patrick.net

joeyjojojunior says

hands of a few people?

5 points here

1. No home ownership factor back in 1920's like it is now, which is the highest net asset most Americans outside the top 1% have
2. Social security, Medicare and unemployed benefits wasn't even around like it was then
3. Pension plans wasn't even around then
4. Real wages are at all time highs as more Americans are working with dual household incomes not single household incomes
5. The people with the highest nominal debt loans
- most educated
- highest income earners
- have the highest net worth of assets on top of the debt

This isn't 1929... and adjusting to demographics, we have a stronger patch coming in now in a few years.

Unlike 2007 when prime age labor force peaked from a high debt leverage bubble with non capacity owning debt

Fixed low debt cost against rising wages, it's the golden egg on debt service economics

joeyjojojunior says

You seem to be saying that the economy now if fundamentally different than in 1929 and therefore increasing inequality won't lead to a recession/depression. I asked what you think is different that will allow the US economy to perform well with such a large chunk of the assets and buying power in the hands of a few people?

You have it all wrong Joey, wealth inequality is not the problem. e.g.
Lets say in year 1 you have $10,000 and your neighbor has $100,000
Year 2, you have $11,000 and your neighbor has $1000,000.
Are you better off, or worse off?

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

Housing never goes down.

When supply goes over 6 months home prices will go down.

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

The 1988 and 2007 meltdowns were caused by America-hating marxists who disagree with objective,

Both cycles had clear over investment thesis ... this cycle we don't have any yet... commercial real estate would be the area to look at

Wow--thank you. A rational response. Here's my response to you.

1. home ownership is included in wealth inequality numbers so you're trying to count it twice.
2. The safety net is definitely important and would keep the US economy from bottoming as far as it did in the Great Depression. Although Republicans are itching to hack away at it, so who knows what it will look like in a few years.
3. Pension plans are underfunded, in general. But they will help some retirees
4. Real wages are only slightly higher than they were 30 years ago despite MASSIVE increases in productivity. This is the core problem with our current economy.
5. Of course the highest nominal debt holders are the people with the highest earning capability. Otherwise nobody would loan them that much money. Not sure what your point is there. Debt is very high because the 1% loans the money they steal from the 99% back to them so that they can afford to buy stuff. If/when they don't--the economy will grind to a halt.

I know you are a huge believer in demographics--the problem is that the underlying assumption in your theory is that people in your target demographic have $$ to spend. If they don't have $$, they don't have demand regardless of what previous generations did.

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

CRA

Didn't create the housing bubble ... everyone took part in it

I would you can't have a massive bubble without a prime age labor force factor in it

joeyjojojunior says

you're trying to count it twice.

More people own homes, different than 1929

joeyjojojunior says

Although Republicans are itching to hack away at

They won't .. not in a meaningful manner

"You have it all wrong Joey, wealth inequality is not the problem. e.g.
Lets say in year 1 you have $10,000 and your neighbor has $100,000
Year 2, you have $11,000 and your neighbor has $1000,000.
Are you better off, or worse off?"

Depends on what inflation was for that year. Most likely you are much worse off.

The pie grows at 2%/year. If your neighbor grows at 1000%, then everyone else loses.

joeyjojojunior says

. Pension plans are underfunded, in general. But they will help some retirees

We have near 30 trillion dollars on pension plans.. some cities are underfunded for sure but they will still be able to draw out $$$

Plus it's not big enough to bring a 1929 crash

"More people own homes, different than 1929"

And that value is included in wealth inequality charts. Don't try to count it twice.

joeyjojojunior says

ncreases in productivity.

Productivity gains mostly came in manufacturing sector hence why it doesn't impact total wages rising...

I have documented all of the working force and pay grades...

https://loganmohtashami.com/2016/12/09/manufacturing-under-president-donald-trump/

joeyjojojunior says

Don't try to count it twice.

Trust me.. nobody living in 1929.. is living now with their homes

joeyjojojunior says

Debt is very high because the 1% loan

Most of the high debt are mortgages, mortgage owners now are the best we will ever see in our life time

joeyjojojunior says

have $$ to spend

First time buyers are 50% of all home purchases now.. M's are entering their 30's and buying homes

1929 crash is running into a higher supply of people that need shelter, food, energy and stuff....in the next few years...

Now as a demographic guy I don't believe older countries can grow fast for many reasons but then again I was a 2% GDP guy in this cycle

Does the smallest investor have exactly the same opportunity to profit as all other investors?
Yeah! Right!

I be loving me some data.

