Stock market panic around the world due to fears about the US entering a recession

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933741][IMG]https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/tLapk.iWkpJpBv.MZxR.FQ--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTY0MDtoPTM2MA--/https://media.zenfs.com/en/stockstory_922/8358bd3812263887dcecffd8029a7987[/IMG]
[url]https://finance.yahoo.com/news/starbucks-nasdaq-sbux-misses-q2-201918696.html[/url]

Believe it on not but Starbucks is actually a very decent indicator of the state of the economy.

These are the type of things you can look into if you do not believe the overall numbers.

People are buying more junk than ever before.[/QUOTE]

Amazon is a whole chapter by itself because they're a growth company that does a lot more than just sell junk and have been moving into multiple sectors. I did look into Starbucks though, being the decent indicator that you say it is.

[QUOTE]Because when people are really struggling one of the first things to go is their $8 overpriced iced-mocha-latte. And this is during a time when many are boycotting Starbucks. We can see their is a small dip at the start of 2024 but it is still selling near all time highs and still trending upward.[/QUOTE]

That's true to an extent, but a lot of mid level and middle management workers, buying Starbucks both provide coffee(and often sugar) as well as status and clout, both at the office and on social media. In that context a 6-8$ expense is cheap and you're giving people way too much credit for being economically responsible. Starbucks have been very good at creating their brand to give this effect, which is why they have a base of very loyal customers.

Nonetheless, given inflation and increase on item prices since 2019, they don't look to be selling more from the chart you posted. Add a population increase since 2019 to that as well and it looks even more dull.

But what did Starbucks themselves say last week?

[QUOTE]Starbucks sales dropped 3% globally at stores open for at least a year, including a 2% drop in its home North America market. And that masked how steep the decline was for Starbucks last quarter: Total transactions at North American stores open at least a year fell 6% in the quarter. That was offset, in part, by higher prices.

In other words: Fewer people are going to Starbucks and buying drinks and food. It was Starbucks’ second-straight quarter of sales declines.[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/30/investing/starbucks-coffee-sales/index.html"]https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/30/investing/starbucks-coffee-sales/index.html[/URL]

They seem to realize that just keep yanking the prices up isn't sustainable, so instead they've decreased the size of their items and now introduced value meals while focusing on technology to be able to serve more customers. I wouldn't suprised if they'd also lowered the quality of some ingredients for cheaper production.

[URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/starbucks/comments/188tgkc/shrinkflation/"]https://www.reddit.com/r/starbucks/comments/188tgkc/shrinkflation/[/URL]

[QUOTE]Starbucks, using a play from fast food chains, is trying to win back customers with value menus. The chain recently rolled out a new “Pairings Menu,” which combines a drink and a breakfast item for either $5 or $6. The company said Wednesday that the pairings menu experiment is paying off, and multi-item orders are surging.[/QUOTE]

Down 25% in company value over the last 12 months, 6% fewer transactions just in the last quarter, and to make up for it they've put in a strategy to try and be able to service more people through cost effecient measures. You're right, that does sound like a decent indicator of the current US economy.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14933820]Amazon is a whole chapter by itself because they're a growth company that does a lot more than just sell junk and have been moving into multiple sectors. I did look into Starbucks though, being the decent indicator that you say it is.



That's true to an extent, but a lot of mid level and middle management workers, buying Starbucks both provide coffee(and often sugar) as well as status and clout, both at the office and on social media. In that context a 6-8$ expense is cheap and you're giving people way too much credit for being economically responsible. Starbucks have been very good at creating their brand to give this effect, which is why they have a base of very loyal customers.

Nonetheless, given inflation and increase on item prices since 2019, they don't look to be selling more from the chart you posted. Add a population increase since 2019 to that as well and it looks even more dull.

But what did Starbucks themselves say last week?


[URL="https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/30/investing/starbucks-coffee-sales/index.html"]https://edition.cnn.com/2024/07/30/investing/starbucks-coffee-sales/index.html[/URL]

They seem to realize that just keep yanking the prices up isn't sustainable, so instead they've decreased the size of their items and now introduced value meals while focusing on technology to be able to serve more customers. I wouldn't suprised if they'd also lowered the quality of some ingredients for cheaper production.

[URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/starbucks/comments/188tgkc/shrinkflation/"]https://www.reddit.com/r/starbucks/comments/188tgkc/shrinkflation/[/URL]



Down 25% in company value over the last 12 months, 6% fewer transactions just in the last quarter, and to make up for it they've put in a strategy to try and be able to service more people through cost effecient measures. You're right, that does sound like a decent indicator of the current US economy.[/QUOTE]

I acknowledged the downturn starting in 2024, but it has now corrected itself, again during a time when Starbucks is supposedly being boycotted.

I do appreciate the thought out reply, however it's missing the big picture. The contention is that all of the economic indicators out there are a lie, and we are secretly living in a recession where everyone is suffering. Basically that everything has gone to shit since Biden and Harris took over and they are masking it with fake numbers.

So while there have been bumps in the road for Starbucks, they have still grown considerably since covid, and since Biden was in office.

[IMG]https://i0.wp.com/fourweekmba.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/starbucks-revenue-per-store.png?fit=2560%2C1931&ssl=1[/IMG]

[IMG]https://files.merca20.com/uploads/2024/02/starbucks-location-2023.jpg[/IMG]



They are now a much bigger and wealthier beast than they were pre-covid. Sure you can point to bumps in the road, but that ignores the elephant in the room, they have grown at a dramatic pace and that just wouldn't be the case in the event of a bad recession.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933830]I acknowledged the downturn starting in 2024, but it has now corrected itself, again during a time when Starbucks is supposedly being boycotted.

I do appreciate the thought out reply, however it's missing the big picture. The contention is that all of the economic indicators out there are a lie, and we are secretly living in a recession where everyone is suffering. Basically that everything has gone to shit since Biden and Harris took over and they are masking it with fake numbers.

So while there have been bumps in the road for Starbucks, they have still grown considerably since covid, and since Biden was in office.

[IMG]https://i0.wp.com/fourweekmba.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/starbucks-revenue-per-store.png?fit=2560%2C1931&ssl=1[/IMG]

[IMG]https://files.merca20.com/uploads/2024/02/starbucks-location-2023.jpg[/IMG]



They are now a much bigger and wealthier beast than they were pre-covid. Sure you can point to bumps in the road, but that ignores the elephant in the room, they have grown at a dramatic pace and that just wouldn't be the case in the event of a bad recession.[/QUOTE]

Considering inflation is over 50% for most goods compared to as pre-covid, starbucks is actually doing worse than before.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933830]I acknowledged the downturn starting in 2024, but it has now corrected itself, again during a time when Starbucks is supposedly being boycotted.

I do appreciate the thought out reply, however it's missing the big picture.[/QUOTE]

It's yourself who's missing the big picture. Their company value is down 25% in the last year, same valye as they were at 5 years ago and they haven't been growing their profits, only their revenue. They know they can't keep it up because they'll burn out the brand as more and more people would stop buying.

As they've changed their strategy into $5-6 combo value meals, the whole premise of using Starbucks as an example of the economy changes as well. The discussion is no longer whether or not Americans are doing so well that everyone are good paying $8 for coffee, but $5-6 combos at lower quantity and quality.


[QUOTE]The contention is that all of the economic indicators out there are a lie, and we are secretly living in a recession where everyone is suffering. Basically that everything has gone to shit since Biden and Harris took over and they are masking it with fake numbers.[/QUOTE]

Economic indicators are built around growth in volume of corporate profits, which doesn't necessarily affect the economy positively of individuals in the general work force.
A relevant example of that is high levels of immigration. Say the government gives someone asylum and startup money to get situated, find a place to live etc, they do this by using tax payer money. At some point that new citizen is likely to need a loan, which is given by a private entity. That loan has interests and the entity is now making profit which contributes to the GDP, but took money away from the tax payers.
And as rmt has already shown you, numbers for new jobs can be manipulated in how they're presented.


[QUOTE]So while there have been bumps in the road for Starbucks, they have still grown considerably since covid, and since Biden was in office.

