Federal Reserve Cuts Rates By Half a Point and Signals Era of Easing Has Begun (ft.com) 144
The Federal Reserve cut its benchmark interest rate by half a percentage point [non-paywalled source] on Wednesday and signalled more reductions would follow, launching its first easing cycle since the onset of the pandemic. Financial Times: The US central bank's first cut in more than four years leaves the federal funds rate at a range of 4.75 per cent. Michelle Bowman, a governor on the Federal Open Market Committee, voted against the decision, favouring a quarter-point reduction. The half-point cut is larger than the Fed's more customary quarter-point pace and suggests the US central bank is concerned about the prospects of a weakening economy after more than a year of holding rates at a 23-year high.
Clap harder to resurrect this murderous monster! (Score:2)
"Federal Reserve Cuts Rates By Half a Point and Signals Era of Easing Has Begun"
Does it, though? Certainly that's how it's being perceived. But it seems irresponsible to confuse perception with reality, just because every finance d00d in the country spends all day every day attempting to convert their consensus perception into reality through sheer volume of their applause of Tinkerbell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My prices are down (Score:4, Interesting)
The issue was price gouging. The way you fight that is with competition. Cranking interest rates to cause mass layoffs [youtube.com] isn't a solution, it's just our betters yanking our chains.
If you want even lower prices, do more anti-trust law enforcement, break up the trusts and monopolies and having the government subsidize more supply like we're doing with computer chips.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Major economists disagree with you: https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/15... [cnn.com]
Occam's Razor seems to disagree as well. Namely eggs went up because of bird flu. Car costs went up because of chip shortages. Car insurance went up because accidents went up. Housing went up because of a housing shortage. And so forth...
Tho some degree of profit taking was likely present, it was far and away not a major driver of inflationary effects.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, the Federal Reserve is in an impossible position, as yet another unelected federal agency that's supposed to act completely independently of the politicians that appointed them. Which, as a concept, I think is flawed at best. That said, they seem to have, for the most part, acted with integrity, at least in my lifetime.
I am criticizing financial advisors, to be sure, but more broadly, I'm criticizing the entire stock-trading public of America, and perhaps the world, who half the time are like atte
About time (Score:5, Insightful)
In any case there's no indication the rate hikes helped inflation. The targets were 2%, inflation month to month hovered around 3-4%. It stopped when consumers hit their limit on higher prices and when the DOJ started doing anti-trust lawsuits seriously.
For example in the Kroger/Albertson's merger they did a full discovery and found emails where the guys running the merger talked about how they were selling 500+ stores to get approval for the merger, but selling them to a company they knew wasn't up to the task and would sell them right back in a year or two.
Anti-trust law is what'll control inflation. That and increasing supply. Competition & supply are what keep prices down, not mass layoffs and people blowing through their retirement savings.
Re: (Score:1)
What if mainstream economics has inflation wrong and the real picture was grasped much better by Fischer Black in "Noise"?
"I think that the price level and rate of inflation are literally indeterminate. They are whatever people think they will be. They are determined by expectations, but expectations follow no rational rules. If people believe that certain changes in the money stock will cause changes in the rate of inflation, that may well happen, because their expectations will be built into their long te
Of course the rate hikes didn't help (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course not. They were printing $2T per year. If you're going to add that much money to the money supply you'd need to go much further than Volcker did in raising the rate in order to avoid a net increase in the money supply.
Anti-trust is only part of it. A massive purge of illegal immigrants and low skill legal immigrants would do even more. Legal or illegal, doesn't matter. The net population increase has had a terrible impact on housing prices. Increasing supply doesn't help there if you are mass importing more population and contrary to what lolbertarians want to believe, immigration has been a net negative for the West since we get half a dozen low to no skill immigrants for every high skill immigrant.
You know who aren't huge wealth producers and tax payers? Low and no skill people. We can't even provide for our own poor effectively, but we mass import them to keep wages down and the natives in line.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Of course the rate hikes didn't help (Score:4, Interesting)
immigration has been a net negative for the West
And yet every economist on the planet disagrees (even the most ardent anti-immigration Borhas could only find an issue at the very edges) and the Unites States own position as the global superpower flies in the face of this assertion. Is this where we are
Maybe the solution to our problem is to build more houses for people who want to live and work here since, and i know this is wild, more labor means more productivity.
