I've participated in the unemployment tallying in the US. That's not how that works.
The only thing that I can possibly imagine you're alluding to is discouraged workers, who are people without jobs who stopped looking. They drop off because it's really hard to hire people who won't apply for any job, which is important to know about when you're trying to determine the number of people available to fill job vacancies.
We just change the calculation. If 25% are unemployed, what if we added a stipulation that they also received a survey from the last job they applied to on whether they were employable. See? We can drop unemployment by calling people unemployable and ignoring those that didn't apply for a job! Math!
Now, these problems have been fairly obvious for at least a decade. Why are they only becoming acute now? Well, international economists are fond of citing Dornbusch’s Law: “The crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought.” What happened in China’s case was that the government was able to mask the problem of inadequate consumer spending for a number of years by promoting a gigantic real estate bubble. In fact, China’s real estate sector became insanely large by international standards.
I don’t understand this take. Comments like this suggest collapse happens overnight. Which means if china didn’t catastrophically collapse in the last 24 hours it means it isn’t happening at all or never.
The reality is collapse happens very slowly. There is no question that the health of the economy both in china and the rest of the world is steadily getting worse year by year.
Collapse isn’t going to happen. It’s already happening. It’s just a steady and slow march to the bottom.
Yeah, it's a believe it when you see it thing at this point. They might stagnate out economically or have internal supply issues, but there's a world of difference between that and actual regime instability.
Case in point: Zimbabwe is still run by largely the same group of guys that ordered the 100-trillion dollar bills made.
I know the general gist of the situation. Low spending from domestic households, real estate bubble, excessive government influence on industry scaring investors, and so on.
My problem with it is that most headlines make it sound like it’s all gonna implode spectacularly tomorrow. The articles themselves usually paint a more reasonable picture of the situation, similar to your comment. But most people don’t read the article. They just see the headline over and over.
Better batteries do happen. Every headline you've read is only a part of the solution. Battery research advances by trying ten things, but only one of them pans out.
Okay, can someone explain THIS giant load of seeming bullshit to me?
In 2023, the U.S. economy vastly outperformed expectations. A widely predicted recession never happened. Many economists (though not me) argued that getting inflation down would require years of high unemployment; instead, we’ve experienced immaculate disinflation, rapidly falling inflation at no visible cost.
By every marker that matters to the POPULACE (costs of food, shelter, energy for shelter, cars, gas for cars, and medical insurance (required)) inflation has gone WAY THE HELL UP, shows no signs of abating, and jobs (in the tech sector at least) are taking a dive. Wages are not keeping pace with costs of living, and people I knew who were on the low end of "rich" are now starting to be as scared as the upper middle class.
Everyone keeps saying the economy is fricking awesome, but rent is astronomical, groceries are bonkers, gas prices are still at "I DID THIS" sticker stupidity levels, few people can get a home, used cars are going for 5 to 10 times what they're worth, and everyone I know around the country is running a much tighter ship than they were during COVID LOCKDOWN.
All of these "new jobs" we keep hearing about are just a small percentage of positions vacated by layoffs. Companies let tons of people go in one fell swoop and hire new people for 1/10th to 1/5th of the positions at lower wages with worse "total compensation" packages.
The recruiters have COMPLETELY stopped hitting up myself and my employed friends. Not a single fricking "you look like a great blahblahblah" for almost a month when it was previously multiple hits a day.
As far as I can tell, we're IN a recession, we're just calling it a recovery for some reason.
The handwaving that typically occurs when people try to throw a layer of obfuscation into economic conversations is both disingenuous and counterproductive to actual fruitful discussion about the current state of things.
You might as well just say "money is wealth" or "what's good for the goose".
The reality is we've been chasing a short run fallacy for a really, really long time now and there's more and more in the way of misrepresented statistics in order to keep everyone from examining all of the indirect consequences.
Democratic nations like the United States rarely politicize their economic statistics — although ask me again if Donald Trump returns to office — but authoritarian regimes often do.
President Xi Jinping is starting to look like a poor economic manager, whose propensity for arbitrary interventions — which is something autocrats tend to do — has stifled private initiative.
Well, international economists are fond of citing Dornbusch’s Law: “The crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought.” What happened in China’s case was that the government was able to mask the problem of inadequate consumer spending for a number of years by promoting a gigantic real estate bubble.
To outside observers, what China must do seems straightforward: end financial repression and allow more of the economy’s income to flow through to households, and strengthen the social safety net so that consumers don’t feel the need to hoard cash.
And when it comes to strengthening the safety net, the leader of this supposedly communist regime sounds a bit like the governor of Mississippi, denouncing “welfarism” that creates “lazy people.”
Will it try to prop up its economy with an export surge that will run headlong into Western efforts to promote green technologies?
The original article contains 877 words, the summary contains 213 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Same problem as anywhere else. Instead of the money getting back into the economy by giving it to people at the bottom, it leaves the economy by ending up in the hands of a few rich.