I believe the economy may be really bad right now. (2 Viewers)

[Juxtatarot]

So, did we decide yesterday that the economy and “soft landing” are going to be okay?

Things look pretty sweet right now. For many of us anyway, probably a really good time to give to our favorite charities and help each other.

I haven't had to cut back in years, but my household is feeling the crunch. Just this month we've eliminated our Green Chef membership, 4 bottles a month Wine Club, 3 streaming TV services, TruGreen lawn treatment service, and we've made an agreement to not eat out under any circumstances. I also now refuse to grocery shop at higher end stores like Publix and am opting for Winn Dixie or Aldi.

Thoughts and prayers.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

When consumer debt is at an all time high the Economy is not in a good spot.

Consumer debt is pretty much always at an all-time high.

Out of the last 8 years consumer debt was at an all-time high in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, and 2023.

 

[MTskibum]

When consumer debt is at an all time high the Economy is not in a good spot.

Consumer debt is pretty much always at an all-time high.

Out of the last 8 years consumer debt was at an all-time high in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, and 2023.

Adjusted for inflation?

 

[Sleestak]

Macros are having a goldilocks moment.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

When consumer debt is at an all time high the Economy is not in a good spot.

Consumer debt is pretty much always at an all-time high.

Out of the last 8 years consumer debt was at an all-time high in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, and 2023.

Adjusted for inflation?

I'm not an economist, just a guy looking at some charts, so I could have the totally wrong read on this.

But looking at the charts, it looks like in general consumer debt generally moves in a consistent line upwards until there is some major event to suck that debt out (2008 housing crisis being the prime example).

Inflation wise, I would think if the debt line is moving consistently, inflation would actually make that MORE impressive, not less, since that generally means the value of that debt is actually lower (IE $17T in debt is a lot less now than $17T in debt in 1920 would have been).

But broadly looking at the last 10 years, consumer debt from 2013-2018 went from $11T to $14T. Then from 2018-2023 went from $14T to $17T. So generally on the same pace. But a $3T gain from 14-17 is not only a lower percentage change than from 11-14, obviously, but also in the face of inflation is actually less true value to the debt because there is a lot more money out there in general.

Also worth noting that by far the largest debt is mortgages, which is generally not considered bad debt. Credit cards being a distant 4th. Of course they've moved in lock step with mortgage debt as have all other kinds of debt, but the actual number is much smaller.

But in general, I think when people or articles say "consumer debt is at an all-time high, the sky is falling!" they're not trying to have a rational conversation. You can pretty much pick any day in history and as long as it's not the middle of a black swan event, chances are extremely high that at that time consumer debt was at an all-time high.

 

[Keerock]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

 

[culdeus]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

Why due to an election cycle? Surely the corporate greed motivation would be to push prices up to maintain carbon emissions?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

Why due to an election cycle? Surely the corporate greed motivation would be to push prices up to maintain carbon emissions?

I would assume the theory is government restrictions are rolled back to allow more production. The USA isn't Saudi Arabia where the government owns the oil companies so we can't just decide to produce more oil as far as I'm aware. Our only control is in how much we make it a PITA for the oil companies to produce more with climate restrictions. But I haven't seen anything get rolled back recently and US oil production has actually been on a pretty steady pace of increase since about 2020. As far as I can tell it's not like we started rolling out a bunch of oil last week, the production increases have been pretty steady for about 3 years now.

I have no inside info on this other than the charts, but oil looks to me like pretty much everything covid related, we massively over corrected the supply/demand balance to account for a temporary change in supply/demand. Demand for oil plummeted because people couldn't move goods and whatnot during the shutdowns. In order to stimulate oil prices we did the OPEC deal to restrict oil production which was a huge overcorrection, so when demand returned we were way short on oil production (worldwide, not just the US). Now that the OPEC deal has worn off and production has continued to rise the last few years we are getting close to getting back to equilibrium.

This is true in almost every class and category coming out of covid. So many different areas where we grew supply too fast to meet rising demand that we thought was going to be more sticky, or restricted supply too fast to meet falling demand that, again, we thought was going to last a lot longer. Bullwhip effect in its most basic form, all re-calibrating back to normal with time. But that hasn't stopped people from turning normal economic trends and re-balancing to politics, which of course are the narratives that people are fed and latch onto.