Low and no skill people.
Dead wrong. Low skill labor still increases productivity and in fact lets more skilled people do more skilled tasks as now there are more people to take up that labor need.
Do you have any economic data to support your views?
We can't even provide for our own poor effectively
For the 1000th time, economics is not a zero-sum issue. Who did you vote for? What are their pro-poor and working class policies?
Re:Of course the rate hikes didn't help (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Of course the rate hikes didn't help (Score:5, Insightful)
because illegal immigrants can get paid less because they don't pay income taxes
Great, start cracking down on the businesses that hire them then, that's called a "pull factor", people don't immigrate to not work, they come to work.
they also face the threat of deportation which does force a more submissive work ethic.
Great, issue more work visas as well as crack down on employers. Why does nobody talk about cracking down hard on the employers?
disadvantage of blue collar workers
Show your data, almost all the data shows immigration, even illegal and even low skilled leads to higher overall wages and growth.
can't find work because they pay taxes
Back this up for me please. If a company is hiring illegals 9/10 times they using a stolen SSN so taxes are paid regardless.
with drug use, especially fentanyl.
Are the immigrans using fantanyl or the natives? Can you show some data here?
The last two men who mowed my lawn, both US citizens, are now in jail for drug use.
And thats the fault of immigrants?
closed them down and opened new ones in China.
I agree, that;s not the fault of immigrants, that American businesses doing American capitalism, blame them for outsourcing to boost share prices.
decreased wages because of illegal immigrants
I know this "feels" true but it actually isn't true. The most bearish economic studies were done again, by Borhas (go read his work) and at most the could find was a wage increase for non-high-school graduates which are a very small slice of the population the wage drop was less than 5% overall, easily remedied by social spending. Everything else goes up, for natives, for low skill, high skill. Rising tides....
Greed drove them to then sell it when an offer came their way and now the new owners have shut it down and opened new factories in... China.
Once again, is this the fault of immigrants or greedy businesses and inefficent policies?
Look at countries which heavily restrict immigration and watch their economies recede. America is built on immigration, our ability to integrate people from all walks of life is the real American superpower, are we gonna turn the clock back on that and make everyones lives worse because of culture war uncomfortableness and "feelings over facts"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
. I'm not your research assistant. If you want to see this truth, come to Appalachia and look for yourself.
And yet the "truth" I am submitting to you doesnt even require you to leave your fucking couch and you refuse to look at it. That's' the laughable part. The country is bigger than Appalachia.
I also secondly love this idea that all these immigrants, they're not going to NYC or Miami or LA or any of the other area, no they can't get to get to the poorest region of the US so they can steal the jobs? Are you a fantasy writer?
but illegal immigration also provides the opportunity for them to hire them.
And if there were no jobs for them immigrants wouldn't attempt a very dangerous bord
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What are their pro-poor and working class policies?
They just pretend that poor people exist. https://www.nbcnews.com/politi... [nbcnews.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Who cares what "economists think?" (Score:2)
Who cares? They might as well be alchemists for all of their inability to make their stuff actually work in real world, profitable ways.
We hit a technology inflection point a long time ago that made that argument obsolete. We used to be like 80% agriculture workers. Modern technology has redu
Re: (Score:2)
I agree those are problems and I wish half as much kvetching about immigrants destroying communities went into pro-housing and pro-consutrction and anti-nimby things. So many problems in the US are downstream from housing, making improvements on that would actually let us know what the actual issues might be but it's all masked behind not enough homes where people want to work and live. .
Culture warriors continue being counterproductive.
Printing the money isn't the problem (Score:3)
They then took that money and used it to buy up all their competitors.
Capitalism without competition is just techno-fuelism.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Only about 10% of the cost of produce is labor. Most of the cost is in storage and transportation. Even if the price of labor doubled, the additional cost would be negligible. The farmers themselves only earn about 40% of the retail price.
Re: (Score:2)
For example in the Kroger/Albertson's merger they did a full discovery and found emails where the guys running the merger talked about how they were selling 500+ stores to get approval for the merger, but selling them to a company they knew wasn't up to the task and would sell them right back in a year or two. .
