What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Thank Goodness, NYTimes Has The Explanation For Inflation (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
Thankfully, the New York Times has the explanation.

The opening from their email newsletter, The Morning" today on rising inflation: (bolded mine)

Consumer prices rose 6.2 percent over the past year, the fastest inflation pace since 1990 — a reflection of American households being flush with cash.
Click to expand...


Thank goodness. The reason things cost so much more now is because your household is "flush with cash". 

Those people struggling just need to stop whining I guess.

 
I think "The Morning" needs a new writer. I read the article and "flush with cash" was not in it. It mostly discussed supply chain issues as a reason for this inflation.

I did a word search and "cash" is not in the article.

Although "too many dollars chasing too few goods" is a well known economic theory and is probably the case.

 
MSM is carrying the flag for the leftist agenda, they have to sell this kind of false hope to the people.

The truth is that every economic factor available suggests the specter of inflation has been muted and simmering and will now manifest.  

 
Joe Bryant said:
I realize it's just for their email newsletter. But that kind of tone deaf sloppy writing for a company is disappointing to see. 
Click to expand...
I might be cynical but I take it further than that.   I feel it's not sloppy, I view it as more a deliberate attempt to deflect blame off the current POTUS and/or try to make this a positive for his administration.   To me that seems more what they are after.

 
Sparky Big Time said:
MSM is carrying the flag for the leftist agenda, they have to sell this kind of false hope to the people.
Click to expand...
Yep, they are carrying the flag. I heard they have meetings in a secret bunker buried deep in a hollowed out mountain. 

They move a lever, and part of the mountain opens up, where you will find a helipad and a manmade lake with sharks with ####### laser beams strapped to their heads. 

 
massraider said:
Yep, they are carrying the flag. I heard they have meetings in a secret bunker buried deep in a hollowed out mountain. 

They move a lever, and part of the mountain opens up, where you will find a helipad and a manmade lake with sharks with ####### laser beams strapped to their heads. 
Click to expand...


Reductio ad absurdum, ineffective.....

 
sfflchamp said:
Although "too many dollars chasing too few goods" is a well known economic theory and is probably the case.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

We've dumped a mountain of cash into the economy via direct payments in the last 18 months and now there are supply issues in several areas of the economy as well.

++ cash chasing fewer goods = inflation.

How is this controversial unless you're just trying to grind your axe?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
supermike80 said:
I might be cynical but I take it further than that.   I feel it's not sloppy, I view it as more a deliberate attempt to deflect blame off the current POTUS and/or try to make this a positive for his administration.   To me that seems more what they are after.
Click to expand...


Could be. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. But reading it again, I'm surprised at the tone deafness. The writer on this isn't some intern. That's often the case on these things. I'll read something and then see the writer is not an experienced writer. 

He's a long time extremely successful journalist.

David Leonhardt writes The Morning newsletter every weekday and also contributes to the Sunday Review section.

He has worked at The Times since 1999, in a variety of reporting and editing roles. In 2011, he won the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary for his columns.

He joined The Times as a business reporter, later becoming a business columnist and a staff writer for The Times Magazine. He has also served as Washington bureau chief and founding editor of The Upshot section, which emphasizes data visualization and an analytical approach to news.

In 2016, he led a committee of Times journalists that recommended changes to The Times’s newsroom, to respond to the rise of digital media. 

Over his Times career, he has also helped found a new sports column, Keeping Score, and an economics blog, Economix. In 2013, he wrote "Here's the Deal: How Washington Can Solve the Deficit and Spur Growth," a short best-selling e-book. In 2009, he won the Gerald Loeb Award for magazine writing for the Times Magazine article “Obamanomics.”

Born in New York in 1973, Mr. Leonhardt studied applied mathematics at Yale. He is a lifelong Times reader and a third-generation native of New York.
Click to expand...


Which makes him writing this as the summary/intro for the issue even more disappointing: "Consumer prices rose 6.2 percent over the past year, the fastest inflation pace since 1990 — a reflection of American households being flush with cash."

That's honestly kind of gross.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
Could be. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. But reading it again, I'm surprised at the tone deafness. The writer on this isn't some intern. That's often the case on these things. I'll read something and then see the writer is not an experienced writer. 

He's a long time extremely successful journalist.

Which makes him writing this as the summary/intro for the issue even more disappointing: "Consumer prices rose 6.2 percent over the past year, the fastest inflation pace since 1990 — a reflection of American households being flush with cash."
Click to expand...
Why is it tone deaf?