 

[Keerock]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

Why due to an election cycle? Surely the corporate greed motivation would be to push prices up to maintain carbon emissions?

Uh, because low fuel prices are a boon issue for the current administration (not singling out this administration... this is true for ANY current administration). Vote us back in... look what we've done for gas prices!

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

Why due to an election cycle? Surely the corporate greed motivation would be to push prices up to maintain carbon emissions?

Uh, because low fuel prices are a boon issue for the current administration (not singling out this administration... this is true for ANY current administration). Vote us back in... look what we've done for gas prices!

What is their mechanism for doing this?

 

[Stoneworker]

Some humorous quotes from soothsayer Janet Yellen from today vs. 2007* for those who believe in the Capt Sully-esque "soft landing" narrative.

**Her 2007 speech was given nine months before we officially entered The Great Recession.

-----------------------------------------------------

Janet Yellen - 12-14-2023 - Five months after the Fed paused interest rates following 18 months of hiking

WSJ: You’ve said you see a soft landing as the most likely outcome for the economy. Do I have that right?

YELLEN: Yes, in the sense that, to me, a soft landing is the economy continues to grow, the labor market remains strong, and inflation comes down. And I believe that’s the path we’re on.

-----------------------------------------------------

Janet Yellen 2-21-2007 - Five months after the Fed paused interest rates following 24 months of hiking. (from Fed Reserve Bank of San Fran speech)

"These [recent 17 consecutive months of interest rate hikes] have held the promise of setting the economy on a glide path for the proverbial “soft landing”—an orderly slowing of growth that avoids the risk of a severe downturn while producing enough slack in labor and goods markets to relieve inflationary pressures"

"In summary, I believe that a soft landing is the most likely outcome over the next year or two."

----------------------------------------------------

 

[rockaction]

Oof. I'm staying away from politics, but those quotes are certainly illuminating.

 

[Keerock]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

Why due to an election cycle? Surely the corporate greed motivation would be to push prices up to maintain carbon emissions?

Uh, because low fuel prices are a boon issue for the current administration (not singling out this administration... this is true for ANY current administration). Vote us back in... look what we've done for gas prices!

What is their mechanism for doing this?

I don't pretend to be an energy or political expert by any stretch, but what I'd heard is that the initial "stop" on drilling permits imposed by the current administration have been loosened, allowing additional drilling to occur. I don't dare post any links as they are mostly politically motivated, but as I said, this isn't unique to this administration.

 

[Stoneworker]

Oof. I'm staying away from politics, but those quotes are certainly illuminating.

Not political. Just a gentle reminder that historically soft-landings are the standard predicted outcome...when in reality they are a rarity.

The IMF was touting the same thing as Yellen as late as August 2007; the Dallas Fed made public soft-landing predictions as late as September (two months before GR).

In its appraisal of U.S. economic policies, the IMF said that current monetary policy "is consistent with a soft landing," and that the Federal Reserve's policymaking Open Market Committee "has rightly emphasized maintaining well-anchored inflation expectations.

September 2007 IMF Survey: Soft Landing Ahead for U.S. Economy

 

[rockaction]

Not political. Just a gentle reminder that historically soft-landings are the standard predicted outcome

Didn't think it was political. Me saying it was a reminder to myself not to get that way. So I will say that when the same person in charge of a similar thing repeats a prognostication that preceded a previous catastrophe, one can fairly wonder about the truth of the claim this time.

 

[Stoneworker]

Not political. Just a gentle reminder that historically soft-landings are the standard predicted outcome

Didn't think it was political. Me saying it was a reminder to myself not to get that way. So I will say that when the same person in charge of a similar thing repeats a prognostication that preceded a previous catastrophe, one can fairly wonder about the truth of the claim this time.

100%

 

[Jayrod]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

Why due to an election cycle? Surely the corporate greed motivation would be to push prices up to maintain carbon emissions?

Uh, because low fuel prices are a boon issue for the current administration (not singling out this administration... this is true for ANY current administration). Vote us back in... look what we've done for gas prices!