Link? I just went through (quickly) the FTC complaint with a special focus on their concerns about C&S being handle the load after the sale. There is one quote from a C&S exec, but I can't find any quoted emails from the Korger/Albertson's side.
Re: (Score:2)
It's painfully obvious from those emails that they don't intend to sell to anyone who can actually run the grocery stores and compete with them. This was used in the trial and it's a big part of why the merger is unlikely to go through.
Usually this kind of discovery just isn't done so that the merger can be rubber stamped. Biden's department of Justice is dead serious about antitrust law enforcement
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how much money Kroger and Albertsons are donating to the Trump campaign...
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.cincinnati.com/sto... [cincinnati.com]
It's painfully obvious from those emails that they don't intend to sell to anyone who can actually run the grocery stores and compete with them. This was used in the trial and it's a big part of why the merger is unlikely to go through.
Anyone else actually read the linked article?
1. They weren't emails. They were texts. .
2. The texts had nothing to do with the current proposed merger and sale of stores to C&S.
3. The texts were not between anyone working for a company that is selling stores in the current merger.
They were texts between two employees of C&S about stores they were going to buy back in 2021 No Krogers personnel. No Albertsons personnel.
I just spot checked four of the twelve stores that C&S did buy then. Al
Re: (Score:2)
In this case the rate hikes helped increase inflation. Companies claimed they were raising wages (they really weren't, but that's another story) which meant they had to raise prices on their goods and services. That got picked up by the Fed which then raised rates to supposedly slow inflation, but as Powell has stated, his real intention was to cause people to lose their jobs [cbsnews.com].
This increase in rates then allowed companies to raise t
Re: (Score:3)
This comes across as unfounded certainty. The claims don't match observation either; I think perhaps its conflating inflation rate with price level. The Fed is accurate in their statement: Inflation rate has definitely dropped. Price level hasn't dropped, and the Fed hasn't claimed it has (and in fact the Fed doesn't want the price level to drop).
High interest rates don't generally cause companies to raise their prices. Companies do use any excuse to raise their prices, and they will do so until their sal
Re: (Score:2)
No, that's not what I said. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. In my last paragraph I said:
The Fed claiming inflation is coming down is demurement. Inflation may not be rising as much as it was, but the soaring prices companies foisted on us are still in place.
By demurement I mean claiming inflation is coming down while not acknowledging how high prices are. They only look at the inflation figure, not the overall picture.
The Fed doesn't live in reality. To them it's all about the numbers. "Oh look, inflation is only 3%. We can cut rates." Which completely ignores the 50% increase in some food prices (pota
Re: (Score:2)
Those price increases don't matter as much if wages go up accordingly. And your claim that wages aren't keeping pace is simply wrong. For the last year or so, wage growth has been outpacing inflation: https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
And the cumulative charts seem to have th
It's a great week! (Score:2)
Inflation is low. Interest rates are dropping. Harris has a growing lead in the polls. Hezbollah members are dying or being crippled for life. Yesterday was the Moon Festival, so we have treats.
Re: (Score:3)
"Inflation is low."
It blows my mind that people can still be wound up like little automatons to believe this, in spit of the evidence of their own eyes
Re:It's a great week! (Score:5, Informative)
Inflation happened thanks to the CCP flu disrupting the economy. Now things are back to normal. Prices are higher, but they're not rising like they were, which means inflation is low again.
Re: (Score:3)
First, it's silly to call it the "CCP flu" when your own country originated it and moved the work to China after gain of function research was supposedly halted in 2014. https://www.science.org/conten... [science.org]
Second, what you are talking about is not inflation, it is the change in inflation. But in both cases the numbers are a contrived pack of lies, just like unemployment rates and the establishment jobs report that is comically redacted retroactively on the regular now.
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect. The "change in inflation" is that it went from ~9% to the current ~3%. Inflation is at 3%, which is low, relatively. The level of current cost/prices is not inflation. It's the cumulative result of inflation. Prices are higher than they were 2 years ago, inflation is lower than it was 2 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Keep swallowing the lies, bro. The failed CCP murdered millions across the world. Typical commie slaughter of innocents.
