To me the "vibecession" is basically failing to see the trees for the forest. The top down economic indicators looked good, but the bottom up experiences were often bad and those bottom up experiences are the ones that drive people to do things like vote. One of the things that generates those bottom up experiences is how cheap things were hit by inflation more than expensive things. That doesn't just mean that people who are on the bottom of the income pile have to do without but people a little bit above have to do with worse. The proportion of their money being spent on things that it feels less good to spend money on* went up, and their perceived value from what they were spending went down even if they were, by the data "doing better" because wages had gone up. *The emotional content of spending is not something economics is well equipped to grapple with.
Same with central banks' response to inflation: raising interest rates shunts money from people at the bottom who typically have a lot of debts, to the creditors at the top. Housing becomes more expensive which is horrible for those at the bottom, and great for home owners. The 'cure' just made the disease worse for those at the bottom.
'To me the "vibecession" is basically failing to see the trees for the forest. The top down economic indicators looked good, but the bottom up experiences were often bad and those bottom up experiences are the ones that drive people to do things like vote.' people are literally comparing today to the 1930, though. it's stupid there's a marked difference from saying, 'the GDP line and quality of life aren't always in sync' vs 'nevermind all of the data we have, throw all of the evidence in the garbage, today is exactly like it was in the 1930s because i am mad about paying more for eggs' and the things people are complaining about have nothing to do with inflation anyway. eggs and poultry are more expensive as a consequence of avian flu, meat prpducts are more expensive as a consequence of drought, rice is more expensive as a direct result of climate change, fuel is more expensive as a consequence of carbon taxes, etc etc etc people choose not to understand any of that and just whine that their ultra-luxury lifestyle living in the west doesn't feel as rich as it should... and there's no good answer for that because it's just people opting to indulge in fantasy rather than accepting reality
I'm glad to see she's changed her tune a bit on metrics/economism. I've seen Kayla write a number of condescending Instagram replies to people about how the inflation/wage metrics are the "objective truth" and anyone who doesn't think things are good is "denying reality". I was hesitant to watch this interview after that, but this ended up being pretty down to earth fortunately.
Yeah, I think the distortions in the housing market have really contributed to a feeling that things aren't great, as well as the hangover from inflation in general. A lot of people blamed incumbents across the world for it (it's a bad year to be an incumbent government and facing an election, pretty much all of them lost), in spite of their record of controlling inflation (good *or* bad). Everyone blamed the people in power, regardless of their level of fault. I think we like to think we vote via a process of rational thinking, but for many of us that just isn't the case. Humans possess rational thinking as a tool and use it quite often, but most of our decisions are made on an irrational basis. This isn't necessarily bad, but it can lead to voting decisions based on "vibes", instead of weighing the options. This goes double for those who are less informed about politics. I also think that re-electing the guy who contributed the most to this situation (outside of the pandemic) via tariffs causing supply chain issues is gonna result in some bumpy economic times in the near future, so let's brace ourselves for that.
It's not a bad year for incumbents, it's a bad year for incumbents who did not make the lives of the majority of their constituencies better (most of them). In Mexico the incumbents won easily. The false dichotomy that we have to choose between reigning in inflation and improving living standards of working class people is insane.
William Gillis made a pretty good point: it’s not that capitalism couldn’t do many of the things socialism aims to do. It’s that it couldn’t do them fast enough, or on principle it just wouldn’t permit for certain policies to pass. Not to mention how volatile it is.
Very funny to hear her say that regulation of Crypto was an "unfortunate thing." She thinks the bad actors showed up once it became regulated. I wonder who she thought was holding crypto before it was regulated. lol.
The problem with this claim is every economic theory claims to adhere to the scientific method, to be descriptively faithful to an underlying mind-independent reality. I would argue MMT is not mathematically rigorous enough and the suffers from the same reductionist, linear, predestination biases that most of mainstream economics suffers from
Turn it in. We are officially on fully vibe based economics. Vibenomics. Sounds like you need to get your vibes checked. Skibbidi levels can drop as we get older. Talk to your squad about it.
How many of that 70% would actually say that in the future, if they had no Medicair or Social Security. You're only okay until you're not. The situation of 'I can do well enough today if I'm not putting any savings away for tomorrow.'
Sure wages can grow but if inflation is growing faster it won't feel like it. If a 'really low wage' rises to be a 'low wage' then in an absolute sense it's still low. A line going up needs to be meaningful. How often does someone get a 0.05 raise so all they can say is gee thanks a lot.
