Some ex recto guesses:
Capital is counting on getting a boost from tax cuts for the wealthy. It'll be a temporary jolt and only benefit the rich, of course, but they're willing to give each other credit while awaiting that.
There actually was a lot of slack in the economy, yeah, and businesses actually aren't raising prices immediately because they realize it would be bad for their guy/party in the Oval Office.
We're still only six months into the administration, as hard to believe as it is. There haven't been mass layoffs yet. All the horrible stuff we've been reading about is horrible in non-economic ways or hasn't had time to have second-order or third-order effects. Prices have gone up for some specific things due to tariffs, but not everything.
Things were worse than they looked in the past few years, so the relative decline isn't as big as we'd expect.
A friend of mine just got laid off from the arts non-profit he works for, because all their grant money is evaporating. He's the third person I know to have lost their job because of Trump. Of the other two, one worked for a human services non profit that got Musked, and the other worked in the sciences and had their NIH funding go away.
Also, my bank branch just left town and the Rite Aid just closed.
My own business is hanging on by a thread. We are reliant on UN contracts and they don't have any money either.
A lot of what is going on is that Trump and Musk are eating seed corn, and that won't have an impact until (figuratively speaking) the next planting season.
Foreign trade is still a relatively small part of the economy -- imports of goods represent something approaching 15% of the economy, and the cost of importation only represents part of the cost of the final product.
As serious as Stephen Miller is about ridding the country of foreigners, they haven't yet set up concentration camps on an economically significant scale.
And Trump inherited a fantastically strong economy, regardless of what you may have read in the New York Times.
My guess is that the stock markets are marking time until Trump can get his person in as Fed chairman in 2026. Then it's party time, because Job 1 for the Fed will be goosing the economy for the remainder of Trump's term.
I'm personally still bearish on the market. But as the man said, there really is a great deal of ruin in a nation.
Canadian tourism in my state is down by something like 70%.
To thoroughly mix literary allusions, the [recession] comes on little cat feet, gradually and then suddenly.
> Are people insensitive to certain kinds of inflation, if it's not just like the stupid eggs or gas?
There were articles earlier this year highlighting a Moody's report showing how much of U.S consumer spending is driven by the top 10% of earners. It's up to 50% of consumer spending. And yes, they're shrugging off the cost of eggs and paying for concert tickets, vacations, preventive medical screenings of questionable necessity, etc.
Restaurants are going under at a much higher rate around here than usual.
I'm still buying more eggs to heighten the contradictions.
I remember 2006 and half the internet was people waiting for the housing crash to start.
The collapse of the Internet bubble in 2000 was something that basically everybody saw coming -- for several years.
I think that was the context in which I first heard the apochryphal Keynes quote: "The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."
Yeah. I remember this guy from the next office over who was maxing out deferred compensation with a plan to retire by thirty or whatever. I left the job before the crash.
I have this vague sense that the stock market* hasn't been too closely attached to people's experiences of the economy for a long time, but there's still somewhat of an expectation that it should be. Does the trend in this chart of the Dow Jones average** match your experience of daily economic life?
The crashes are on there, sure, but I don't think most people experienced those as temporary drops that very quickly were outpaced by sustained gains.
*Or maybe just the main averages that get reported as top line numbers.
**I don't know anything about the source but those aggregate numbers are probably right?
The 30 year plot matches my life pretty well if you adjust for inflation. Or probably with would. I'm just guessing what it looks like with inflation considered.
The 2008-2020 section would match my life better if I hadn't been accruing and then paying student loans in that period.
3 seems accurate. For example, this Krugman column seems like it fits the "eating the seed corn" description. https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/bad-times-for-college-graduates
As I suggested, the current unemployment rate for young college graduates isn't the highest we've ever seen. But previous peaks have come at times of general economic distress, like the aftermath of the global financial crisis. Now we have low overall unemployment, only slightly above historic lows, but unemployment among college graduates between 22 and 27 at recession-like levels.
...
So what does a business do in the face of this kind of uncertainty? It tries to avoid making commitments that it may soon regret.
And hiring recent college graduates is a significant commitment. Whatever their formal training, young people need to acquire real-world experience to be effective in their new jobs. Employers need to be willing to spend time and money while new hires gain this experience. And in this uncertain environment, that's not a commitment employers are willing to make. They may hold on to their existing workers, at least for now, but they won't hire.
There were articles earlier this year highlighting a Moody's report showing how much of U.S consumer spending is driven by the top 10% of earners. It's up to 50% of consumer spending.
