Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)FR
Posts
0
Comments
207
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • If we end up in a 10 year deflationary period then that would be catastrophic I was moreso referencing a short term “return to 2019 numbers” type of deflation that I believe could be a good thing for people

    Are you saying that a 2%-ish deflation rate sustained for ten years would be catastrophic, but a return to 2019 prices would be a good thing? On what sort of time period would that be beneficial?

    Because the accumulated inflation since 2019 is somewhere around 20%, and if we correct it over ten years that would approximately match the scenario you deemed as catastrophic earlier.

    Since the FED is focused on a 2% inflation hedge and we’ve raised interest rates so much, they would just lower them again to prevent a repeat of Japan

    Well, that is what Japan tried to do and it wasn't enough. The problem is that in the real world you can't lower interest rates beyond a certain point, because as interest rates approach zero or even negative values (ZIRP), banks find it very difficult to make a profit from lending, which leads them to bankrupcy, which in turn slows the economy down, which is the opposite of what you are trying to achieve. Not to mention that on the way to ZIRP private debt balloons and when interest rates eventually revert to their mean the debt burden becomes unbearable, which leads to a recession.

    In other words, macroeconomics is a tricky unstable system and simplistic takes have poor outcomes.

  • The real truth of it is that deflation is good for PEOPLE

    Deflation encourages businesses and people to hold on to their money instead of spending it. One person's spending is another person's income, so when spending goes down so do incomes. When people's incomes go down, they reduce their own spending in response. This is a vicious cycle that leads to a lower standard of living.

    Don't believe me? It is what happened to Japan since the 1990s after their real state bubble exploded. It is called "the lost decades" and it was very much felt by the population.

  • Indeed. Central banks in developed nations act independently of the government for good reasons. What the GP is suggesting, which is government interference on the central bank to lower interest rates, is the scenario that causes developing nations like Turkey to experience runaway inflation. It is a terrible idea with plenty of historical precedents.

  • I agree that we need to incentivize the construction of more supply, but while adding supply takes a long time, reducing demand can be done with the stroke of a pen. Here are some ideas that can be implemented overnight:

    • Singapore-style taxation of residential units sold to corporations, non-residents and people who already own a home.
    • Yearly tax on residential units, offset by refundable tax credits. This means that only non-residents would pay this tax, discouraging foreign speculators.
    • Switch from a property tax to a land value tax to discourage real estate hoarding. A land value tax encourages land to be used.
    • Temporary reduction of immigration quotas of all kinds, to be progressively relaxed over time as specific housing targets are reached.
  • Now you say:

    Read my comments, I’m not arguing the incident, I’m arguing against shitty clickbait.

    Earlier you said (emphasis yours):

    No info here other than some random-ass tweet claiming there had been an accident.

    You can do better than this.

  • Most helium now has oxygen in it precisely to prevent this.

    What a shitty thing to do! Inhaling an inert gas is apparently one of the least stressful ways to go, as CO2 buildup is what triggers the asphixiation response rather than the lack of oxygen.

    I'm upset that they make it hard to commit suicide in a fairly bombproof painless way. Motherfuckers.

  • In Quebec, it is illegal to fail to render aid to someone whose life requires it. Doesn’t that give people an obligation to wear a mask?

    By that argument we would be legally obligated to murder all bees and ban peanut butter, since some people are deadly allergic to them. We don't want to be responsible for their death, do we?

  • We can also build larger appartments suitable for families. It is not rocket science.

    Not that I have anything against mid-density mixed-use developments, quite the contrary. But in the downtown I can see why even taller buildings make sense.

    It's the sprawl of necessarily car-dependent single-family homes that I have a problem with, because while it means comfort for the rich, it only brings externalities for everybody else.

  • They’re not supposed to call the police when they’ve been robbed? Theft of service is a crime is it not? If the police aren’t doing anything that’s the problem

    I'm speculating here, but I guess it boils down to the amount of money involved combined with the absence of threats or violence.

    In general it makes little sense to spend resources investigating a non-indictable offense where the perpetrator is unlikely to be found in the first place and even if they are found the cost of even finding and processing then is much higher than the monetary damage they caused.