It's wrong. Almost laughably so. Why is it tone deaf?

 
massraider said:
Yep, they are carrying the flag. I heard they have meetings in a secret bunker buried deep in a hollowed out mountain. 

They move a lever, and part of the mountain opens up, where you will find a helipad and a manmade lake with sharks with ####### laser beams strapped to their heads. 
Click to expand...
When was the last time the NYT or WaPo endorsed a Republican presidential candidate? I’ll save you the time. WaPo - Never. NYT - Eisenhower. Both of them endorsed Mondale over Reagan. Now let’s do the LA Times, Boston Globe and Chicago Tribune.  

 
PSA to do your Christmas shopping now.  I get the feeling the secondary toy/electronic market is going to be crazy this year.  You can see it in Amazon pricing the popular items this year are already sold out and being hocked from secondary venders at 300% markups.  

But then again if everyone is flush with cash, these markups wont matter. 

I'd say for reference, my household expenditures are up at least $200 a month from gas, groceries and utilities. That's probably a low end estimate. 

 
Philo Beddoe said:
When was the last time the NYT or WaPo endorsed a Republican presidential candidate? I’ll save you the time. WaPo - Never. NYT - Eisenhower. Both of them endorsed Mondale over Reagan. Now let’s do the LA Times, Boston Globe and Chicago Tribune.  
Click to expand...
Is it annoying to switch between accounts?

 
Tone Deaf:

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/tone-deaf

adjective

1. unable to distinguish differences in pitch in musical sounds when producing or hearing them.

2. unable to perceive public sentiment, attitudes, or preferences:The council’s politically tone-deaf plan would cost lower income residents $100 a year.

3. lacking emotional insight; insensitive or unsympathetic to others:She is often tone-deaf to her daughter’s needs.
Click to expand...

 
supermike80 said:
I might be cynical but I take it further than that.   I feel it's not sloppy, I view it as more a deliberate attempt to deflect blame off the current POTUS and/or try to make this a positive for his administration.   To me that seems more what they are after.
Click to expand...


In a certain sense it is defensible.   There is some element of pent up demand due to supply chain factors, and if they get the chain moving they will lay claim to the "victory" of improvement, not that the average citizen will feel it or see it.

But this administration heralded a 4th of July cost being .19 cheaper and it managed to sell, I assure you they will pretend they did something eventually...

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thankfully, the New York Times has the explanation.

The opening from their email newsletter, The Morning" today on rising inflation: (bolded mine)

Thank goodness. The reason things cost so much more now is because your household is "flush with cash". 

Those people struggling just need to stop whining I guess.
Click to expand...
I for one have to take a broom and sweep the cash out the door we are so flush with it. I don't know what to do with it all except obviously pay inflated prices for goods and services that used to cost less. At least we have Brandon looking out for us with this problem. 

 
Dinsy Ejotuz said:
Exactly.

We've dumped a mountain of cash into the economy via direct payments in the last 18 months and now there are supply issues in several areas of the economy as well.

++ cash chasing fewer goods = inflation.

How is this controversial unless you're just trying to grind your axe?
Click to expand...
Very good post.  The only thing I would change is that I would be more explicit about what you implied -- namely that the spending we're talking about was absolutely a bipartisan affair.  The inflation that we're experiencing now is as much on Trump as it is on Biden.  (The supply chain stuff is clearly a factor too, and that's nobody's fault in particular).

And that's not necessarily terrible either.  It would be perfectly reasonable to say that we erred on the side of over-stimulating the economy during the pandemic, and that was a logical thing to do at the time even if we know now that we went a little overboard.  It's frustrating that the legacy media has to turn this into a tribal issue by carrying water for the guy who happens to be in office when the bill arrives.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
Could be. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. But reading it again, I'm surprised at the tone deafness. The writer on this isn't some intern. That's often the case on these things. I'll read something and then see the writer is not an experienced writer. 

He's a long time extremely successful journalist.

Which makes him writing this as the summary/intro for the issue even more disappointing: "Consumer prices rose 6.2 percent over the past year, the fastest inflation pace since 1990 — a reflection of American households being flush with cash."

That's honestly kind of gross.
Click to expand...
Households in aggregate have more cash and less debt than they've had in a very long time.  Like decades.  And I believe that's especially true for poor and lower-middle class people due to the cash payments during COVID. 

So maybe "flush with cash" should have included some sort of "compared to..." qualifier, but it's pretty much true.  More disposable income than in a long long time.

 
Max Power said:
PSA to do your Christmas shopping now.  I get the feeling the secondary toy/electronic market is going to be crazy this year.  You can see it in Amazon pricing the popular items this year are already sold out and being hocked from secondary venders at 300% markups.  