That's nuts. Trying to find more details, I can find a number of articles citing that report but not much data on the data behind it. I guess that would mean that each person in the top 10% is spending, on average. 9 times as much as an average person in the remaining 90%; that doesn't seem (at all) impossible but I'm still trying to wrap my head around it.
They may hold on to their existing workers, at least for now, but they won't hire.
I'm in one of the (private) sectors that's downstream of the DOGE cuts (plus state government cuts that are also DOGE cuts in that the state got federal money that then went out as state grants) and that describes my organization so far. There's a partial hiring freeze, some job openings and even in-progress searches have been canceled, but no significant layoffs yet. Lots of contingency planning around possible future budgets that would include layoffs and cutbacks on service and operations.
15: it's incredible just because it's so stark, but I don't find it hard to believe in the sense of hard to understand or inconsistent with my lived experience. A lot of people are just barely getting by. To put some numbers on it, the 90th percentile of income is about $212,000. That would be considered middle class in some cities. On the other end, the federal poverty level is $21,000 for a household of 2, and 7 to 12 percent of people depending on what metric you use get by on less than that. My friends and I may worry about money and our stuff, but we have money and stuff. A lot of people just don't.
It's part of being old, but I still haven't reset my numbers of what's 10th percentile. $212k/yr is so much more than my household! I would have guessed I was in the top 10th percentile.
Makes sense though, every time a drive through a rich suburb I'm just baffled about how so many people can have that much money.
For that to be true the top 10% would have to be spending, per person, nine times as much as the bottom 90% on average. That doesn't sound completely unreasonable given the figures in 17.
FWIW, here's the most detailed summary I found: https://www.pymnts.com/consumer-finance/2025/wealthiest-10-of-americans-drive-bulk-of-consumer-spending/
These consumers make up just under half of all consumer spending, the highest figure in data dating back 35 years, the report said, citing an analysis by Moody's Analytics. Three decades ago, those wealthier consumers accounted for about 36% of spending.
This means that economic growth is "unusually" dependent on wealthier Americans' spending, the report said. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, estimated that spending by these consumers made up close to a third of gross domestic product.
Higher earners upped their spending by 12% between September 2023 and September 2024, the report said, while working class households began spending less.
"The finances of the well-to-do have never been better, their spending never stronger and the economy never more dependent on that group," said Zandi.
The WSJ report notes that richer Americans have increased their consumer spending well above inflation, while the rest of the country has not. The bottom 80% of earners spent 25% more than they did four years earlier, while prices increased 21% during that period. The wealthiest 10%, meanwhile, spent 58% more, the report said.
Income is great, but paying 2003 Pittsburgh housing prices is a huge help.
> To put some numbers on it, the 90th percentile of income is about $212,000. That would be considered middle class in some cities.
Does "middle class" here just mean "doesn't feel rich"?
If not, what cities?
Taking "Manhattan" as a city, it's plausible, but I can't think of any others. After taxes in NYC, you're at $140K. Median apartment rental in Manhattan is 60K a year, food and transportation 25K. But that's still 55K of discretionary income.
They have the best bagel sandwiches, but they're like $12 to $18 dollars each.
Healthcare is the great missing piece there. Because someone with a family and without good insurance through their job could be spending a couple of thousand a month even if no one has any serious health problems.
> Healthcare is the great missing piece there.
Very true, so that discretionary gets cut almost in half.
The other great missing piece here is that these numbers are medians in Manhattan because the working class people who work there don't live there.
And that almost half of households are singles compared to a quarter nationally.
There's a piece on precisely the OP subject in the Saturday Financial Times. It says that historically, the market tends to recover from geopolitical or other sudden shocks within a three weeks, and then after the effects on stocks just get priced in with all the other stuff happening so (I elaborate for myself) lot harder to prove what is doing what.
Of course that also depends on good economic data eventually coming in, which, who knows.
You also need to buy nicer clothes if you live in Manhattan. Apparently.
22: according to this calculator, $212000 is the 75th percentile in Washington, DC. That's not right in the middle, but it's close to the rounded part of a bell curve. I'll bet a lot of metropolitan areas are similar.
I'm watching Jaws and they make a show of the coroner typing "Shark Attack" in the cause of death shot of the death certificate. It's probably the most annoying pull-down menu now.
22: "Middle class" in nearly any context like this means "needs to work for a living." There's obviously a very big difference between the lower and upper middle classes, and nobody making six figures should complain too loudly about the luxuries they find out of reach, but it's fair to say you're middle class if a few months out of work would pretty much ruin you.