[IMG]https://i0.wp.com/fourweekmba.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/starbucks-revenue-per-store.png?fit=2560%2C1931&ssl=1[/IMG]

[IMG]https://files.merca20.com/uploads/2024/02/starbucks-location-2023.jpg[/IMG]


They are now a much bigger and wealthier beast than they were pre-covid. Sure you can point to bumps in the road, but that ignores the elephant in the room, they have grown at a dramatic pace and that just wouldn't be the case in the event of a bad recession.[/QUOTE]

If you increase your prices by 35% while cutting down some item sizes e.g by10% and you only end up with 15% more revenue, you're not doing well and like I said you're burning off the brand putting it into a slow death. I posted for you the article where Starbucks themselves acknowledge this and they're no longer the Starbucks of old, but a discounted version now trying to beat out the competition by not having lines at their drivethrus.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933773]It doesn't matter if Amazon is a monopoly or not (it's not), that doesn't mean that the entire population has to spend more money there. Oh well I tried, have fun living in your false great depression and letting everyone know how hard it is on your new iphone.[/QUOTE]

ok ill make sure to let all my employees know they're doing better than ever and their dollar buys more than it ever has.

what you think their response will be? Why are they asking for gas cards lmao? Is it because they got all this extra spending money?

how about we stop comparing things to the top 5 largest companies in the world that will cut 50k employees to ensure profits remain the same... and compare it to your average mom and pop place shall we?

Walmarts a good example of how you can cut your workforce drastically, while pointing at profits and saying everything is fine.

they used to have 30 cashiers for example, now they got like 5. Self-checkouts have allowed them to drastically cut their workforce, that means so much money is saved.

It's also the cheapest place you can buy stuff at, the fact they're doing great isn't a good indicator. It means people can't shop at more costly places, so they choose walmart

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933773]It doesn't matter if Amazon is a monopoly or not (it's not), that doesn't mean that the entire population has to spend more money there. Oh well I tried, have fun living in your false great depression and letting everyone know how hard it is on your new iphone.[/QUOTE]

You don't see the increase in not just groceries, gas, insurance (homeowner's, auto, long term care), eating out, travel but virtually everything? You don't know about the increase in credit card debt, use of food banks, car repossessions? Which world are you living in?

[QUOTE=rmt;14933733]Going by some of you on this board, the economy is just honky-dory, and Biden belongs on Mt. Rushmore.[/QUOTE]

Well this post aged like Milk

[url]https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/us-stocks-august-6-2024[/url]

[QUOTE=rmt;14933898]You don't see the increase in not just groceries, gas, insurance (homeowner's, auto, long term care), eating out, travel but virtually everything? You don't know about the increase in credit card debt, use of food banks, car repossessions? Which world are you living in?[/QUOTE]

I guess I'm living in the world where I have a good job and salary and the company I work for is doing well and my saving and 401k are killing it. I can not deny that inflation has been problematic, but if we were actually in a bad recession I would be collecting unemployment right now which is infinitely worse.

[QUOTE=paksat;14933845]
how about we stop comparing things to the top 5 largest companies in the world that will cut 50k employees to ensure profits remain the same... and compare it to your average mom and pop place shall we?[/QUOTE]
[IMG]https://commerceinstitute.s3.amazonaws.com/new-businesses-started-every-year/new-businesses-created-over-time.webp[/IMG]


We shall, there are more mom and pop places in the US right now than ever before. You keep bringing up your own small business and how well you are doing financially, so you are one of them :facepalm

[QUOTE=John8204;14933900]Well this post aged like Milk

[url]https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/us-stocks-august-6-2024[/url][/QUOTE]

And it's up even more today (since this article was written). Please, do you really think the stock market is all there is to the economy? People are getting pounded by higher prices, interest rates, debt, etc.