But then again if everyone is flush with cash, these markups wont matter. 

I'd say for reference, my household expenditures are up at least $200 a month from gas, groceries and utilities. That's probably a low end estimate. 
Click to expand...
Same here. We started Christmas shopping about 2-3 weeks ago. Trying to do a little bit every paycheck to not get screwed come December. Our expenses are way up too. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Because a ton of American Households are the opposite of "flush with cash". 
Click to expand...
~75% of American families live paycheck to paycheck.  Inflation hits the lower end of the payscale much harder. It's definetly a bad situation and sad the NYT would minimalize it. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Because a ton of American Households are the opposite of "flush with cash". 
Click to expand...
I get your issue with the phrasing, but as others have asked - are they wrong?     

In other threads we seem to be talking about people not going back to work or the employees have a bit more power now because of the payments during the pandemic.   So if that's true, isn't it logical to say that on average the households had an influx of money?    I get it - the poor are left behind constantly and that's not good.  As we talked in the other thread, I have no doubt people are currently struggling because of the rising prices.      But I do think their core idea isn't too far off as many still worked, still got the extra payments, and until this year weren't able to get out as much and spend it.   

 
KarmaPolice said:
I get your issue with the phrasing, but as others have asked - are they wrong?     

In other threads we seem to be talking about people not going back to work or the employees have a bit more power now because of the payments during the pandemic.   So if that's true, isn't it logical to say that on average the households had an influx of money?    I get it - the poor are left behind constantly and that's not good.  As we talked in the other thread, I have no doubt people are currently struggling because of the rising prices.      But I do think their core idea isn't too far off as many still worked, still got the extra payments, and until this year weren't able to get out as much and spend it.   
Click to expand...
If those people are like me, that money went to pay debt and was gone as soon as it came. Debt went down a little but is starting to rise again as costs increase. Stretching from paycheck to paycheck is getting worse. 

 
I wasn't picking a fight with the tone deaf question. I was wondering. 

People are buying homes, spending money, unemployment is in a good place, the economy snapped back better than anyone thought. 

There are always Americans that are in a bad spot, and that is only getting worse. 

It didn't seem obviously tone deaf to me, that's why I asked what you meant. 

Before the inflation talk, you weren't reading a ton of discussion about how hard it was to make ends meet, it was, 'I'm killing it in crypto, and the stock market is up!!'

 
Insein said:
If those people are like me, that money went to pay debt and was gone as soon as it came. Debt went down a little but is starting to rise again as costs increase. Stretching from paycheck to paycheck is getting worse. 
Click to expand...
People were spending money on home improvement and Peletons. Amazon was swamped. 

And debt is rising because Americans are out spending money they don't have again. 

 
massraider said:
People were spending money on home improvement and Peletons. Amazon was swamped. 

And debt is rising because Americans are out spending money they don't have again. 
Click to expand...
Amazon was swamped because people either weren't allowed to leave their homes or were terrified to. Some still are. 

 
Real disposable income.  Notice that we're back on the pre-COVID trendline.  Everything above trend is a plus, and was shared across the board with virtually everyone in the country.  It wasn't concentrated in the wealthiest brackets.

And, even better, debt as a percentage of disposable income is at the lowest level in 40+ years.  Again, especially for lower and middle-class Americans for whom $x thousand in direct payments was very material.

So you've got more disposable income, lower debt payments, pent up demand from the pandemic, and now, on top of that, there are supply chain issues limiting goods available for purchase.  INFLATION.

I still think it will pass once supply chains are restored, debt rises and pent up demand is met -- but it's worth being careful for sure.

Again, this is all an average.  There are always millions of Americans suffering and barely making ends meet.  No one, including the NYTs guy, would suggest otherwise.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein said:
If those people are like me, that money went to pay debt and was gone as soon as it came. Debt went down a little but is starting to rise again as costs increase. Stretching from paycheck to paycheck is getting worse. 
Click to expand...
Of course there are people that did this.   Just like there are people that did what massraider is saying  and spent it on Peletons and big screens.   Despite what people did with it, I think the concept that the majority of households found themselves with more money than usual is probably correct, right? 

 
I believe most economists would agree with this being one of the primary causes of the inflation.  It would be irresponsible of the New York Times to NOT report it.  

 
massraider said:
Yep, they are carrying the flag. I heard they have meetings in a secret bunker buried deep in a hollowed out mountain. 