"According to the 2014 census, 14.5% of Americans, or over 45 million people, live in poverty, up from 11.3% in 2000; a rate not seen since the early '90s."
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/45-million-americans-live-poverty-you-wouldnt-know-it-watching-2016-coverage

"Almost 5 percent of Americans struggle living just one step above poverty, according to a new report by the Census Bureau."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/five-percent-of-americans-hover-just-above-poverty/2014/05/01/1d8fe754-d16a-11e3-a6b1-45c4dffb85a6_story.html?utm_term=.64bbec4f67d1

Let me cypher.
14.5% + 5%=19.5%

I am looking for the data that tells me how many of these will purchase
pitchforks & Guillitones preparing for revenge on RIGGED CAPITALISM,The Market,TBTF
& the rich. I'm sure the data will show they will act when they finally get pissed off & are tired of being
fucked by the 10%.
A great number probably own firearms.

Strategist says

Are you better off, or worse off?

What's important is how the "worse off" feel about being "worse off"
especially when there are many of them.

I've just had a glimpse of a Black Swan.

Repeal ACA. 20 million will be very happy.
Republicans messing with SS & Medicare,the poor will be ecstatic.
Of course there aren't any Con/Reps in the numbers of poor/near poor.
Trump better be making some jobs.

HEY YOU says

I be loving me some data.

Logan Mohtashami says

Millennials will be out of their highschool room at 31, rent, marry at 39, rent, they buy their first home at 51.
Here goes your demographic case.

I am trying to tell you guys, 1929 and 2017 are different beast ....

Logan Mohtashami says

Trust me.. nobody living in 1929.. is living now with their homes

Do you really not understand the point? I posted a chart of wealth inequality--homes are included in that chart. Saying more people own homes doesn't help because it's reflected in the data already posted.

Logan Mohtashami says

1929 crash is running into a higher supply of people that need shelter, food, energy and stuff....in the next few years...

Need and can afford are two different things. That's the point.

joeyjojojunior says

I posted a chart of wealth inequality--homes are included in that chart

What I am trying to explain is that more middle class Americans own homes and have that wealth than 1929, the distribution isn't the same. This is why a deflationary collapse in America is very unlikely

Logan Mohtashami says

I am trying to tell you guys, 1929 and 2017 are different beast ....

Then show all of those charts in 1928. Otherwise, how are you showing that it's different?

To show a difference, you have to compare them. All you are doing is showing graphs of today.

joeyjojojunior says

Need and can afford are two different things. That's the point.

Retail sales cycle highs
Home sales cycle highs , mortgage buyers cycle highs
Wages all time highs
165 Million working Americans
Highest Job openings print ever

These are not what you see in near deflationary collapses coming from a soft demographic patch as we are from 2008-2019

joeyjojojunior says

All you are doing is showing graphs of today.

We have more working people now than the total population back in 1929

Listen I am not a total Conservative tool here, I am open to more government spending for the lower end... just not worried about our middle class

I wouldn't come on this show if I was

Logan Mohtashami says

What I am trying to explain is that more middle class Americans own homes and have that wealth than 1929, the distribution isn't the same. This is why a deflationary collapse in America is very unlikely

And what I'm saying is that that is reflected in the chart I already posted.

Logan Mohtashami says

These are not what you see in near deflationary collapses coming from a soft demographic patch as we are from 2008-2019

Really? Retail sales always peak before a recession. Again--what were they in 1928?

joeyjojojunior says

Again--what were they in 1928?

This isn't a deflationary collapse working population data line

1929 collapse would need humans to not spend on food and energy in the same trend post 1939

Logan Mohtashami says

We have more working people now than the total population back in 1929

So what? We have more non-working people too.

Logan Mohtashami says

1929 collapse would need humans to not spend on food and energy in the same trend post 1939

Because they have no money?

joeyjojojunior says

We have more non-working people too.

Missing only 2.5 million prime age workers from the peak of the last cycle

Note what you're saying is roughly 43.7 million will refuse to buy food and gasoline which will send GDP to negative 10% and unemployment rates to 30

joeyjojojunior says

Because they have no money?

This theory that Americans are too poor to buy food and gasoline the middle class doesn't have any data to support it

Logan Mohtashami says

Note what you're saying is roughly 43.7 million will refuse to buy food and gasoline which will send GDP to negative 10% and unemployment rates to 30

Nope--that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying at some point people won't be able to borrow money any longer and therefore won't be able to spend at the same rate as they are spending now. They won't refuse to buy food and gas-they just won't be able to afford it.

Logan Mohtashami says

This theory that Americans are too poor to buy food and gasoline the middle class doesn't have any data to support it

Of course it does--I already posted it. The data is inequality. The pie grows at 2%/year roughly. If more and more goes to the top 0.01%, then it means that the other 99.9% are getting less and less. This can't continue forever.

joeyjojojunior says

They won't refuse to buy food and gas-they just won't be able to afford it.

I have heard of this theory that debt servicing for food and gasoline will go away

I just to buy it due to the distribution of income to consumption for both and not to mention we have SNAP today too