The subjective feelings and experiences about the economy by the working masses is the economy, not if a number goes up that only matters to ultra wealthy people. The vibes are off, and people are right to recognize it. Late Stage Capitalism is failing to deliver, and it's endemic to our system. The question is what we should do about this fact.
So if 80% of the population couldn't afford a roof over their heads, but subjectively they felt this was fine, great actually, never been better - would that be a superior economic situation?
@@bennycarter5249 So you agree that economic facts external to people's perceptions of them are actually important? You're disagreeing with the people in the hypothetical, remember. They're fine with it (somehow).
“70% are doing well” who did you ask? Lmao It reminds me of a seminar I went to with work. At the seminar the speaker said that “people believed that their wages were 7th in importance and other things like workload were more important” And like, yeah, if you’re asking a corporate employee making 150k per year they won’t say their wage is the most important thing. Go ask a McDonalds worker and that’ll surely change.
@ “a survey of 1800 adults.” I mean, I apologize if I’m not putting a great deal of stock in that. Also, be weary of how you speak to people. Some of us may lead wretched lives and won’t mind trading a few years behind bars for the opportunity to make sure you never type again.
This figure is taken from the Federal Reserve's 2023 Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking. fielded in October 2023. They explain their methodology on p71 of the document published on the appropriately-titled page "Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking". The survey features the responses from 11,400 respondents. I don't exactly know what the "1800 adults" figure is taken from.
@ yep! just looked into it. I had been looking at the wrong one. Going through it I do notice that “doing okay” is lumped in with “living comfortably”: 39 and 33 percent respectively to get that 72 percent number. I think “doing okay” is closer to “just getting by” (19 Percent), and “finding it difficult to get by” (9 percent). If I’d write the report, my headline would be, 33 percent of Americans living comfortably. The rest are either doing okay or struggling. Or Economy Is Failing Most Americans as only 33% live comfortably. Doing “okay” is not a good thing.
Shit only gets done at the State level because our States are the size of Countries. The whole bulk of the Nation is just way too big otherwise for better or worse.
Kyla Scanlon has learned too much mainstream econonmics. She has a long way to go in unlearning econmics. I suspect she is from a privileged background.
Her glee at how dishwashers eliminated jobs was puzzling. Also, if she'd ever worked a kitchen, she'd know human dish washers still exist, AND they use appliance dishwashers.
She's a neolib status quo state-approved normie econ influencer. She's blown up out of nowhere and has talent agency representation. She's not grass roots. Too much pointing out what is "interesting" instead of actual analysis. Vibes over substance.
This. We're sick of being stolen from, while being told the economy is 'doing great' because the values of our homes is being inflated to the moon, while everything else gets harder and harder to afford. Life was supposed to get easier under this system as time goes on, not harder.
Right, even Reagan's "trickle down" analogy for our neoliberal economy was overgenerous; it's more of a money chimney, pulling everything directly to the top while leaving ash in its place, and we've reached a point where there's very little fuel left. Those of us standing in the embers are furious or desperate enough to do anything (including, unfortunately, really stupid stuff, like we saw this month) to try for an economy where 50%+ of our salary doesn't go to guys with literally the word "lord" in their job title.
It is half-a-century after the Moon landing. Can anybody figure out planned obsolescence in automobiles? The Repo Crisis is hilarious! I have Never owned a new car. They are useless variations in junk. How much do Americans lose on the depreciation of automobiles every year. Oh yeah, economists do not talk about the Net Domestic Product.
Hmmm ---any honest interpretation and analysis of 'money, be it crypto or 'real' money,' can only lead to the conclusion that it is, almost by definition, anti-democratic, in both the short and long run. I'm off to work (haha) so I've only heard about 15 minutes or so...
To me the "vibecession" is basically failing to see the trees for the forest. The top down economic indicators looked good, but the bottom up experiences were often bad and those bottom up experiences are the ones that drive people to do things like vote.
One of the things that generates those bottom up experiences is how cheap things were hit by inflation more than expensive things. That doesn't just mean that people who are on the bottom of the income pile have to do without but people a little bit above have to do with worse. The proportion of their money being spent on things that it feels less good to spend money on* went up, and their perceived value from what they were spending went down even if they were, by the data "doing better" because wages had gone up.
*The emotional content of spending is not something economics is well equipped to grapple with.
It’s a similar concept as in UE’s Steven Pinker video where he discussed how increasing GDP doesn’t translate to increased quality of life.
Same with central banks' response to inflation: raising interest rates shunts money from people at the bottom who typically have a lot of debts, to the creditors at the top. Housing becomes more expensive which is horrible for those at the bottom, and great for home owners. The 'cure' just made the disease worse for those at the bottom.