How low will it go? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Prices cannot decrease unless the inflation rate goes negative.
They wont allow it to go negative, as it hurts all debt holders, inflating the interest they have to be on their overleveraged holdings.
This goes for the governements servicing of the debt as well.
The reason there is a target of 2% for the inflation rate, is to steal as much productivity and purchasing power from the plebs without causing a revolution.
But we are inching towards that anyways as the debt is unsustanable.
Re:Election Season Stimulus (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is been REALLY NICE having money in savings accounts earning actually tangible interest each month....
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Election Season Stimulus (Score:5, Informative)
Update your knowledge base: wage growth is outpacing inflation, and has been since February of 2023 [statista.com].
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like a trend that's roughly 100 years too short.
Re: (Score:2)
Update your knowledge base: wage growth is outpacing inflation, and has been since February of 2023.
I keep seeing numbers like that, and yet for the past 50 years, things have been getting worse and worse for those at the bottom. You can post all the numbers you want and spin them however you want and yet I know more and more people who are struggling. Things will break soon regardless of whether or not you provide a link that says that wages have been outpacing inflation. The game is almost over. People are dying.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
it's been terrible for all of the people who have spent all of their savings trying to stay afloat because wages aren't keeping up with inflation.
Higher interest rates are also good for holding back inflation. Cutting interest rates down half a point will tend to make inflation even worse. The fed does not like to see low or negative inflation.. in reality they are working against the people, and in favor of certain corporations such as Banks, financial institutions, and commodities dealers, who are t
Re: (Score:3)
I think it sucks.
It is been REALLY NICE having money in savings accounts earning actually tangible interest each month....
You'd be better off putting that money into the market, anyway. Massively higher returns, even with a well-diversified, low-risk investment strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Election Season Stimulus (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm old enough to remember the double digit interest rates of the 70's and 80's....
It was normal to see 11% levels of interest rates, and yet...no one had problems buying cars or building homes then....
For that matter, I see people buying houses all the time around where I live...6% isn't the end of the world...
Re: (Score:2)
High density housing...if you want it, fine...BUT, don't try to force shoehorn it into the middle of areas with safe, single family dwellings....keep them separate.
Re: (Score:2)
Affordable housing (defined as spending 30% or less of your monthly income on housing) is good for everyone, including neighborhoods.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I love how all who pretend the move is not political are repeating the title that says it all
Re:Election Season Stimulus (Score:5, Insightful)
I love how all who pretend the move is not political are repeating the title that says it all
This type of thinking is exactly the flawed thinking of correlation equals causation.
It's obviously flawed thinking. So, last month, the Fed was anti-Harris for not dropping rates, but now they're anti-Trump for dropping rates. It's almost like reading the made-up analysis of minute-to-minute stock market fluctuations.
Re: (Score:2)
I love how all who pretend the move is not political are repeating the title that says it all
This type of thinking is exactly the flawed thinking of correlation equals causation.
It's obviously flawed thinking. So, last month, the Fed was anti-Harris for not dropping rates, but now they're anti-Trump for dropping rates. It's almost like reading the made-up analysis of minute-to-minute stock market fluctuations.
Sure, but some people see things as a zero-sum game. While I imagine this happens across the political spectrum, it seems that some people, and especially Trump, live it. With regard to the latter, it seems to be his go-to belief, so it's then not surprising that (some of) his followers believe that too. (Just sayin' in general, not casting aspersions at posters.) It's worse with Trump specifically as he always has to be the one who wins and everyone else has to lose -- in his mind anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well said - I always cringe when I hear "Today's change in the market's index is its response to (some minor event)..."
Really? When did they meet and talk about this? Did they take a vote? Were there minutes?
Re: (Score:2)
The have wisened up a little, now they say "Today's major market indexes changed following (some minor event)..."
Re: (Score:2)
With Teamsters endorsing Trump over Kamala almost two to one, you'll need all the help you can get
Controlling 20 metrics with one slider? (Score:2)
Propagating the troll's Subject is not helpful and I sure don't see much "insight" in your comment so modded.