And most of the top ten causes of death are in the first few letters of the alphabet. The exception, heart disease, is probably too big to hide.
Richard Dreyfuss looks like an incel with that beard.
I'm talking to a Welshman who went out for a cigarette.
I can't remember what that euphemism means.
He was really drunk. The bartender wouldn't give him another beer until he could say the name of the beer.
I know "Welshman" is a euphemism, but I don't know for what.
We talk of the K shaped recovery --- the top of the K is still doing okay and they buy a lot.
But the stock market isn't the economy, and I have to believe some people are making bank predicting taco runs.
I still swapped some stocks for bonds and am holding onto the latter because I think the causes for crashes / weakness will continue to accumulate.
||
New Blog Post! Happy Solstice!
|>
So that's why it's so fucking hot. Thanks, teofilo.
In Gwich'in, orientation is given in relation to river systems. Instead of walking "north" or "south," you travel "upriver" or "downriver." If Mr. Herbert is disoriented at night in thick forests, he has only to look at Yahdii's orientation. He mentally maps the position of the stars in relation to the river-drainage system on the land below, as he and Dr. Cannon documented in 2022.This must be a lot harder that it sounds, considering the deranged drainage across most of that area. Or maybe things are better organized in the Yukon Flats?
Diagram of yahdii on page 3 (PDF).
Or ... the predictions were all bullshit.
Just like the prediction that Twitter would collapse when 80% of its staff were fired, and that Twitter would be replaced with [Mastodon|Threads|Bluesky|Lemmy], and that the Russian economy would collapse under the weight of sanctions, and that Kamala would win, and that inflation was transitory, and that people should be worried about the flu and not covid (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/13/world/asia/coronavirus-risk-interpreter.html) ...
You consume media that flatters your sensibilities and are then surprised when reality doesn't comply...
Fuck off if you're going to write unsigned criticism of what people here mostly didn't say.
@48 People did though...
Covid - http://www.unfogged.com/archives/week_2020_02_23.html
Twitter Collapsing - http://www.unfogged.com/archives/week_2022_11_13.html
I'm not saying you are bad people -- far from it! It's just that (like everyone else) you latch on to narratives that make you feel good.
Great. Then just get a name to put in the little box that says "Name:".
Yes, it's super frustrating to see long comments with no name. What point is there in responding?
I can't prove it, but I'm pretty sure that was me as "Opinionated food service worker" in the Covid thread.
Adapting great works of literature into PlayStation games, number 1:
A la recherche de temps perdu (In Search of Times Past) by Marcel Proust, volume 1: "Du cote de chez Swann" (Swann's Way).
Summary of review:
Graphic and sound design: playtesters praised the realistic graphics, in particular the leaf and dust kinetic animations. The immersive sound scape was also called "impressive" although some playtesters said that the background music was too obtrusive.
Gameplay: the loading screen hints ("To dip an object in your tea, hold down left trigger"; "Press A to eat a madeleine thoughtfully") were useful and presented in a suitable style. Playtesters noted, however, that doing both at the start of gameplay triggered an unskippable 18-hour cinematic cutscene. This was criticised as reducing player enjoyment and replayability.
inflation was transitory
Inflation was, in fact, transitory. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpi
If you're going to write comments in the style appropriate for twitter/bluesky/mastodon/truth.social/etc., it's best to do that in one of those places.
Pace the COVID thread: I can't remember if I ever completed the story of my sister's health, but it has all turned out pretty well. She's no longer a candidate for liver or kidney transplants, the horrible calcification thing on her leg was cleared up by adjusting medication, she gained a lot of weight back, and she can get around pretty decently, with some use of a cane. She's still on SSDI, and she is engaged to be married to a really cool woman she's known for a long time this fall. My niece seems to have taken the whole thing in stride and just wrapped up an excellent first year of middle school. So that's all pretty darn good, given my sister was in multiple organ failure 5.5 years ago and several doctors were trying to steer the family towards palliative care only.
That's great to hear. I had been wondering, but was afraid I missed something.
56: That's some wonderful news! Thanks for sharing , Natilo!
This must be a lot harder that it sounds, considering the deranged drainage across most of that area. Or maybe things are better organized in the Yukon Flats?
