At its core, that basically is what they're saying. The argument points out that while the cost of goods went up because of supply chain issues, it wasn’t just that—prices also rose because consumers were in a better position to pay more. The Recovery Act and the student loan repayment pause boosted disposable income, making it easier for people to absorb these costs. As supply chains improved, prices have come down somewhat, but not entirely, partly because wages have gone up, increasing production costs. But there’s also truth to the idea that corporations took advantage of the pandemic to hike prices, blaming it all on COVID-related issues. This kind of “pandemic pricing” kept prices higher even when some original causes started to ease up. That being said, that isn't the main factor at play—it was for FY21, to be sure, and it's part of the broader problem, but it's not the main driver like it was then.
To deny the Recovery Act’s role in shaping today’s economy misses the bigger picture. A-1.2 trillion-dollar injection obviously needs to be recognized for its effects in the economy. Even so, without that support, a lot of people would likely have struggled even more to cover basic costs. Ultimately, the choice was about providing a financial cushion when people needed it most, even if it meant dealing with some inflation down the road. Unfortunately, voters don't envision the worse reality they would be in where they didn't make it, they see the world where the costs of inflation has them barely make it. It would be difficult to argue that more people are worse off than they would be without the Recovery Act, but it's hard to envision because the hypothetical worst-case scenario never seems as bad as the actual bad-case scenario. It's what's called the "preparedness paradox." And you might be doing it right now. ☺️
Tesla sales dropped in the first two quarters of this year for the first time in the company's history, by ~10% and another 5% respectively. And this doesn't specifically breakout the new red-hat purchasers for whom Elon is the new god-king that replaced some of those liberal consumers.
Every cybertruck owner I've talked with and/or seen was clearly a Trumpet. Two of the ones I've seen even had Trump stickers and one had one of those American flags on a pole on it. Admittedly (and thankfully) I do not live in California. Nevertheless, the net effect of Elon's mask-removal has negatively affected sales, specifically because the almost exclusively liberal, college-educated, upper-middle-class purchaser that was the company's main consumer is declining.
Nevertheless, my point wasn't that it is somehow going to bankrupt Tesla. My point was the exact opposite: all this stupid shit -- "liberals are boycotting tesla!" "Swifties are boycotting X!" "Engineers are boycotting SpaceX!" -- does not actually affect anything enough to be worthy of celebration.
I really think it's kind of unimportant. Elon is the richest man in the world. There is quite literally no way for him to ever not be rich. He decided to target what turns out to be over half the country to use his social media platform, and it will now, even more than before, become a central communications tool for the hard right and incredibly politically important. That's valuable and, in this case, dangerous. You know how people use to talk about how important Twitter was for organizing and political dissent? The Arab Spring? Occupy? Well, it works both ways.
Swifties leaving X is the most unimportant thing I've read in a while, and I'm on Lemmy. SpaceX is still the most important space program in the world and NASA is now utterly reliant on them. Tesla, even after the mass exodus of liberal consumers, is still one of the top 5 auto companies in net profit. Elon is still the richest man on the planet and is about to get a high-powered position in the federal government.
You're here, you're queer, and you're about to go 40 years backwards in social acceptance. And the scary part is there's no way to go back into the closet in the world we live in with social media. Here's hoping the ascendant radical right wing isn't as bad as people think.
Isn't the right-wing Sweden Democratic party continuing its ascension and partially through its hard-line anti-immigrant stance? It seems they've held that stance for some time.
Sweden strikes me as sitting at the top of a long slide looking down.
Harris spent like the last 6 weeks of the campaign slowly losing ground and Trump spent it slowly gaining. It's just as likely Harris would have lost by more if she'd had more time.
Like it or not, the more time Harris spent doing interviews and getting out on the campaign trail, the less people liked her.
A primary might have helped insofar as she would have lost it like last time.
Yeah and if Sotomayer pulls a Ginsberg, suddenly Trump gets three picks, effectively forcing a radically right-wing court for at least the next 40 years.
The real tragedy of Trump being elected is that this effectively ends any chance of reforming the court. Gen Z will basically be in their 60s before there is any chance of balancing the court let alone swinging it left.
Yeah totally. The mass of white liberals is going to suddenly revolt and start a revolution lol.
They're going to do what they always do: put their head down and rationalize the oppression of the poor, racial minorities, and women. That, at least, has will stay consistent.
"I DID my part! I took ten minutes out of my day to vote! What else could you possibly expect of me??"
No one is going to comment on the name? Lol