• 3 Posts
  • 125 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 23rd, 2022

help-circle

  • Because the inflation that’s reported is some artificial measure of consumer prices. Asset price inflation (primarily stocks and real estate) isn’t ever discussed, but it’s also quite important.

    By facilitating money to be pumped into the stock and real estate markets via structures like quantitative easing, zero interest rates, and dollars returning from being spent abroad, green line always go up.

    This is of course reported as stock and real estate markets performing well, as opposed to when grocery or consumer goods prices go up which is reported as a completely unavoidable economic necessity.

    This is super tldr but it’s basically Michael Hudson’s Marxian thesis on superimperialism and modern debt, if you’re interested in learning more. I can also expand on each of the points if you’re interested.

    Edit: of course stock buybacks are another big part of why many stocks have performed relatively well in the last decade or so.



  • Programmers very often fall into the group of people who are very good at what they do and clueless about everything else, but what they do has a certain level of complexity to make them think they’re super clever and apply this to everything.

    The 0.2% of greenhouse gases thing is actually accurate as far as I remember. Various natural systems move a whole lot of carbon around constantly. What isn’t accurate is that humans don’t or even can’t have an effect. The problem arises from the fact that this system is very precariously balanced, indeed perfectly balanced on all but long geologic time scales, so it cannot handle even an additional tiny amount on one side of the scales. Human emissions do pale in comparison to natural emissions, but the natural ones are taken up in some way by other elements of the carbon cycle. Industrial human emissions are not.

    Anyway if they’re up to replicating and or peer reviewing climate science all by their uneducated lonesome that’s cool I guess, until then the UN panels on climate change are probably a reasonably trustworthy proxy.