Yeah, the Yukon is a big fucking river and its tributaries mostly flow into it in an orderly way, so this kind of navigation system makes sense for the Yukon Flats specifically. The Mackenzie is also a big river with an orderly system of tributaries so the same may be true for the more easterly Gwich'in region. There are many other parts of the Arctic where this wouldn't work at all, though.
deranged drainage across most of that area
I'm assuming maybe you are aware, but "deranged" is the actual technical term for those drainage patterns.
A deranged drainage system is a drainage system in drainage basins where there is no coherent pattern to the rivers and lakes. These can form in areas with extensive limestone deposits, where surface streams can disappear into the groundwater via caves and subterranean drainage routes. ...A classic example is the Canadian Shield.
There is a small bit of deranged drainage patterns in Pennsylvania on the Pocono Plateau.
Also in my basement before we fixed the French drain.
Speaking of deranged, CNN headline right now: US strikes mark a stunning demonstration of military might and presidential power,
Bombing another country and a strongman leader. Twofer for the national media.
I had a Canadian -- a Canadian -- tell me the other day that she trusts Donald Trump to improve the economy more than she trusts Mark Carney. I mean, it's not like I trust Mark Carney on anything any further than I can throw him, but Trump already fucked up the economy massively through his negligence, and in the last several months he's given every indication that he will do so again.
People are just sleepwalking into serfdom.
The Trump election has really degraded my baseline for humans. The first one was bad enough but the second was like 'you do remember what happened last time?'
It's just weird to think like 40% of the population is that dumb or cruel. I'm not saying ignorant because there is a willful ignorance that I think is at play which is a combination of dumb and cruel.
My own mother! How does she square it with the Bible or with her teaching background (in special education too)? On one hand, an interesting intellectual exercise to figure out; on the other, I would would end up yelling a lot and probably would never speak to her again if I asked.
Anyway, turns out people are awful and authoritative regimes are way more likely than I thought!
63 is tribal behaviour. She presumably voted for PP, and so cannot possibly admit that PP's rival (who defeated him) could be better than the absolute worst in the world at anything at all.
It's just weird to think like 40% of the population is that dumb or cruel.
It is weird, yet the historical evidence for it is pretty hard to ignore.
Something something Arendt something.
65: yeah, I certainly see that psychology everyday when it comes to trying to convince people they are being scammed. You would think that the fact that someone you met online, who claims to be a famous Hollywood actor, and who you have been "engaged" to for a couple of years without ever meeting in person, has started to ask for larger and larger amounts of gift cards to be transmitted to them would tend to arouse people's suspicions. But once they're into the scam for even a couple of thousand dollars, it's like pulling teeth to get someone to admit they've been tricked.
Yeah, Trump is a consummate scammer, and people (and especially Americans) love to fall for scams.
The band that Taylor briefly dated the one guy from before the guy kept doing racism?
47: Someone needs to tell the head of the Russian central bank that there's nothing to worry about:
"We grew for two years at a fairly high pace because unused resources were activated," said Russian Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina. "We need to understand that many of those resources have truly been exhausted."
hydrobatidae @ 64: Over at LG&M I learned a new word "vincible ignorance": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincible_and_invincible_ignorance
Vincible ignorance is, in Catholic moral theology, ignorance that a person could remove by applying reasonable diligence in the given set of circumstances. It contrasts with invincible ignorance, which a person is either entirely incapable of removing, or could only do so by supererogatory efforts (i.e., efforts above and beyond normal duty).[1]
Joining in on being happy to hear the good news in 56!
"Vincible ignorance" is a great phrase, and I'm glad to learn it.
Hooray for Natty's sister!
And co-signing 64. It's really rocked my core beliefs about the world. (Although thankfully my parents are not infected).
7t is the difference between being Ignorant (not knowing stuff) and being Dumb (aggressively determined not to learn stuff). There is also being Slow (knowing stuff but not drawing the obvious conclusions).
75: Ahha! Great concept and of course this is a known issue with people.
I keep getting a call so my landline where a robot with a woman's voice says "This is a call for Moby Hick." And then a robot that sounds like a cop says "This is a documented attempt to reach you about a matter that has been filed with our office." I'm asked to call them at a number. The scammers have realized they don't even need to try hard.
82: but they only need to scam a tiny portion of the population -- many less than is needed to win a Presidential election
Trump is watching and demanding we keep oil prices down. I'm going to ask my neighbors with the $60,000 trucks to take the bus to work. Thank you for your attention.
hydrobatidae, Ajay: I especially like that it comes from Catholic theology, the better to throw it in the faces of these un-Christian Talibangelicals.