What is their mechanism for doing this?

I don't pretend to be an energy or political expert by any stretch, but what I'd heard is that the initial "stop" on drilling permits imposed by the current administration have been loosened, allowing additional drilling to occur. I don't dare post any links as they are mostly politically motivated, but as I said, this isn't unique to this administration.

I've read/heard that gas and oil prices are very much based on oil futures prices, which are more reactive to changes in policies and any pressures on the global market real or expected.

Meaning that governmental policy changes can and do indeed have a nearer term effect on the price of gas than would likely play out a purely drilling-to-gas-pump pricing scenario.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Here is a question regarding the economy. We talk about consumers becoming immune to paying for necessary goods and services. We have seen that Crude has took a dramatic decline in the last few weeks. My question is why is gas below 3.00 (2.78 in my neck of the woods) we were accustomed to paying over $3.00 the last year and why did they not drop it to $3.05 but not lower so all the companies involved in delivering to the pump can profit even more.

The easy answer? Due to the upcoming election cycle, US crude oil production is ramping back up near an all time high.

Why due to an election cycle? Surely the corporate greed motivation would be to push prices up to maintain carbon emissions?

Uh, because low fuel prices are a boon issue for the current administration (not singling out this administration... this is true for ANY current administration). Vote us back in... look what we've done for gas prices!

What is their mechanism for doing this?

I don't pretend to be an energy or political expert by any stretch, but what I'd heard is that the initial "stop" on drilling permits imposed by the current administration have been loosened, allowing additional drilling to occur. I don't dare post any links as they are mostly politically motivated, but as I said, this isn't unique to this administration.

I am also no expert and am probably missing something (or 10 things) but when I look at the production charts while things have accelerated a bit this year it doesn't appear to be anything crazy. Oil production has been ramping up pretty steadily for the better part of 3 years. Yes we're back near the all-time highs now but we've been steadily headed in that direction since the bottom in 2020, it's just taken a while to get there.

 

[BeTheMatch]

Gas prices go down every winter. This is hardly a new phenomenon.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Oof. I'm staying away from politics, but those quotes are certainly illuminating.

Not political. Just a gentle reminder that historically soft-landings are the standard predicted outcome...when in reality they are a rarity.

The IMF was touting the same thing as Yellen as late as August 2007; the Dallas Fed made public soft-landing predictions as late as September (two months before GR).

In its appraisal of U.S. economic policies, the IMF said that current monetary policy "is consistent with a soft landing," and that the Federal Reserve's policymaking Open Market Committee "has rightly emphasized maintaining well-anchored inflation expectations.

September 2007 IMF Survey: Soft Landing Ahead for U.S. Economy

Definitely a good point. I don't remember where but I saw someone going through a chart of periods of inflation in the past and show that in basically all the other periods there was the run of inflation, then a recovery back to almost the target rate, and then inflation ballooned again back to all-time highs.

I can certainly see that as plausible this time with the way that Americans continue to spend like the money will never run out. I would imagine it's always the same story. Inflation goes up, rates go up, inflation comes down, people party like the battle is won and start spending again, and inflation returns.

That seems to be exactly what's happening again this time. Only this time people barely stopped spending, but as soon as the fed gave their speech the other day people couldn't jump faster to hang the "mission accomplished" banner and start pouring money into risky crap again. Markets soared, flights and concerts are booking up like crazy. Heck, even crypto is running nutso again. Everyone that got slapped for being reckless before is right back to it because, once again, the long term damage was minimal. I said at the beginning of all this that people won't learn until they're slapped with a hard landing where there are real consequences to being idiots with their money instead of taking the long term wealth that's been handed to them on a silver platter over the last decade plus.

 

[FairWarning]

I spend like crazy because my bills go up - namely groceries, utilities, and insurance. I’m at the point where two jobs is barely coving it.

 

[Stoneworker]

Definitely a good point. I don't remember where but I saw someone going through a chart of periods of inflation in the past and show that in basically all the other periods there was the run of inflation, then a recovery back to almost the target rate, and then inflation ballooned again back to all-time highs.