They move a lever, and part of the mountain opens up, where you will find a helipad and a manmade lake with sharks with ####### laser beams strapped to their heads. 
Click to expand...
Seems dumb

Theyve been just boldly doing it out in the open for years

 
Hard for me to reconcile that the folks so quick to defend the accuracy of the NYT blurb (which I agree is accurate, although incomplete, in aggregate) also seems to be the same people that would automatically push back on a statement that boasted about how much American families are flush with all the advantages and benefits of our leading per capita GDP...because of inequities.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thankfully, the New York Times has the explanation.

The opening from their email newsletter, The Morning" today on rising inflation: (bolded mine)

Thank goodness. The reason things cost so much more now is because your household is "flush with cash". 

Those people struggling just need to stop whining I guess.
Click to expand...
Whenever more money flows into the economy, it eventually ends up in one place.  Household cash increases about 30% from the end of 2019 through Q2 2020 in aggregate.  42% of the excess liquid savings went to the top 1%.  Households in the bottom 20% saved less.  

 
Perhaps the issue is the difference in audience/reference points how "flush with cash" is interpreted.

Much ado about nothing for those well off or in economic/financial circles. Hugely offensive to working folk.

From the perspective of overall economy, the system is certainly flush with cash (i.e. liquidity). This is obviously due to fiscal and monetary policies since March 2020. This is a fact backed up with real data (below) in the form of an increased personal savings rate that barely ran above 7% for a decade, but has recently shot up dramatically. 

For the average Joe, however, who is suffering from inflation left and right, maybe unemployed, and with lagging wage increases, all of their cash is being soaked up by everyday expenses. Not so flush. For those with disposable income, their cash is feeding the "everything" asset bubbles.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thankfully, the New York Times has the explanation.

The opening from their email newsletter, The Morning" today on rising inflation: (bolded mine)

Thank goodness. The reason things cost so much more now is because your household is "flush with cash". 

Those people struggling just need to stop whining I guess.
Click to expand...
Was this a tease for an article in the Times?

 
What this thread also brings to light is some unintended consequences of the fiscal/monetary actions of the Fed and gov't since 2008.

While they've done a good job keeping the overall system from crashing, they've simultaneously helped fuel even more massive wealth inequality.

Big conundrum.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thankfully, the New York Times has the explanation.

The opening from their email newsletter, The Morning" today on rising inflation: (bolded mine)

Thank goodness. The reason things cost so much more now is because your household is "flush with cash". 

Those people struggling just need to stop whining I guess.
Click to expand...
Curious.  Isn't there an inflation thread?  I think there's also an MSM thread.

 
The New York Times, like all the other media outlets, have a goal of generating revenue. Advertising, clicks, views, etc. This headline, like everything they do, is an attempt to maximize those things. Of course, shame on them for trying to solve the cause of inflation in one sensational, slanted headline. Another poster commented they didn't even mention the "flush with cash" in the article. The headlines are written afterward, and they're meant to drive traffic.

The inflation coverage itself is a self-perpetuating cycle. All news organizations are always looking to maximize eyeballs, they see what topics are trending and generate their own content on the topic. Right now it's inflation, we've got supply chain issues driving the cycle, a couple weeks ago it was CRT (funny how that died down). Go back in the past, it's always something. Realize on these things, we're the marks. 

 
Stoneworker said:
Perhaps the issue is the difference in audience/reference points how "flush with cash" is interpreted.

Much ado about nothing for those well off or in economic/financial circles. Hugely offensive to working folk.

From the perspective of overall economy, the system is certainly flush with cash (i.e. liquidity). This is obviously due to fiscal and monetary policies since March 2020. This is a fact backed up with real data (below) in the form of an increased personal savings rate that barely ran above 7% for a decade, but has recently shot up dramatically. 

For the average Joe, however, who is suffering from inflation left and right, maybe unemployed, and with lagging wage increases, all of their cash is being soaked up by everyday expenses. Not so flush. For those with disposable income, their cash is feeding the "everything" asset bubbles.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT
Click to expand...
Was going to post the same chart. Americans were flush with cash in April 2020 and March 2021. That cash is working its way through the system. That said, it isn't the sole reason for inflation. Believe it or not, inflation is kinda complicated. So is deflation. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thankfully, the New York Times has the explanation.

The opening from their email newsletter, The Morning" today on rising inflation: (bolded mine)

Thank goodness. The reason things cost so much more now is because your household is "flush with cash". 

Those people struggling just need to stop whining I guess.
Click to expand...


I hope our CFO doesn't see that.  I'd like to get a raise this year.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Washington Post: "Seven Ways A Recession Could Be Good For You Financially." (9/29/22 23:57 PST)
Replies
15
Views
1K
BassNBrew
BassNBrew

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top