Look, I'm old - not into selling in a panic. I actually took the day off on Monday to buy (pre-market was really low). But I see my kids' friends graduate, living at home with parents, can't find jobs and it's just SAD. 35 trillion in debt, SS and Medicare headaches soon - these are [B][U]HUGE[/U][/B] problems that no one is addressing. And the government keeps spending. The future is not bright for most.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933930]I guess I'm living in the world where I have a good job and salary and the company I work for is doing well and my saving and 401k are killing it. I can not deny that inflation has been problematic, but if we were actually in a bad recession I would be collecting unemployment right now which is infinitely worse.[/QUOTE]

I am happy for you, but not blind to what's happening to others not as fortunate.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933931][IMG]https://commerceinstitute.s3.amazonaws.com/new-businesses-started-every-year/new-businesses-created-over-time.webp[/IMG]


We shall, there are more mom and pop places in the US right now than ever before. You keep bringing up your own small business and how well you are doing financially, so you are one of them :facepalm[/QUOTE]

Well its not all roses out there for small business. Their share of the GDP has shrunk from 50.9% 25 years ago to 43.5% today. Only 65% are profitable which is actually good compared to some other recent years. The average lifespan of a small business is now 9.5 years. And the biggie , in 2024 small business confidence is the lowest in 11 years

[QUOTE=rmt;14933732]You're darn right I don't trust them - who would trust any stats that are 11/12 months wrong (last year) and (this year) 279,000 jobs off (and only 7 months have gone by). If you trust those stats, smh. And it's this job report that set off the 2 days of world-wide panic/selling.[/QUOTE]

But you trusted every word president trump was uttering, right? It was the gospel and everything was going perfectly from January 2017 to January 2021!

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933931][IMG]https://commerceinstitute.s3.amazonaws.com/new-businesses-started-every-year/new-businesses-created-over-time.webp[/IMG]


We shall, there are more mom and pop places in the US right now than ever before. You keep bringing up your own small business and how well you are doing financially, so you are one of them :facepalm[/QUOTE]

I live in Florida where everyone is evacuating to. It's allowing us to enjoy a better economy for obvious reasons

Your data simply isn't making sense, how is everything better than ever when 2 out of 3 people live with less than 1k in their bank account?

If you go by wage increase and compare it to the average increase of rent groceries and gas, all your graphs get proven to be lies

Sorry MAGA that economic collapse you were hoping for so you could blame it on Biden/Harris did not turn out the way you wanted.

Jobless claims plummet, completely erasing all fears of recession. Sorry MAGA, I know your hopes were up.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14933930]I guess I'm living in the world where I have a good job and salary and the company I work for is doing well and my saving and 401k are killing it. I can not deny that inflation has been problematic, but if we were actually in a bad recession I would be collecting unemployment right now which is infinitely worse.[/QUOTE]

Dude, you're supposed to be overly negative and reactive. Get with the program! :lol

[QUOTE=Lakers Legend#32;14934023]Sorry MAGA that economic collapse you were hoping for so you could blame it on Biden/Harris did not turn out the way you wanted.[/QUOTE]

Always next time! :lol

[QUOTE]JPMorgan has raised the odds of a US recession by the end of this year to 35 per cent from 25 per cent probability earlier, citing easing labor market pressures.
Fears of a US recession following a weaker-than-expected July jobs report and an unwinding of yen-funded carry trades sparked a sharp sell-off in global equities earlier this week.[/QUOTE]

[URL="https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/jp-morgan-raises-odds-of-us-recession-by-year-end-to-35-from-25-report-124080801912_1.html"]https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/jp-morgan-raises-odds-of-us-recession-by-year-end-to-35-from-25-report-124080801912_1.html[/URL]

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14934525][URL="https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/jp-morgan-raises-odds-of-us-recession-by-year-end-to-35-from-25-report-124080801912_1.html"]https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/jp-morgan-raises-odds-of-us-recession-by-year-end-to-35-from-25-report-124080801912_1.html[/URL][/QUOTE]

That's why the response will be to lower the interest rates, and it will happen. I look forward to JPMorgan's updated odds once the interest rate cut comes.

[QUOTE=bladefd;14934888]That's why the response will be to lower the interest rates, and it will happen. I look forward to JPMorgan's updated odds once the interest rate cut comes.[/QUOTE]

I don't care too much about specific designations, but more so the big picture. If there's an ongoing risk of recession, it means a lot of people are struggling.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14935030]I don't care too much about specific designations, but more so the big picture. If there's an ongoing risk of recession, it means a lot of people are struggling.[/QUOTE]

IIRC it wasn't long ago that JP Morgan and others pinned their odds of recession at 100%.