I can certainly see that as plausible this time with the way that Americans continue to spend like the money will never run out. I would imagine it's always the same story. Inflation goes up, rates go up, inflation comes down, people party like the battle is won and start spending again, and inflation returns.

That seems to be exactly what's happening again this time. Only this time people barely stopped spending, but as soon as the fed gave their speech the other day people couldn't jump faster to hang the "mission accomplished" banner and start pouring money into risky crap again. Markets soared, flights and concerts are booking up like crazy. Heck, even crypto is running nutso again. Everyone that got slapped for being reckless before is right back to it because, once again, the long term damage was minimal. I said at the beginning of all this that people won't learn until they're slapped with a hard landing where there are real consequences to being idiots with their money instead of taking the long term wealth that's been handed to them on a silver platter over the last decade plus.

Agreed. Inflation is like a forest fire that needs to be completely extinguished with a torrent of water and not just contained or it will simply re-ignite and get even worse.

And now, after Powell spurring another "everything rally" on Wednesday, we've got the NY Fed apparently contradicting Powell's statement and thus making the Fed appear even more incompetent.

Wednesday: “There’s a general expectation that this [interest rate cuts] will be a topic for us looking ahead,” Powell said.

Today: "We aren't really talking about rate cuts right now,"New York Federal Reserve President John Williams said Friday in a CNBC interview.

It's pretty hard to believe that an institution that can't even communicate a simple PR message can pull off a soft landing for a $25 trillion economy.

 

[The Commish]

Definitely a good point. I don't remember where but I saw someone going through a chart of periods of inflation in the past and show that in basically all the other periods there was the run of inflation, then a recovery back to almost the target rate, and then inflation ballooned again back to all-time highs.

I can certainly see that as plausible this time with the way that Americans continue to spend like the money will never run out. I would imagine it's always the same story. Inflation goes up, rates go up, inflation comes down, people party like the battle is won and start spending again, and inflation returns.

That seems to be exactly what's happening again this time. Only this time people barely stopped spending, but as soon as the fed gave their speech the other day people couldn't jump faster to hang the "mission accomplished" banner and start pouring money into risky crap again. Markets soared, flights and concerts are booking up like crazy. Heck, even crypto is running nutso again. Everyone that got slapped for being reckless before is right back to it because, once again, the long term damage was minimal. I said at the beginning of all this that people won't learn until they're slapped with a hard landing where there are real consequences to being idiots with their money instead of taking the long term wealth that's been handed to them on a silver platter over the last decade plus.

Agreed. Inflation is like a forest fire that needs to be completely extinguished with a torrent of water and not just contained or it will simply re-ignite and get even worse.

And now, after Powell spurring another "everything rally" on Wednesday, we've got the NY Fed apparently contradicting Powell's statement and thus making the Fed appear even more incompetent.

Wednesday: “There’s a general expectation that this [interest rate cuts] will be a topic for us looking ahead,” Powell said.

Today: "We aren't really talking about rate cuts right now,"New York Federal Reserve President John Williams said Friday in a CNBC interview.

It's pretty hard to believe that an institution that can't even communicate a simple PR message can pull off a soft landing for a $25 trillion economy.

One guy says we aren't talking about it right now and the other says it's a topic of conversation for the future.

 

[Sleestak]

One guy says we aren't talking about it right now and the other says it's a topic of conversation for the future.

Concur. What's the beef? They are nailing this (present tense).

 

[Stoneworker]

Definitely a good point. I don't remember where but I saw someone going through a chart of periods of inflation in the past and show that in basically all the other periods there was the run of inflation, then a recovery back to almost the target rate, and then inflation ballooned again back to all-time highs.

I can certainly see that as plausible this time with the way that Americans continue to spend like the money will never run out. I would imagine it's always the same story. Inflation goes up, rates go up, inflation comes down, people party like the battle is won and start spending again, and inflation returns.

That seems to be exactly what's happening again this time. Only this time people barely stopped spending, but as soon as the fed gave their speech the other day people couldn't jump faster to hang the "mission accomplished" banner and start pouring money into risky crap again. Markets soared, flights and concerts are booking up like crazy. Heck, even crypto is running nutso again. Everyone that got slapped for being reckless before is right back to it because, once again, the long term damage was minimal. I said at the beginning of all this that people won't learn until they're slapped with a hard landing where there are real consequences to being idiots with their money instead of taking the long term wealth that's been handed to them on a silver platter over the last decade plus.

