/- 5 % on the stock markets mean very little in terms of inequality. And inequality is crucial for measuring both an economy and wellbeing.
GDP is a measure of what is produced. Wealth is what people have. What you said is only partly true and only in the long run.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
> My point is we measure too frequently wellbeing with GDP and the stock markets.
GDP should never be used alone for well being. GDP and tons of other indicators all need to be considered to get the complete picture of where we are headed. But the GDP does a good job at giving us one (of a few) clues as to the health of the economy. So it is a major factor in measuring well being, even if not the only one.
> "quantifying things based on economy" What's your point and what do you mean?
That as a metric for the health of the economy, and by extention one important component of the well being of its people, it is a very important measure.
> BTW, Long term neither Harris or Trump are in power. So, attributing direct responsibility to the president for how the economy is doing without further context is misadvised at best.
I generally agree, while presidents do have large effects on economies it still needs to be taken into account as part of the bigger picture. In fact strictly by the numbers congress tends to have more long-term quantifiable effects on markets than presidents do. Though presidents have more of a temporary effect (decisions or statements will cause large temporary swings in response).
youshouldknowthis
2 of 2:
You said it well - "tangent". I would say that is a huge misunderstatement, though.
My point is we measure too frequently wellbeing with GDP and the stock markets.
"quantifying things based on economy" What's your point and what do you mean?
BTW, Long term neither Harris or Trump are in power. So, attributing direct responsibility to the president for how the economy is doing without further context is misadvised at best.
Love your optimism!
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Yes 1% change is the average on any one day.. Its a random walk though, so 5% over the course of a year is still huge.
youshouldknowthis
Stock markets go up and down 1 to 3 % every day. One upward or downward movement say close to nothing about current inequality.
Say someone is unemployed, steals and goes to prison. You argument doesn't hold here.
Say someone pays 10.000$ for a repair (car was smashed, only little bruises). Your argument doesn't hold here, too.
Derek Caelin is writing a book
@QasimRashid Absolutely! I really wish we could break this mental pattern.
youshouldknowthis
Say the rich get 10% richer and the poor 1% richer (inflation already taken into account). With the natural improvement in productivity companies develop, this could be achieved with 0 effort from the president. The economy is heading in the right direction? I would argue not.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Well the president will never have 0 effect... but yea you very well can have effects on the economy without the president playing much of a role on many aspects, no doubt. Thats why I said someone needs to really look at the nuance to determine that. Biden has a pretty bad track record on economy and spending, so he deserves some of the blame for sure. But as I said, congress is likely a bigger factor than anything. When you have a congress that is split and not reaching across the aisle you tend to have very poor economies regardless of what the president does.
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
The real (adjusted) hourly wage under biden went down by 7.5% - 10%, by comparison under trump it increased something like 10% - 15%.
His spending astronomical and wreckless.. Trumps spending was also wreckless (stuff like the wall was a complete waste) but overall the overall spending was at least lower, not that i would endorce trumps approach either.
Every indicator under Biden for economic health is just, bad, some are at best neutral.
youshouldknowthis
Why do you believe that Biden has a "bad track record on economy and spending"?
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
Sure, source here is bureau of labor statistics, its dump from September 2023 (most recent once I've analyzed).
youshouldknowthis
Sources, please.
youshouldknowthis
Perhaps you have a link you have read from, you may share?
Or otherwise a link from a piece of news that talks about it?
🎓 Doc Freemo :jpf: 🇳🇱
I'm sure i can find someone who discussed the real wage decrease, let me look.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.