We are at no threat of recession. What is happening that society doesn't like is the natural evolution of capitalism. It always seeks to figure out what is cheapest and most efficient. In times of high inflation, there are no businesses that are going to rush to get their employees pay up to speed. It can take a decade before wages eventually catch up.

And everyone on the right who is supposedly struggling and want change? What they aren't seeing is that they are actually demanding socialism. Trickle down doesn't work, if it did we would all be rich right now because the wealthy have never been more top-heavy than they are currently.

I prefer president's who did not cheer for a market crash.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14935041]IIRC it wasn't long ago that JP Morgan and others pinned their odds of recession at 100%.

We are at no threat of recession. What is happening that society doesn't like is the natural evolution of capitalism. It always seeks to figure out what is cheapest and most efficient. In times of high inflation, there are no businesses that are going to rush to get their employees pay up to speed. It can take a decade before wages eventually catch up.

And everyone on the right who is supposedly struggling and want change? What they aren't seeing is that they are actually demanding socialism. Trickle down doesn't work, if it did we would all be rich right now because the wealthy have never been more top-heavy than they are currently.[/QUOTE]

Back when they pinned the odds of recession at 100% was when the GDP was negative for two consecutive quarters in 2022, which as long as you and I have been able to read is what governments and media has used as the definition when they say recession.

[IMG]https://www.bea.gov/system/files/gdp2q22_adv-chart-01.png[/IMG]

And no, people on the right aren't asking for socialism, that's a talking point installed on the left for the people there to feel smart, "but they're actually asking for what we want to give them".
The real solution is to bring back production jobs and force companies to pay out US citizens wages instead of Mexican, Chinese, Vietnamese or whatever to the extent possible.
You have an American registered company and brand and want to sell to Americans, you should be producing your goods in the US and not Mexico or anywhere else - if you do produce in Mexico, the US govt taxes you to an extent where it doesn't make sense to keep production there.

I know the counter argument is to say that then everything will just get more expensive because US workers needs higher wages than e.g Mexican, but it's not how it plays out in the realuty because of domestic competition on more equal terms. I'll give you an example:

Company A sells AC units, they were making around 1 billion in profit per year after all wages and expenses when producing their units in Mexico and shipping them over the border. Their profit margin was 30% before having to move production back and they want to keep the same profits after having been pushed to move their production to the US, so they add to the price.
People then start complaining that those AC units are too expensive, so someone smart takes a look and finds out that if he makes company B, another AC company and aims for a 10% profit margin after having paid all workers and expenses instead of 30%, he can out compete company A on price and take their customers. The new founder would have to be contempt with his company earning $330 million instead of 1 billion after all expenses if it was eventually to grow to the size of company A, but there are lots of people who want that kind of business.
The market wouldn't be taken over by Chinese companies producing ACs either, because the government in question would obviously slap a tariff on their producs so they end up at same price level as domestic production.

More quality jobs for US workers means more money for the population, and it's a much better way than letting mega corporations profit through external production before having to give some of that money to US government as taxes, who then can pass it on to the popoulation through various support programs and make people dependent on government in the day to day. The more money which has to flow to government, the higher the chance of corruption, bureaucrats and politicians taking a cut in deceptive ways.

To me, the main reason to vote for Trump was always that he was trying to bring jobs back and get people off food stamps.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14935794]

And no, people on the right aren't asking for socialism, that's a talking point installed on the left for the people there to feel smart, "but they're actually asking for what we want to give them".
The real solution is to bring back production jobs and [B]force companies to pay out US citizens[/B] wages instead of Mexican, Chinese, Vietnamese or whatever to the extent possible.


[/QUOTE]

:eek:

[QUOTE=SATAN;14935800]:eek:[/QUOTE]

When it comes to American companies that produce mainly for that market, there's nothing wrong with US gov protecting Americans workers instead of ones in Tijuana or Guanzhou. It's also better for the environment if production of products happen closer to where they're consumed.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14935794]Back when they pinned the odds of recession at 100% was when the GDP was negative for two consecutive quarters in 2022, which as long as you and I have been able to read is what governments and media has used as the definition when they say recession.