What I find absurd is that there are many metrics affecting the economy. Unemployment, investment, sales (actual and projections), foreign exchange rates, and a bunch of others. But somehow we are supposed to believe that all of these factors can be controlled with a single slider for a "key" interest rate.
Sorry, I'm not buying it. Even with all the explanatory BS piled on top. It just makes no sense
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not expecting you to explain more on Slashdot, but any books you might recommend? I still read quite a lot of economic stuff, mostly corporate histories, but there are few I'd recommend for substance, though Michael Lewis has a highly readable style.
The interest rate is the one slider that seems to get all the attention while seeming the most irrelevant to anything. Haven't heard much about the other "controls" you mentioned, though quantitative easing as practiced locally just seems to be a huge scam to pr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Still not clear to me what perspective you have, though it sounds like you may be one of the gamesters playing money games for the sake of more money. In that case, my primary question would be "Do you think you have a real problem?" I think a real problem has to have a solution, but the problem of "needing more money" is a fake problem because there is no number that can solve it. Are you familiar with ol' JR Simplot? (Sorry, but I can't recall the best book about him, but it may have been one of the ones
Re: (Score:2)
I'd also whole heartedly recommend a transaction tax on stock trades. I've said it on this site before and it gets poopooed. I think it is needed for a different reason than you though I think. A transaction
Re: (Score:2)
Started as an ACK but...
So I don't disagree with any of your reasons, though you seem to think I might. However I think they are mostly symptoms of the same problem.
The shorting thing is different. That's part of gambling on the future that no one knows. I think the main problem there is that the claimed value of the speculations on the future have become much larger than the present values. Not sure what the multiplier is, but it's become quite insane.
Nest egg? Another can of worms, but mostly I'd combine
Re:Election Season Stimulus (Score:5, Insightful)
Hard to say, since it also happens to be the right time to do it.
Sorry, but the timing is just too obvious. This is politically motivated.
It's really not. All the economic indicators that the Fed looks for to show that it's time to loosen rates have been showing for some time. Many economists think that the Fed is acting too slowly, and should have begun lowering rates months ago. Other central banks around the world did as early as the spring. The Fed beginning to cut rates in September means that the full economic impact won't be felt until after the election. If Powell wanted to help the Democrats with rate cuts, he needed to start no later than June.
Re: (Score:2)
How much will retirement account balances increase in this election year 30% or 50%? In either case I'm sure it's just a coincidence!
Well, they've already gone up by quite a bit. Mine is up 20% this year even before the rate cut, which would be an outstanding year even if it ended right now.
Strong claims require strong evidence (Score:3)
> Sorry, but the timing is just too obvious
El Not. If one looked at the unemployment and the inflation curves a year or two ago, extrapolate out, they'd see the "lowering point" roughly corresponds with now. I don't see any evidence of shenanigans. I've been watching Fed R. behavior for too many decades, and they fit the usual pattern.
The early 80's slump kicked our family pretty hard, so I started paying much more attention to economic indicators. (Whether Volcker was too aggressive is squashing inflati
Re: (Score:1)
Would it lessen the politics to simply set rates at zero forever and use indexation of income and savings to protect everyone's real purchasing power no matter how irrational nominal inflation gets?
Re: (Score:2)
Look at Japan for why this is a very bad idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Give it a few months, you'll see why.
They are teetering as we speak.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you "index savings"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Would it lessen the politics to simply set rates at zero forever and use indexation of income and savings to protect everyone's real purchasing power no matter how irrational nominal inflation gets?
In this country? No. Everything is politics now because it's become apparent that politics is a good way to keep people absolutely batshit fucking crazy angry at each other.
I'd much rather we stop printing new money to hand to the oligarchs every time they stub their toe, creating massive inflation, which wages absolutely do *NOT* keep up with. But, you know, I'd also like dragons to be real and to own my own private space yacht, so, really, if we're talking fantasy, I'll take the space yacht first and GTFO
Re: (Score:2)
In this country? No. Everything is politics now because it's become apparent that politics is a good way to keep people absolutely batshit fucking crazy angry at each other.
No! The people on my political team aren't the problem. It's the politicians on the other team that are the problem! Now I can justify any action I take against the other team and its members!!!!!!!!!
