Rolling US Economy Into The Shitbin Thread

This kind of economy how the all-volunteer military fills its quotas.

agreed however it is fun to talk about the bizarrely shitty financial education americans get. my economics class was taught by the PE/driver's Ed teacher and all we did for weeks was pick stocks out of the newspaper and see if they went up or down, and keep track of how much money we'd "made" or "lost". for one day only, near the end of the term, there was a stilted lesson on "Other economic models" which included "command and control" as one of the types

I don’t think ‘financial literacy’ is a panacea

Agree with this wholeheartedly, but I think we can impart knowledge about just how fucking predatory our economic system really is, and how to navigate it while keeping your head somewhat above water... like, if you see a 'rent to own' sign, just walk the other way

Also: timeshare properties!

I have never heard anyone say, "Man, I'm glad we got that timeshare!"

Rent to own is predatory and also the only way he had non-curb find furniture when I was a kid is the problem.

One of the best pieces of financial advice I ever heard came from Lemmy; I asked him at the end of an interview if he had any advice for young bands (not even specifying financial advice) and he said, "If the record label gives you the name of a lawyer you can have look over the contract, laugh in their face, get up and walk out."

I don’t think ‘financial literacy’ is a panacea - “don’t buy toys on a 27.99% credit card,” yeah okay but credit is how you get to have toys, treats and vacations at all when your rent is 40% of your income.

― papal hotwife (milo z), Friday, January 5, 2024 6:47 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

if you could afford to pay off the credit debt plus interest, you could’ve just saved the same amount and ended up with more money. unless you meant you’d file for bankruptcy?

In a couple of years saving up you could definitely get that toy or weeklong vacation - if your alternator doesn't die or your pet doesn't get sick or etc..

I don't believe people generally take on credit card debt because they're morons who can't figure out that compound interest is bad - if not an actual necessity (vet bill, mechanic, my current credit card debt is for a root canal and cap because Obamacare dental plans are all a joke), it's the option for making life a little more bearable.

I've always wondered if there was a way to estimate what percentage of people taking personal austerity measures and getting debt-free becomes unsustainable because it tanks the overall economy.

The germans seem to do fine

I always got the impression that german austerity measures were a bad recipe (though I guess that's more macro than personal household policy)

In a couple of years saving up you could definitely get that toy or weeklong vacation - if your alternator doesn't die or your pet doesn't get sick or etc..

but the same logic applies to paying off the credit card debt. “In a couple of years up you could definitely pay off the credit card debt from that toy or weeklong vacation - if your alternator doesn't die or your pet doesn't get sick or etc..” is describing the exact same situation it’s just more money because of the interest

I was talking more about the german culture of financial restraint but yes xp

but the same logic applies to paying off the credit card debt

Except for the part where you got to go on vacation.

Yes, the person then has to eventually pay it off, declare bankruptcy or get stuck in an eternal loop of payments. I think we’re all agreed that credit cards are bad. That just doesn’t mean people are unaware of the concept of interest and would stop using them if only they knew.

Do these debt stats (86-106%) mean that German households are basically are accruing (and paying off) debt roughly equivalent to their income or that their outstanding debt is about a year's worth of income?

https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/households-debt-to-income#:~:text=Households%20Debt%20in%20Germany%20decreased,source%3A%20EUROSTAT

Because if it's the former, then that paints an unflattering picture of what "low" debt means -- you're basically treading water.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to do many things (e.g., rent a car) if you have no credit history.

lol i'm kinda laughing at flopson itt. clearly someone who has never been poor.

when you're desperate for a reason to live, you don't make rational financial decisions. the only financial education poor people need is .. the knowledge that comes from having more money in their bank account every month.

I mean, part of my economic downfall was trying to be helpful to family and overextending, but I also was chasing highs from hedonistic escapades as part of a protracted midlife crisis and...yeah, I was throwing hotel stays and big bar tabs on credit cards. snapped out of it and don't do that anymore but credit cards don't care, once the sin's committed you're stuck til it's paid off over time or through some windfall you get.

so yeah, map/milo otm. if I've had a really bad month and there's something I want to do that might cheer me up but it's a bad idea financially....if I'm the average person, I probably just do it.

not to mention, y'know how many family vacations are things moms and dads are going "the smile on my kid's face makes this all worth it, but this is going to HURT"

absolutely unheard of for a person struggling with poverty to also have mental health and/or trauma issues on top of that. poor people aren't thinking of the future, they're thinking about how to survive right now, they've usually been in this mode for years, and they're so starved for pleasure that doesn't come with horrible consequences that a big credit card purchase is an attractive option. like, get those shoes you've always dreamed about owning or claw out an existence in self-imposed austerity for three years in the hopes that it will give you a little more padding in case of an emergency? and given the fact that you don't have stable mental health or relationships, how the fuck are you going to be strong enough to do the latter?

agreed. it’s also gross how people with money will latch on to the thing they perceive as an extravagance that someone scraping by owns, when that’s probably someone’s prized possession that they actually value and maintain because they understand that windfall may not come again

owning a house, owning real estate - that is a fucking extravagance.

