Possible US Banking Collapse Inbound?

[QV]

Our government can't manage a contract to get boots for our soldiers, and you expect them to create big scale economic opportunity?

You have so much more faith in our political class than I do.

This government has been doing the exact opposite. For example, no pipelines across the country for O&G and "the lack of a business case" to supply our allies in EU with natural gas... but I digress. It's almost like all this stuff is connected or something...

 

[suffolkowner]

In a normal economy, if an industry can’t hire people for a low wage, it should increase that wage to attract workers. I witnessed this firsthand while living in an oil patch community 20 years ago. Back then to get workers, fast food restaurants and other traditional minimum wage jobs had to increase wages and benefits to complete for labour with the oil and gas sector.

Fast forward a few years later when I briefly returned to the community and all the minimum wage positions were taken over by temporary foreign workers. I later found out that they were being paid minimum wage sans benefits. Industry and government found a way to suppress wages.

Go to any fast food restaurant now. How many workers there are teenagers starting out or retirees making a couple extra bucks while keeping busy? Mostly they are staffed by new Canadians trying to eke out a living on minimum wage, probably working more than one job to support their family. It’s hard not to think that they are being exploited. “Come to Canada, land of milk and honey! By the way, we won’t recognize your prior work experience so you’ll have to work at McDonalds to support your family. You’re welcome!”

The labour market is broken.

really the labour market is broken just by the existence of a minimum wage law

 

[Eaglelord17]

A 50's car or house was a lot simpler than today's car or house. It won't do to simply compare things across decades as if they are one-for-one interchangeable and not acknowledge the improvements as part of the value. The most no-frills car and house today, which are probably not very common because they are not very much in demand, are affordable.

I see in recent news that colon cancer rates are increasing among younger cohorts. Chances of survival today are good to excellent, depending on when detected. Chances in 50's, not very good at all.

Standard of living has improved and continues to improve.

It was simpler, however we now have substantially improved production methods which require substantially less labour to manufacture substantially more.

The average car in the 50s cost about 15,600$ of todays money. Today the average cost of a car is 48,000$ todays money. And yes you can pay less for a car, the point here is to work with averages not the lowest point.

Average house was 11k which worked into inflation is about 80k todays money. Houses today being not as simple is subjective. Yeah they are a bit thicker on the wood, a bit more outlets on the walls, and some more insulation, but they also had many things built better, like better floorings, etc.

The biggest flaw in the argument that the standard of living has drastically improved is affording kids. Again they could afford 6 on a single income with all of the above. Yes health technology wasn't as good, but arguably they had better access to the doctors than we do today.

Saying just that technology has improved and therefore everything is better isn't quite true. There was plenty of benefits that have seized to exist today, simply not doable for the majority of people thanks to the loss of purchasing power.

 

[Brad Sallows]

It was simpler, however we now have substantially improved production methods which require substantially less labour to manufacture substantially more.

The average car in the 50s cost about 15,600$ of todays money. Today the average cost of a car is 48,000$ todays money. And yes you can pay less for a car, the point here is to work with averages not the lowest point.

Average house was 11k which worked into inflation is about 80k todays money. Houses today being not as simple is subjective. Yeah they are a bit thicker on the wood, a bit more outlets on the walls, and some more insulation, but they also had many things built better, like better floorings, etc.

The biggest flaw in the argument that the standard of living has drastically improved is affording kids. Again they could afford 6 on a single income with all of the above. Yes health technology wasn't as good, but arguably they had better access to the doctors than we do today.

Saying just that technology has improved and therefore everything is better isn't quite true. There was plenty of benefits that have seized to exist today, simply not doable for the majority of people thanks to the loss of purchasing power.

The whole question of standard of living hinges on either increasing or decreasing capability/consumption. A 1950's car is well short of a 2020's car - safety, durability, fuel economy, performance, accessories. It's obvious by mere inspection that people today enjoy more capability and variety and volume in virtually every aspect of life.

Houses today are also safer, more durable, likely to be sold in a completely finished or nearly so condition (there are still 50's-era houses in my part of the world with unfinished basements), larger, more energy efficient, have more conveniences (bathrooms, built-in appliances), fewer hazardous materials, more luxurious features (cabinets, countertops).

The fact that people have fewer kids is another indicator of improving standard of living: people can choose family size rather more easily than in the 1950's.

What are the benefits that have ceased to exist? Broadcast black-and-white TV? Not-so-painless dentistry? Land-line-only phones? Bias ply tires?

 

[Lumber]

Our government can't manage a contract to get boots for our soldiers, and you expect them to create big scale economic opportunity?

You have so much more faith in our political class than I do.

They don't need to create big scale economic opportunity, but what they can do (since we are talking about people living pay-check to pay-check) is create programs that either prevent people from falling off a cliff, or programs that at least soften the fall at the bottom. This is the Nordic-model of social capitalism that @Humphrey Bogart is espousing. Programs like free (meaning tax paid) higher education, free health are, free eldercare, free day care, maybe even UBI! And before you or anyone else says it, the Republican/conservative talking point that "welfare makes people lazy" has been repeatedly debunked; people want to work and have meaningful lives and careers.