Agreed. Inflation is like a forest fire that needs to be completely extinguished with a torrent of water and not just contained or it will simply re-ignite and get even worse.

And now, after Powell spurring another "everything rally" on Wednesday, we've got the NY Fed apparently contradicting Powell's statement and thus making the Fed appear even more incompetent.

Wednesday: “There’s a general expectation that this [interest rate cuts] will be a topic for us looking ahead,” Powell said.

Today: "We aren't really talking about rate cuts right now,"New York Federal Reserve President John Williams said Friday in a CNBC interview.

It's pretty hard to believe that an institution that can't even communicate a simple PR message can pull off a soft landing for a $25 trillion economy.

One guy says we aren't talking about it right now and the other says it's a topic of conversation for the future.

“The question of when it will become appropriate to begin dialing back the amount of policy restraint…begins to come into view, and is clearly a topic of discussion out in the world and also a discussion for us at our meeting today,” Powell said Wednesday.

 

[Mitchie]

Not political. Just a gentle reminder that historically soft-landings are the standard predicted outcome

Didn't think it was political. Me saying it was a reminder to myself not to get that way. So I will say that when the same person in charge of a similar thing repeats a prognostication that preceded a previous catastrophe, one can fairly wonder about the truth of the claim this time.

Bottom line is recessions are essentially impossible to predict, she was wrong last time, she may be wrong again or she may be right.

 

[Stoneworker]

Not political. Just a gentle reminder that historically soft-landings are the standard predicted outcome

Didn't think it was political. Me saying it was a reminder to myself not to get that way. So I will say that when the same person in charge of a similar thing repeats a prognostication that preceded a previous catastrophe, one can fairly wonder about the truth of the claim this time.

Bottom line is recessions are essentially impossible to predict, she was wrong last time, she may be wrong again or she may be right.

They are?

An inverted yield curve in U.S. Treasuries has predicted every recession since 1955, with only one false signal during that time*.

*Source: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (ironically where Yellen was President)

 

[Mitchie]

Not political. Just a gentle reminder that historically soft-landings are the standard predicted outcome

Didn't think it was political. Me saying it was a reminder to myself not to get that way. So I will say that when the same person in charge of a similar thing repeats a prognostication that preceded a previous catastrophe, one can fairly wonder about the truth of the claim this time.

Bottom line is recessions are essentially impossible to predict, she was wrong last time, she may be wrong again or she may be right.

They are?

An inverted yield curve in U.S. Treasuries has predicted every recession since 1955, with only one false signal during that time*.

*Source: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (ironically where Yellen was President)

Very small sample size, 7 recessions, 1 not, not very meaningful predictor.

 

[Stoneworker]

Bottom line is recessions are essentially impossible to predict, she was wrong last time, she may be wrong again or she may be right.

They are?

An inverted yield curve in U.S. Treasuries has predicted every recession since 1955, with only one false signal during that time*.

*Source: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (ironically where Yellen was President)

Very small sample size, 7 recessions, 1 not, not very meaningful predictor.

So then please explain how you expect the treasury yield curve to un-invert, if not induced by a recession.

 

[Mitchie]

Bottom line is recessions are essentially impossible to predict, she was wrong last time, she may be wrong again or she may be right.

They are?

An inverted yield curve in U.S. Treasuries has predicted every recession since 1955, with only one false signal during that time*.

*Source: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (ironically where Yellen was President)

Very small sample size, 7 recessions, 1 not, not very meaningful predictor.

So then please explain how you expect the treasury yield curve to un-invert, if not induced by a recession.

well that's what Fed is aiming for, bring down Fed rate over time which should bring down short end of curve, but not slow down economy so econ growth can sustain itself or prob slow down some but avoid recession

 

[Stoneworker]

Bottom line is recessions are essentially impossible to predict, she was wrong last time, she may be wrong again or she may be right.

They are?