'Missing the forest for the trees' is how i would describe Kyla's econmics in general.
'To me the "vibecession" is basically failing to see the trees for the forest. The top down economic indicators looked good, but the bottom up experiences were often bad and those bottom up experiences are the ones that drive people to do things like vote.'
people are literally comparing today to the 1930, though. it's stupid
there's a marked difference from saying, 'the GDP line and quality of life aren't always in sync' vs 'nevermind all of the data we have, throw all of the evidence in the garbage, today is exactly like it was in the 1930s because i am mad about paying more for eggs'
and the things people are complaining about have nothing to do with inflation anyway. eggs and poultry are more expensive as a consequence of avian flu, meat prpducts are more expensive as a consequence of drought, rice is more expensive as a direct result of climate change, fuel is more expensive as a consequence of carbon taxes, etc etc etc
people choose not to understand any of that and just whine that their ultra-luxury lifestyle living in the west doesn't feel as rich as it should... and there's no good answer for that because it's just people opting to indulge in fantasy rather than accepting reality
Good take.
I'm glad to see she's changed her tune a bit on metrics/economism. I've seen Kayla write a number of condescending Instagram replies to people about how the inflation/wage metrics are the "objective truth" and anyone who doesn't think things are good is "denying reality". I was hesitant to watch this interview after that, but this ended up being pretty down to earth fortunately.
Yeah, I think the distortions in the housing market have really contributed to a feeling that things aren't great, as well as the hangover from inflation in general. A lot of people blamed incumbents across the world for it (it's a bad year to be an incumbent government and facing an election, pretty much all of them lost), in spite of their record of controlling inflation (good *or* bad). Everyone blamed the people in power, regardless of their level of fault.
I think we like to think we vote via a process of rational thinking, but for many of us that just isn't the case. Humans possess rational thinking as a tool and use it quite often, but most of our decisions are made on an irrational basis. This isn't necessarily bad, but it can lead to voting decisions based on "vibes", instead of weighing the options. This goes double for those who are less informed about politics.
I also think that re-electing the guy who contributed the most to this situation (outside of the pandemic) via tariffs causing supply chain issues is gonna result in some bumpy economic times in the near future, so let's brace ourselves for that.
It's not a bad year for incumbents, it's a bad year for incumbents who did not make the lives of the majority of their constituencies better (most of them). In Mexico the incumbents won easily. The false dichotomy that we have to choose between reigning in inflation and improving living standards of working class people is insane.
William Gillis made a pretty good point: it’s not that capitalism couldn’t do many of the things socialism aims to do. It’s that it couldn’t do them fast enough, or on principle it just wouldn’t permit for certain policies to pass. Not to mention how volatile it is.
Very funny to hear her say that regulation of Crypto was an "unfortunate thing." She thinks the bad actors showed up once it became regulated. I wonder who she thought was holding crypto before it was regulated. lol.
Maybe she just liked using it for drugs dude and wanted as little regulation as possible.
Problem with "not believing in MMT" is MMT is descriptive, it is the way things are already run.
The problem with this claim is every economic theory claims to adhere to the scientific method, to be descriptively faithful to an underlying mind-independent reality. I would argue MMT is not mathematically rigorous enough and the suffers from the same reductionist, linear, predestination biases that most of mainstream economics suffers from
Turn it in. We are officially on fully vibe based economics. Vibenomics.
Sounds like you need to get your vibes checked. Skibbidi levels can drop as we get older. Talk to your squad about it.
How many of that 70% would actually say that in the future, if they had no Medicair or Social Security. You're only okay until you're not. The situation of 'I can do well enough today if I'm not putting any savings away for tomorrow.'
Glad Unlearn Econmics has accepted his new American overlord.
it's about damn time!
Sure wages can grow but if inflation is growing faster it won't feel like it. If a 'really low wage' rises to be a 'low wage' then in an absolute sense it's still low. A line going up needs to be meaningful. How often does someone get a 0.05 raise so all they can say is gee thanks a lot.
"Don't believe your lying eyes"
The subjective feelings and experiences about the economy by the working masses is the economy, not if a number goes up that only matters to ultra wealthy people. The vibes are off, and people are right to recognize it. Late Stage Capitalism is failing to deliver, and it's endemic to our system. The question is what we should do about this fact.
So if 80% of the population couldn't afford a roof over their heads, but subjectively they felt this was fine, great actually, never been better - would that be a superior economic situation?
@@Dirdle If you are rich, yes. If you can't afford a roof, no.
You are so right! I feel like @KylaScanlon is desperately looking for answers with her head up her own *ss.