[IMG]https://www.bea.gov/system/files/gdp2q22_adv-chart-01.png[/IMG]

And no, people on the right aren't asking for socialism, that's a talking point installed on the left for the people there to feel smart, "but they're actually asking for what we want to give them".
The real solution is to bring back production jobs and force companies to pay out US citizens wages instead of Mexican, Chinese, Vietnamese or whatever to the extent possible.
You have an American registered company and brand and want to sell to Americans, you should be producing your goods in the US and not Mexico or anywhere else - if you do produce in Mexico, the US govt taxes you to an extent where it doesn't make sense to keep production there.

I know the counter argument is to say that then everything will just get more expensive because US workers needs higher wages than e.g Mexican, but it's not how it plays out in the realuty because of domestic competition on more equal terms. I'll give you an example:

Company A sells AC units, they were making around 1 billion in profit per year after all wages and expenses when producing their units in Mexico and shipping them over the border. Their profit margin was 30% before having to move production back and they want to keep the same profits after having been pushed to move their production to the US, so they add to the price.
People then start complaining that those AC units are too expensive, so someone smart takes a look and finds out that if he makes company B, another AC company and aims for a 10% profit margin after having paid all workers and expenses instead of 30%, he can out compete company A on price and take their customers. The new founder would have to be contempt with his company earning $330 million instead of 1 billion after all expenses if it was eventually to grow to the size of company A, but there are lots of people who want that kind of business.
The market wouldn't be taken over by Chinese companies producing ACs either, because the government in question would obviously slap a tariff on their producs so they end up at same price level as domestic production.

More quality jobs for US workers means more money for the population, and it's a much better way than letting mega corporations profit through external production before having to give some of that money to US government as taxes, who then can pass it on to the popoulation through various support programs and make people dependent on government in the day to day. The more money which has to flow to government, the higher the chance of corruption, bureaucrats and politicians taking a cut in deceptive ways.

To me, the main reason to vote for Trump was always that he was trying to bring jobs back and get people off food stamps.[/QUOTE]

I don't have any disagreement with this take. But I will say that if you are forcing US companies to pay more for US production rather than getting cheap labor outside of the US? That is more or less a form of socialism. It is no different than allowing those companies to get their cheap labor in China, but then taxing them for that and using that money to create US jobs.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14937089]I don't have any disagreement with this take. But I will say that if you are forcing US companies to pay more for US production rather than getting cheap labor outside of the US? That is more or less a form of socialism. It is no different than allowing those companies to get their cheap labor in China, but then taxing them for that and using that money to create US jobs.[/QUOTE]

Money flowing directly from companies to people is very different than money flowing from companies to government, and then to people. The latter is the building block for communism and a world where the person is dependent on the state. It's also a building block for government corruption as officials decide how much of your money they want to keep for the state, which they can thenen use for state services at companies of their family, friends etc.

Tip(s) of the day - Go Roth (and take chance government will keep its word on tax free on the back end). Traditional IRA no longer can be stretch IRA for most beneficiaries (except spouse). Convert traditional IRAs to Roth between age 59 1/2 to 63 (be careful of Medicare IRMMA - 2 year look back). Recommendation: The Retirement Savings Time Bomb Ticks Louder by Ed Slott.

Don't know why anyone ever said Medicare is free - what a joke - based on income and a stick to single people.

Go Medicare High Deductible plan G - especially in Florida and NY.

All this retirement/Medicare stuff is complicated.

[QUOTE=ZenMaster;14937245]Money flowing directly from companies to people is very different than money flowing from companies to government, and then to people. The latter is the building block for communism and a world where the person is dependent on the state. It's also a building block for government corruption as officials decide how much of your money they want to keep for the state, which they can thenen use for state services at companies of their family, friends etc.[/QUOTE]

The gist of socialism is forcing money from companies and the wealthy and spreading it around to those who are more in need than them. Which is more or less what forcing companies to spend more on their own citizens is. Again, I'm all for it. But you should be realistic about what it is. Taxing companies and using that money to create jobs is literally the same thing.

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14937089]I don't have any disagreement with this take. But I will say that if you are forcing US companies to pay more for US production rather than getting cheap labor outside of the US? That is more or less a form of socialism. It is no different than allowing those companies to get their cheap labor in China, but then taxing them for that and using that money to create US jobs.[/QUOTE]

I dunno, but this is how I feel:

first of all, exploiting cheap labor is bad. It's immoral. I know people don't wanna talk about such things, but it's important, imo, esp if you are talking about people being rich and becoming better people.