An inverted yield curve in U.S. Treasuries has predicted every recession since 1955, with only one false signal during that time*.

*Source: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (ironically where Yellen was President)

Very small sample size, 7 recessions, 1 not, not very meaningful predictor.

So then please explain how you expect the treasury yield curve to un-invert, if not induced by a recession.

well that's what Fed is aiming for, bring down Fed rate over time which should bring down short end of curve, but not slow down economy so econ growth can sustain itself or prob slow down some but avoid recession

I see. So now we're back full circle to trusting Yellen's disciples to make good on her prognostications. The same group that added "transitory" to our vocabulary. Good luck. I'll take the under.

 

[Mitchie]

Bottom line is recessions are essentially impossible to predict, she was wrong last time, she may be wrong again or she may be right.

They are?

An inverted yield curve in U.S. Treasuries has predicted every recession since 1955, with only one false signal during that time*.

*Source: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (ironically where Yellen was President)

Very small sample size, 7 recessions, 1 not, not very meaningful predictor.

So then please explain how you expect the treasury yield curve to un-invert, if not induced by a recession.

well that's what Fed is aiming for, bring down Fed rate over time which should bring down short end of curve, but not slow down economy so econ growth can sustain itself or prob slow down some but avoid recession

I see. So now we're back full circle to trusting Yellen's disciples to make good on her prognostications. The same group that added "transitory" to our vocabulary. Good luck. I'll take the under.

not exactly, my premise was that inflations very hard to predict, said nothing about listening to Yellen. And in regards to "transitory" at the end of the day it kinda turned out to be...

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I spend like crazy because my bills go up - namely groceries, utilities, and insurance. I’m at the point where two jobs is barely coving it.

Between my wife and I were probably in the top 10% but with two kids in college things are pretty tight. I’ve been trying to get a job at UPS for a night shift. I’m extremely overqualified but It’s been impossible so far.

I’m going though a nightmare with our water company with high water bills. Our last quarter bill was almost $800. They sent out the crew to check my house for leaks and told me I had none and replaced the water meter. The following day they tell me that they discovered an underground leak and I instructed me that I needed to get a plumber to dig up my front yard to check my Water main. I did that and they didn’t find a leak.

I’m going to get my money back because I have it all in writing and take meticulous notes but it’s still money out of my pocket a week and a half before Christmas.

I know somebody on the inside, and they told me that they’re getting ready to jack up the rates for water another 8% soon.


ETA - Were fine, we have plenty of savings, all bills get paid and we’re not behind- but there just isn’t as much disposable income right now.

I can’t imagine how rough it must be for others. If this was happening 10 years ago things would be a lot different.

 

[Orange&Blue]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

 

[Mitchie]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

exactly when i read the first part thought it was going to be about finding inexpensive restaurants...

 

[Alex P Keaton]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It wasn’t considered cheap 5 years ago. At least not for the majority of this country.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It wasn’t considered cheap 5 years ago. At least not for the majority of this country.

Ok

 

[IvanKaramazov]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It wasn’t considered cheap 5 years ago. At least not for the majority of this country.

Gotta disagree here. A sit-down meal for $20 per person has been pretty reasonable for a while, especially if it includes tax and tip. I get that you had a kids meal stuck in there, but that still works out to like $15 per entree. Clearly a step up from Qdoba, but cheaper than a bottom-feeder chain like Applebee's. (Full disclosure: my wife and I almost never go out, partly because she's a picky eater, but mainly because we both feel like it's a bad value. I sympathize with your price-sensitivity.)

 

[Alex P Keaton]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It wasn’t considered cheap 5 years ago. At least not for the majority of this country.

Gotta disagree here. A sit-down meal for $20 per person has been pretty reasonable for a while, especially if it includes tax and tip. I get that you had a kids meal stuck in there, but that still works out to like $15 per entree. Clearly a step up from Qdoba, but cheaper than a bottom-feeder chain like Applebee's. (Full disclosure: my wife and I almost never go out, partly because she's a picky eater, but mainly because we both feel like it's a bad value. I sympathize with your price-sensitivity.)

I’ll be more succinct: a whole lot of people can’t afford to drop $100 for a meal very often.

