Oh hey, also the same thing with environmental issues

  • Mossy Feathers (She/They)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 months ago

    US dollars make up nearly 60% of the world’s reserve currency. I could be mistaken here, but my understanding is that means a significant chunk of the world is using the USD as a significant part of their currency standard (#2 is the euro with just under 20%). As such, if I understand correctly that means that if the US dollar undergoes inflation, then the rest of the world will experience at least some inflation as well.

    MW has barely changed in the USA over decades but has risen much more elsewhere. If the theory were right, USA would have been largely free of inflation…

    This is only true if you look at federal minimum wage. Wages aren’t keeping up with inflation, but most US cities have an official or unofficial minimum wage of $15/hr. I think that shift happened about 10yrs ago, and afaik nothing’s changed since then.

    Why? Corporate greed. Poor regulation. International tax avoidance.

    Exactly. They knew they could charge more, and so they did. That’s what inflation is. Everyone realized they could charge more, so they did. The dollar decreased in value because prices went up across the board.

    Inflation.

    • @davidagain
      link
      English
      -12 months ago

      Seriously? You went from giving some homeless people enough money to get accommodation and food to a global inflation crisis?

      I mean ,that’s some really absurd fear mongering right there.

      You’ve got to be a Republican if you can swallow or invent nonsense like that. No, global inflation crises are caused by corporate reactions to war and stock market scares, not by charity projects.

      Who the f*** ever heard of the global RedCross inflation crisis of 1987?! There wasn’t one!
      The World Food Programme guacamole price hike of 2014?! There wasn’t one!
      The International Rescue Committee credit crunch of 2018? There wasn’t one!
      The The World Health Organization cancer treatment rising expense scandal of 2023? There wasn’t one!

      Why didn’t these things happen?

      Because giving people in dire straights enough to get them back on their feet IS NOT a cause of any kind of inflation. Stop making out that your crazy catastrophe theories are even slightly plausible,

      Charitable crisis solving is safe. It’s unequivocally good for the economy. Keeping people on the streets and hence out of work is bad for the economy. Alleviating abject poverty is unequivocally GOOD.

      • Mossy Feathers (She/They)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I give up. You’re not reading what I’m saying. I’m actually pretty far left, further left than it seems you or most of the people here are considering how they object to the idea that people should receive whatever assistance they need, not just have money thrown in their face and told to fuck off

        Edit: sigh one last try. I think you’re fucking with me, and if so then you’re doing a really good job, so congrats. Well done, you got me pretty good.

        Seriously? You went from giving some homeless people enough money to get accommodation and food to a global inflation crisis?

        Actually yes. It sounds unhinged, but when you’re talking about rich people, they’ll do whatever to get richer. Rich people will unironically bring the economy to the brink of collapse if it means they’ll get richer. Where have you been the past, oh I dunno, all of human civilization?

        It’s not poor people’s fault.

        It’s nothing they’ve done.

        It’s all rich people.

        Get rid of the rich people. Now you won’t have to keep increasing the money you give poor people. Otherwise someone might be able to afford tools today but be unable to buy new ones tomorrow.

        • @davidagain
          link
          English
          12 months ago

          I didn’t object to any of the extra help. That’s a straw man. I just have to keep reminding you that giving people in abject poverty substantial chunks of no-strings unconditional cash has a large and growing body of evidence showing that it’s more effective and cheaper than leading with non-cash interventions, which are slow, have limited long term benefits and high drop-out rates. You do them too, later, but you lead with cash. Actual cash. You know, to fix the lack of cash issue that’s causing most of the rest of the problems.

          • Mossy Feathers (She/They)
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            That’s literally what I’ve been saying this entire fucking time you dingus.

            Edit:

            I’m not convinced that just cash will solve homelessness or poverty. It may help, but it seems like a “give a man a fish, he’ll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he’ll eat for a lifetime” kinda situation. Give people the fish so they can eat, but if you want them to actually be independent, then you gotta make sure they have the tools they need to do so.

            Key sentence in bold and italics. From my first comment in this thread.

            • @davidagain
              link
              English
              12 months ago

              Not quite, it isn’t, not in overall message, and if you read what I said, you’ll see that I didn’t object to any additional help, I just insist on substantial cash first and reject most firmly your absurd histrionics about inflation.

              • Mossy Feathers (She/They)
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 months ago

                Not quite, it isn’t, not in overall message

                Listen, I may have been horrible at phrasing what I’m saying, but that’s legitimately what I’ve been trying to argue. The difference I guess is that I’m anticipating the possible negative outcomes and saying they should be resolved simultaneously instead of just saying “throw money at them”.

                you’ll see that I didn’t object to any additional help, I just insist on substantial cash first

                Okay, sooooo… Again, apparently I was bad at explaining myself, but that’s basically what I was trying to say, just that instead of cash now, resolve issues later, I think that you should resolve the possible issues at the same time.

                reject most firmly your absurd histrionics about inflation.

                Why is it hard to believe that rich people will happily destroy the world if it means they get an extra dollar or two? They’re already doing it. Recent history has firmly established that rich people are consistently among the worst human beings that humanity has to offer. They would unironically feed a baby into a blender if that meant their company ran 0.1% more efficiently. That’s why I’m convinced they’ll just fuck people over again. You have to either remove them from the equation as well, or at the very least, quarantine them so their obscene wealth and influence can’t hurt anyone in the real world.

                And we can make it quick bby. It doesn’t have to take long~.

                • @davidagain
                  link
                  English
                  12 months ago

                  Inflation is a real thing and will really happen. It’s just that charity programmes have absolutely nothing to do with fuelling inflation. You have cause and effect utterly backwards.

                  The difference I guess is that I’m anticipating the possible negative outcomes and saying they should be resolved simultaneously instead of just saying “throw money at them”.

                  The difference is that I’m hearing the people doing the things and analysing the results who are saying no strings cash is far and away the best thing you can do. All the other stuff has to come later.

                  If it’s 103 outside and you haven’t drunk anything since the morning, your mouth is parched and you’re starting to feel dizzy and I show up with a shrink and a sachet of electrolyte-rich powder, I’m just not helping. If I show up with three pints of cool but not cold water then you might be prepared to take some electrolyte powder in it but I bet you $100 you don’t want to wait for me to mix it into the first pint, because here’s the thing, the water is the main thing you need. Pint 2 or 3 you might accept the electrolytes, but frankly they can wait. And don’t bother with the shrink yet either. Don’t lead with the powder, don’t lead with the shrink, lead with the water.