An extravagance? It's out of reach for too many people, but it's hardly an extravagance. Owning a home should be within the reach of most of us. I realize that it isn't, but it should be.

milo's point is that constantly living hand to mouth with no visible path out of that situation creates a reality which cannot be improved by any financial advice that applies to people with even tiny amounts of discretionary income. anyone who's lived that kind of poverty very long understands this.

map: i agree with everything that you wrote in your posts. it’s true that i’ve never been poor—my income has been below official poverty lines for many years but it wasn’t acute or severe poverty, which i would never claim to have first-hand experience of—but my post wasn’t meant to be prescriptive; i’m bad at personal finances, have a lot of debt and no savings, live paycheck to paycheck. i haven’t been on vacation in years but if i did i would almost surely go deeper into debt in the process. credit provides real value (both psychologically and economically) but is also highly exploitative and regressive, and i do think some of that exploitativeness is derived from the financial illiteracy/irrational economic decisions of borrowers. as you said it’s more about psychology than economics. milo’s posts that i was replying to seemed to me to be saying “sure credit debt is bad how else could you ever afford a vacation” but imo that’s a purely illusory value of credit. the credit card company doesn’t pay for your vacation; *you* pay for it, and then on top of it you also pay them interest. they are profiting off of your impatience, lack of impulse control, poor financial planning skills. i don’t think that’s good. hopefully its possible to think that without denigrating a person who would make that decision. anyways sorry if my post read as victim-blamey or seemed condescending/aloof, that wasn’t my intention

imo there’s a difference between saying “you shouldn’t have spent money on this small pleasure” versus “you shouldn’t buy so much on credit.” my sister is far from poor but spends way too much on credit due to an addiction to online shopping and always has huge debt which she’s paying for out the wazoo in interest fees. she can *afford* everything she’s buying, it’s just the way she’s spaced out the payments/purchases in time that’s costing her more

otm. My parents had this problem, I am sure it contributed to the breakup of their marriage.

owning a house, owning real estate - that is a fucking extravagance.

― ꙮ (map), Saturday, 6 January 2024 12:47 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

An extravagance? It's out of reach for too many people, but it's hardly an extravagance. Owning a home should be within the reach of most of us. I realize that it isn't, but it should be.

― immodesty blaise (jimbeaux), Saturday, 6 January 2024 12:58 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

whether or not you think owning homes is an extravagance or not, housing markets with lower shares of owners (for example in many parts of europe where long term rentals are more common, or in singapore where every residence is technically public housing on a 99-year lease from the government) tend to function much better. when housing is primarily based on home ownership, increasing affordability means decreasing property values of home owners, which puts the two goals in opposition. only one generation can both buy cheap homes and have them be a source of wealth

I guess it depends on what you mean by "function." It's a truism that renters build up no equity.

that’s good though. making money off home equity means house prices are going up, which means housing is becoming less affordable. there are other sources of equity, but there’s only one housing market

If the assumption is that if the US had more renters, rental laws would be stronger, I think that's a pretty bad assumption to make.

They'd definitely be stronger, for landlords.

real chicken and egg situation and it assumes the organization of renters in absence of regulation can happen. you have to be a real piece of shit as a landlord, usually in areas other than that, to face repercussions

agreed. it’s also gross how people with money will latch on to the thing they perceive as an extravagance that someone scraping by owns, when that’s probably someone’s prized possession that they actually value and maintain because they understand that windfall may not come again

― ɥɯ ︵ (°□°) (mh), Saturday, January 6, 2024 12:44 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

Related pet peeve: people who apparently think that every mobile phone is a iPhone and every personal computer is a Mac. 1) These items are not always as big an extravagance as these critics assume, and 2) try functioning in the world as we know it without reliable online access (especially getting and keeping a job).

just batshit crazy. it’s nearly impossible to do anything without access to a computer of some sort and for the vast majority of the population, that’s a phone

one of the things support groups use to help the unhoused is to help them charge their phones. what are they going to do, sell their phone for exactly zero dollars and then be even worse off?