@@bennycarter5249 So you agree that economic facts external to people's perceptions of them are actually important? You're disagreeing with the people in the hypothetical, remember. They're fine with it (somehow).
“70% are doing well” who did you ask? Lmao
It reminds me of a seminar I went to with work. At the seminar the speaker said that “people believed that their wages were 7th in importance and other things like workload were more important”
And like, yeah, if you’re asking a corporate employee making 150k per year they won’t say their wage is the most important thing. Go ask a McDonalds worker and that’ll surely change.
Questioning data you weren't even smart enough to look up yourself... LMAO...
@ “a survey of 1800 adults.” I mean, I apologize if I’m not putting a great deal of stock in that.
Also, be weary of how you speak to people. Some of us may lead wretched lives and won’t mind trading a few years behind bars for the opportunity to make sure you never type again.
@@SlickSimulacrum Go talk to 100 random people. I guarantee 70 of them will not be doing well.
This figure is taken from the Federal Reserve's 2023 Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking. fielded in October 2023. They explain their methodology on p71 of the document published on the appropriately-titled page "Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking".
The survey features the responses from 11,400 respondents. I don't exactly know what the "1800 adults" figure is taken from.
@ yep! just looked into it. I had been looking at the wrong one.
Going through it I do notice that “doing okay” is lumped in with “living comfortably”: 39 and 33 percent respectively to get that 72 percent number. I think “doing okay” is closer to “just getting by” (19 Percent), and “finding it difficult to get by” (9 percent).
If I’d write the report, my headline would be, 33 percent of Americans living comfortably. The rest are either doing okay or struggling. Or Economy Is Failing Most Americans as only 33% live comfortably.
Doing “okay” is not a good thing.
I'll listen to anything she puts out
Kyla Scanlon is an economist who wrote " How Money and Markets Really Work " , and worked on Crypto. One sentence filled with contradictions.
Shit only gets done at the State level because our States are the size of Countries. The whole bulk of the Nation is just way too big otherwise for better or worse.
Kyla Scanlon has learned too much mainstream econonmics. She has a long way to go in unlearning econmics.
I suspect she is from a privileged background.
I love that the last thing she say basically is "I do not know what MMT mean" :D
Her glee at how dishwashers eliminated jobs was puzzling. Also, if she'd ever worked a kitchen, she'd know human dish washers still exist, AND they use appliance dishwashers.
She's a neolib status quo state-approved normie econ influencer. She's blown up out of nowhere and has talent agency representation. She's not grass roots. Too much pointing out what is "interesting" instead of actual analysis. Vibes over substance.
@@andylouie6217 Interesting stuff and I'm not surprised. People are starting to realize; Her comment sections are funny.
ffs it's because most americans want to drive a car they haven't been able to afford since the 70's.
This. We're sick of being stolen from, while being told the economy is 'doing great' because the values of our homes is being inflated to the moon, while everything else gets harder and harder to afford. Life was supposed to get easier under this system as time goes on, not harder.
Right, even Reagan's "trickle down" analogy for our neoliberal economy was overgenerous; it's more of a money chimney, pulling everything directly to the top while leaving ash in its place, and we've reached a point where there's very little fuel left. Those of us standing in the embers are furious or desperate enough to do anything (including, unfortunately, really stupid stuff, like we saw this month) to try for an economy where 50%+ of our salary doesn't go to guys with literally the word "lord" in their job title.
Why is is bizare if people feel better about the economy when their party wins, but if the stock market rallies up it just normal economic behavior?
If you've been paying attention you've been in a vibesession since, like, 1980.
Almost got up to check whats up with my washer.
Oooh, this is interesting, was curious to see if Kyla and a socialist would vibe together.
I don't think she would understand a thing they were saying.
AI apologism, *really*?
Unlearning Economics doctor doomcock impression at the beginning
It is half-a-century after the Moon landing.
Can anybody figure out planned obsolescence in automobiles?
The Repo Crisis is hilarious! I have Never owned a new car. They are useless variations in junk.
How much do Americans lose on the depreciation of automobiles every year.
Oh yeah, economists do not talk about the Net Domestic Product.
Hmmm ---any honest interpretation and analysis of 'money, be it crypto or 'real' money,' can only lead to the conclusion that it is, almost by definition, anti-democratic, in both the short and long run. I'm off to work (haha) so I've only heard about 15 minutes or so...
Graeber/Wengrow do suggest that as long as there are mechanisms in place, then wealth doesn’t equal more power.
@@LandOfTheFallenthose mechanisms are wealth redistribution through things like the Pacific Northwest tradition of the potlatch.
@@seanbeadles7421 haha that was certainly one of them they mentioned.