As for my faith in the political class? Yes, I do have "so much more" than you, because you seem to have effectively ZERO, and I don't know how that's possible. I know several really great people who I used to work with in the military who have gotten out and run for office, and several of them have been elected. These were some of the most honest hard-working people I know, and they would never sell their souls for profit or power. Now, that's just me in my small little world in this small little corner of Canada called Halifax. So, multiply that out across the country, and you know what you have? A lot of honest people who run for office because they honestly want to do good.

Are all politicians (and government bureaucrats) so rosie and benevolent? No, there absolutely are shills out there who are as bad as YOU say they are, but the ones who would truly sell their souls and abandon the welfare of their constituents I believe are in the minority.

 

[Halifax Tar]

They don't need to create big scale economic opportunity, but what they can do (since we are talking about people living pay-check to pay-check) is create programs that either prevent people from falling off a cliff, or programs that at least soften the fall at the bottom. This is the Nordic-model of social capitalism that @Humphrey Bogart is espousing. Programs like free (meaning tax paid) higher education, free health are, free eldercare, free day care, maybe even UBI! And before you or anyone else says it, the Republican/conservative talking point that "welfare makes people lazy" has been repeatedly debunked; people want to work and have meaningful lives and careers.

Where are you proposing we get the revenue to cover, or continue to cover, these tax funded programs ? The middle class its taxed to the max IMHO. We are massively in debt and my understanding is its not getting better. Any program that aims to take more money of my pay cheque I am going to view as the enemy.

Secondly; and I've had this issue before with you. WRT to your Republican/Conservative comments; deal with me as an individual please. I have very left leaning views and I have very right leaning views. I am very much middle of the road. While I vehemently dislike the LPC I do not hate left leaning policies as a matter of personal policy. In fact I have voted on the grounds of many and voted for parties further left than the LPC.

As for my faith in the political class? Yes, I do have "so much more" than you, because you seem to have effectively ZERO, and I don't know how that's possible. I know several really great people who I used to work with in the military who have gotten out and run for office, and several of them have been elected. These were some of the most honest hard-working people I know, and they would never sell their souls for profit or power. Now, that's just me in my small little world in this small little corner of Canada called Halifax. So, multiply that out across the country, and you know what you have? A lot of honest people who run for office because they honestly want to do good.

My friend a cursory internet search will provide you all the reasons, and then some, to lose faith in our political class. If you choose to maintain some belief that we have a Governmental system that still has some sense of patriotism and benevolence for the country, province or municipality good on you, I do not.

Are all politicians (and government bureaucrats) so rosie and benevolent? No, there absolutely are shills out there who are as bad as YOU say they are, but the ones who would truly sell their souls and abandon the welfare of their constituents I believe are in the minority.

For every politician caught, I believe there are 3 who weren't. You know how a politician is lying ? Their lips are moving. We essentially have a political class that works for a victorious outcome in an election cycle. Not for the betterment of the country.

 

[Rifleman62]

I know several really great people who I used to work with in the military who have gotten out and run for office, and several of them have been elected.

If they were elected as Liberal MP's, then they are only seat warmers. Even if they hold a higher position in the current Trudeau government parliament.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The "decent people" in politics seem mainly to serve as lipstick for the pigs who control things.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Credit Suisse Reignites Bank Fears

Problems at the Swiss lender are causing bank stocks around the world to falter.

www.barrons.com

Credit Suisse now in trouble with trading of many banks in Europe halted.

Wall Street drops as Credit Suisse sparks fresh bank selloff

U.S. stocks dropped on Wednesday as turbulence at Credit Suisse renewed fears of a banking crisis, while data hinting at economic weakness kept alive hopes of a less aggressive monetary policy move by the Federal Reserve in March.

www.reuters.com

Also, inflation is still 3x the target rate currently sitting at 6% so more belt tightening will inevitably have to occur:

US inflation slows to 6% annual rate amid looming banking crisis

The Fed’s target of bringing inflation to 2% could see dramatic change in tumultuous aftermath of Silicon Valley Bank collapse

www.theguardian.com

Going to be an interesting year

 

[Navy_Pete]

I wish they would stop jacking up interest rates for scenarios like this where it has nothing to do with the main factors driving inflation. I don't care how high they put it, will not change the fact that Rus invaded Ukr, and the corresponing impact on food prices, oil supply etc, on top of the ongoing ripple effects on the worldwide supply chains from COVID.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Jacking up interest rates increases the cost of borrowing-to-spend, which reduces demand, which reduces prices or slows the rate of price increases. The effect happens regardless what is responsible for the price increases. Obviously it isn't a tool for zeroing in on specified commodities or services.

 

[Dana381]

Simpsons again?

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/11onqv1