The country is massively unequal right now economically. And it has been getting worse for a long time. So is $100 for a meal affordable? Yeah, for about 30% of the country. This is what my friends and family “back home” tell me about the economy. My friends in suburban Chicago would think $100 for a meal is a steal.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I’ll be more succinct: a whole lot of people can’t afford to drop $100 for a meal very often.

The country is massively unequal right now economically. And it has been getting worse for a long time. So is $100 for a meal affordable? Yeah, for about 30% of the country. This is what my friends and family “back home” tell me about the economy. My friends in suburban Chicago would think $100 for a meal is a steal.

Sorry, I misunderstood where you were going with this. I agree with this point. Your average person can't afford to drop $100 at a restaurant on a regular basis. If that's a weekly Friday-night "treat" for the family, that's a $5200 annual bill and the median household income is about $75K. That doesn't fit.

On the other hand, part of me wants to say that it's always been that way, but I'm not sure about that and maybe I'm over-generalizing from my own upbringing.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I’ll be more succinct: a whole lot of people can’t afford to drop $100 for a meal very often.

The country is massively unequal right now economically. And it has been getting worse for a long time. So is $100 for a meal affordable? Yeah, for about 30% of the country. This is what my friends and family “back home” tell me about the economy. My friends in suburban Chicago would think $100 for a meal is a steal.

Sorry, I misunderstood where you were going with this. I agree with this point. Your average person can't afford to drop $100 at a restaurant on a regular basis. If that's a weekly Friday-night "treat" for the family, that's a $5200 annual bill and the median household income is about $75K. That doesn't fit.

On the other hand, part of me wants to say that it's always been that way, but I'm not sure about that and maybe I'm over-generalizing from my own upbringing.

I worded my point poorly, so it’s on me.

 

[Mitchie]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It wasn’t considered cheap 5 years ago. At least not for the majority of this country.

Gotta disagree here. A sit-down meal for $20 per person has been pretty reasonable for a while, especially if it includes tax and tip. I get that you had a kids meal stuck in there, but that still works out to like $15 per entree. Clearly a step up from Qdoba, but cheaper than a bottom-feeder chain like Applebee's. (Full disclosure: my wife and I almost never go out, partly because she's a picky eater, but mainly because we both feel like it's a bad value. I sympathize with your price-sensitivity.)

I’ll be more succinct: a whole lot of people can’t afford to drop $100 for a meal very often.

The country is massively unequal right now economically. And it has been getting worse for a long time. So is $100 for a meal affordable? Yeah, for about 30% of the country. This is what my friends and family “back home” tell me about the economy. My friends in suburban Chicago would think $100 for a meal is a steal.

i mean it was for 5 people so really $20 for a meal

 

[Desert_Power]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

"Four naan, Jeremy? Four? That's insane."

 

[dickey moe]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It really isn't for a lot of families. That's kind of the point.

 

[jwb]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It wasn’t considered cheap 5 years ago. At least not for the majority of this country.

Gotta disagree here. A sit-down meal for $20 per person has been pretty reasonable for a while, especially if it includes tax and tip. I get that you had a kids meal stuck in there, but that still works out to like $15 per entree. Clearly a step up from Qdoba, but cheaper than a bottom-feeder chain like Applebee's. (Full disclosure: my wife and I almost never go out, partly because she's a picky eater, but mainly because we both feel like it's a bad value. I sympathize with your price-sensitivity.)

I’ll be more succinct: a whole lot of people can’t afford to drop $100 for a meal very often.

The country is massively unequal right now economically. And it has been getting worse for a long time. So is $100 for a meal affordable? Yeah, for about 30% of the country. This is what my friends and family “back home” tell me about the economy. My friends in suburban Chicago would think $100 for a meal is a steal.

Somewhat anecdotal (although I did read a few articles alluding to this), but we now have a massive amount of retired / semi-retired Boomers with pensions who are spending - much much more than retired folks spent years ago. I wonder how much that influences the economic numbers?

 

[Mitchie]

We (5 of us) went out to eat last night at an Indian restaurant. After taxes and tip it was a $100 bill and that included a kids meal. We probably won't go out to eat again for several months. It is just impractical.