Second of all, I feel like IF we are able to make people use US labor, when we have rules in place to avoid people being overworked and working for sweat wages, then we increase the value of everything we have in a fundamental sense. Arguably, we even make life better for the poor laborers who will probably see an increase in their wages eventually, too.

I don't see that as socialism because it's outside of our laws. If capitalism was just lawless then it should have labor camps. Take all poor people and force them to work for free. We do have laws, however, and capitalism works with those laws. Those laws are designed to protect workers, and while they do not redistribute wealth in that socialist sense, they do 'artificially' raise the cost of labor. However, it's necessary to give people a level of protection against 'slavery.'

Ideal world is where people can make money making things for us and can also afford products themselves. If our country only works with cheap labor, then shit is ****ed up.

In no world should we be championing exploitation.

-Smak

[SIZE=7][B]m[/B]arl[B]e[/B]y = [B]c[/B]ool[/SIZE]

[QUOTE=Bill Gates;14937280]The gist of socialism is forcing money from companies and the wealthy and spreading it around to those who are more in need than them. Which is more or less what forcing companies to spend more on their own citizens is. Again, I'm all for it. But you should be realistic about what it is. Taxing companies and using that money to create jobs is literally the same thing.[/QUOTE]

Literally the same thing huh? Telling companies that if they act as an international company pretending to be American then they'll have to pay import taxes on their products is different at it's core than taxing those companies for profits built on the back of cheap labor in Asia or South America.

You want American companies to to exploit cheap labor in other countries so they can send the profit into the US where a job is then created for the money? That's one of the most dystopian and internationally unsustainable things I've ever heard.

So in your model, an American company creates something cool, then goes to China and have them make it all, send back money for the US government so they can tell a person in the US that now there's job for you collecting garbage from the streets or whatever, paid for by Chinese workers. You won't have a chance to move up and advance in anything, because it's someone else creating the value from where you're getting paid.

In my model, an American creates something cool, then goes to the US work force asking people if they want to help build it at a fair wage, with a chance to move up internally within the company if you perform well.

Your model is not only depressive when considering the self worth people feel doing meaningful stuff, but it's also highly inefficient as you need a seperate work force within government who creates the jobs, decides who gets the jobs and how much they can be paid, their workers rights etc. Sounds a lot like communism to me and the American ends up with less money than they otherwise would have, because some of the wealth have gone to a Chinese worker who actually produced something.

The model I propose is what they in other countries simply refer to as having a healthy and sensical job market, while you'd call it "trickle down and it doesn't work", which is only because past politicians let US companies outsource heavily without any consequences(those politicans became rich in the process of donations and insider knowledge).

And if you were "all for it" regarding my model, you'd be voting Trump as he's the only guy who's actually advocating for this structure instead of the communism route.

Bump :pimp:

[QUOTE=bladefd;14933487]With this sign, I expect interest rate cut coming very soon, perhaps 2 cuts before the year ends. I would urge against panic selling because nobody can predict the bottom.[/QUOTE]

I hope the MAGA crew didn't panic sell. They would be up quite a bit today.

[QUOTE=bladefd;14944655]Bump :pimp:



I hope the MAGA crew didn't panic sell. They would be up quite a bit today.[/QUOTE]

Have you seen your updated IRL health and IRL income? :roll:

[QUOTE=AKA_AAP;14944662]Have you seen your updated IRL health and IRL income? :roll:[/QUOTE]

I know I know, the stock market health doesn’t matter anymore. At least not for the next couple of months, should Trump win the election.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14944665]I know I know, the stock market health doesn’t matter anymore. At least not for the next couple of months, should Trump win the election.[/QUOTE]

:oldlol:

[QUOTE=AKA_AAP;14944662]Have you seen your updated IRL health and IRL income? :roll:[/QUOTE]

Cry more, fakkit

[QUOTE=bladefd;14944655]Bump :pimp:



I hope the MAGA crew didn't panic sell. They would be up quite a bit today.[/QUOTE]

Am curious, how much more wealth do you have today compared to 4,5 or 6 years ago?