Re: (Score:2)
In this country? No. Everything is politics now because it's become apparent that politics is a good way to keep people absolutely batshit fucking crazy angry at each other.
No! The people on my political team aren't the problem. It's the politicians on the other team that are the problem! Now I can justify any action I take against the other team and its members!!!!!!!!!
Anybody telling you any politician is on "Your team" is full of shit. They are on their own team. All of them. You just have to choose which one will harm you less going forward. None of them are destined to help the average person. They're far too greedy to worry about such pettiness as serving the people that elect them.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
And the Fed doesn't work for the President, so...
At the moment anyway. That might change if Trump wins. He has said -- then backed off, then waffled -- that the President, and especially him, should have a say. From Trump says he ‘made a lot of money’ so he should have a say in when you get a rate cut [cnn.com]:
“I feel the president should have at least a say in there. I feel that strongly,” Trump said toward the end of his press conference. “I made a lot of money. I was very successful. And I think I have a better instinct than, in many cases, people that would be on the Federal Reserve — or the chairman.”
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
oh, we're still draining it and we won't be actually replenishing it again until, coincidentally, January.
That's some pretty interesting information that you just made up. https://www.spr.doe.gov/dir/di... [doe.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You can't redefine words to mean whatever you want though; it makes it difficult to have discussions.
Right or wrong (and I agree it's probably closer to 'wrong'), recession is defined as two consecutive quarters of falling GDP. We haven't had that; there is no obfuscation.
What you're looking for is more a measure of buying power or standard of living, and hey, there are statistics for that - but reductions in standard of living are orthogonal to recessions, even if highly correlated.
What you're observing i
Re: (Score:2)
If you use financialized numbers for GDP and QE the crap out of it, [statista.com] real production can hit a nadir and you can still claim there is no recession [haver.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Right I agree in principle, which is why I mentioned "multiple economies." GDP has never really measured actual physical production but is only a measure of the financial accounting part.
This is why I even said "I think GPD is not a great measure, but that's the one that defines recession."
The trouble with measures that cannot be "gamed" by playing with things like QE is that it's really tough to find something other than dollar value to account for things like "well corn production dropped, but solar pane
Re: (Score:2)
If the majority of the number is heavily financialized, GDP is measuring not much at all except the ability of the government to keep the spigot turned on and ensure 'returns' aka increases in the money supply. How long before people wise up to the fact that the money spigot consists of ...nothing?
You already see the signs in the way business has changed. No longer is the effort in trying to sell product, instead it's in financializing the brand. Making money on stock rather than product sales. That is
Re: (Score:3)
Because they're looking at economic indicators, and what they see signals the time for a rate cut?
The FED is independent, and the FED Chair was appointed by Trump in 2018, so I really don't know what you think you're suggesting here.
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, I wonder why they cut rates right now, after holding them so high for so long.
Why wonder when you can read TFA? Is it because you think everything is a conspiracy? Are you yourself actually a conspiracy? Maybe you're not real.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think monetary policy is apolitical so examining political considerations in setting monetary policy is reasonable.
Low interest rates boost asset prices which large numbers* of people desire, thus making the status quo more desirable, thus helping politicians.
_____
* if the number of stock and real estate owners decline and consolidate in the future, this effect may fade but now I think it's a reliable play.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Becuase they are intentionally tweaking Trump? No, tha'ts highly unlikely but it is exactly what Trump will claim. Trump WANTS a bad economy, and an open border, because it helps his election chances. Remember - For Trump it's all about what's good for him, not what's good for America.
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, I wonder why they cut rates right now, after holding them so high for so long. I don't know if I can think of a reason. Can you?
I think you forgot to add a /sarcasm tag to your post. Just sayin'
Re: (Score:2)
Causes of the inflation (Score:3)
Inflation had world-wide causes. No one nation "broke prices". First, factories were shut down or scaled back in many countries due to the pandemic. Different nations recovered from the pandemic at different rates, so some wanted products that were now scarce, so prices for them naturally went up (Econ 101).
Others didn't want to pay the high price so instead shopped for other products. But when everyone is doing this at the same time, ALL prices go up, not just those tied to closed factories. It's kind of l