$100 for five people (including tip) is very cheap.

It really isn't for a lot of families. That's kind of the point.

I can respect that, but you don't have to go out to eat, can also go to a cheaper restaurant, should also look at the menu ahead of time if you're concerned about cost. I don't really have too much sympathy for someone who goes to a restaurant and gets the bill and then complains about it.

 

[dkp993]

I spend like crazy because my bills go up - namely groceries, utilities, and insurance. I’m at the point where two jobs is barely coving it.

Between my wife and I were probably in the top 10% but with two kids in college things are pretty tight. I’ve been trying to get a job at UPS for a night shift. I’m extremely overqualified but It’s been impossible so far.

I’m going though a nightmare with our water company with high water bills. Our last quarter bill was almost $800. They sent out the crew to check my house for leaks and told me I had none and replaced the water meter. The following day they tell me that they discovered an underground leak and I instructed me that I needed to get a plumber to dig up my front yard to check my Water main. I did that and they didn’t find a leak.

I’m going to get my money back because I have it all in writing and take meticulous notes but it’s still money out of my pocket a week and a half before Christmas.

I know somebody on the inside, and they told me that they’re getting ready to jack up the rates for water another 8% soon.


ETA - Were fine, we have plenty of savings, all bills get paid and we’re not behind- but there just isn’t as much disposable income right now.

I can’t imagine how rough it must be for others. If this was happening 10 years ago things would be a lot different.

****ty story Steady, sorry to hear it.

We’re not in too different a position. I don’t have 2 kids in college (have an 8yr old) but I make what the vast majority would say is a great living yet disposable income feels like a mythical creature. The idea of spending money on a nice family vacation is laughable.
And the utilities thing is very real. I live in SoCal yet had a $350 gas bill last month, all because we had the audacity to heat our home to 68 in the morning (after turning it down to 65 at night). We also got a notice from Gas company that we should sign up for notifications of future rate increases. In other words they plan multiple increase coming. Unreal.


*and for clarity, like you, I’m not saying this as a “poor me” statement, it’s in the vain of I’m in awe of how people who aren’t as lucky as myself are doing it.

 

[massraider]

can also go to a cheaper restaurant

Is this possible? Less than 20 bucks a head?

This has nothing to do with the national economy, at any rate

 

[FairWarning]

I spend like crazy because my bills go up - namely groceries, utilities, and insurance. I’m at the point where two jobs is barely coving it.

Between my wife and I were probably in the top 10% but with two kids in college things are pretty tight. I’ve been trying to get a job at UPS for a night shift. I’m extremely overqualified but It’s been impossible so far.

I’m going though a nightmare with our water company with high water bills. Our last quarter bill was almost $800. They sent out the crew to check my house for leaks and told me I had none and replaced the water meter. The following day they tell me that they discovered an underground leak and I instructed me that I needed to get a plumber to dig up my front yard to check my Water main. I did that and they didn’t find a leak.

I’m going to get my money back because I have it all in writing and take meticulous notes but it’s still money out of my pocket a week and a half before Christmas.

I know somebody on the inside, and they told me that they’re getting ready to jack up the rates for water another 8% soon.


ETA - Were fine, we have plenty of savings, all bills get paid and we’re not behind- but there just isn’t as much disposable income right now.

I can’t imagine how rough it must be for others. If this was happening 10 years ago things would be a lot different.

****ty story Steady, sorry to hear it.

We’re not in too different a position. I don’t have 2 kids in college (have an 8yr old) but I make what the vast majority would say is a great living yet disposable income feels like a mythical creature. The idea of spending money on a nice family vacation is laughable.
And the utilities thing is very real. I live in SoCal yet had a $350 gas bill last month, all because we had the audacity to heat our home to 68 in the morning (after turning it down to 65 at night). We also got a notice from Gas company that we should sign up for notifications of future rate increases. In other words they plan multiple increase coming. Unreal.


*and for clarity, like you, I’m not saying this as a “poor me” statement, it’s in the vain of I’m in awe of how people who aren’t as lucky as myself are doing it.

they don’t notify their customers in advance of a rate increase?