“There’s this wild disconnect between what people are experiencing and what economists are experiencing,” says Nikki Cimino, a recruiter in Denver.

    • DrMorose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      8 months ago

      I would LOVE to see a source on this, but I have a feeling I already know where it is coming from.

        • mypasswordistaco@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I think the wording in your original comment is pretty misguided. Nowhere does it say the poor are “doing better than” the wealthy. They just had the strongest short-term wage growth since covid. This does not equate to prosperity. Perhaps it is you that has the restrictive social circle.

          • Tja
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            8 months ago

            The wording was obvious. If someone though OP meant “the bottom 10% can afford more yachts than the wealthy” that’s a logic problem.

            • mypasswordistaco@iusearchlinux.fyi
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I disagree. The connotation and literal meaning of the phrase “doing better than”, combined with the comment on social circles indicates that they’re trying to suggest the poor are somehow doing well, whatever that means.

              That’s how I read it, anyway. And I think that’s why they’re getting down voted as well.

              • Tja
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                8 months ago

                Doing well… proportionately. The talk was about growth/lack thereof.

                • Coach@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Proportionally, having a penny is infinitely more than having nothing, but I still can’t buy shit with a penny.

                  Take your “proportionately” logic and shove it. Shit is bad. And it’s bad because capitalism has consolidated wealth at the top. Capitalism has run its course and has failed. It’s time to move on.

                  • Tja
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    9
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    I can shove it all you want, but statistics show otherwise.

                    And blaming you own failures on capitalism won’t solve shit. Plenty of people are successful under capitalism, no matter what a dozen geniuses on a fringe site cry about.

                    Communism has been tried and failed, either through revolution (eastern Europe), evolution to market economies (China, Vietnam) or famine and slavery (North Korea).

                  • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    11
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    Take your logic and shove it

                    Ah, Leftists. The screaming children of the modern age.

                    Also - Horseshoe Theory in action. Guess who else hates logic but loves being angry?

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                8 months ago

                they’re trying to suggest the poor are somehow doing well, whatever that means.

                Which is nonsensical, which should suggest you’re misinterpreting.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            8 months ago

            The wording is obvious to anyone with a brain. So given that this is lemmy, you’re absolutely right and I’ll dumb it down. My apologies.

            • mypasswordistaco@iusearchlinux.fyi
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              8 months ago

              I think it’s unfortunate that you’re being so hostile. It was an interesting point and very good sources that you brought to the discussion. But you’ve decided to play the "you’re all ‘autists’ " card.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                13
                ·
                8 months ago

                It was an interesting point and very good sources that you brought to the discussion.

                The fact that this doesn’t matter is why I’m being hostile. Bunch of idiots in here. If you’re interested in discussing it I’m absolutely open to that. It’s the ones who fail basic reading comprehension that have my scorn.

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Yes, bottom 10% are doing better and the top 10%. That means the middle is getting hollowed out and the whole thing turns into a very divided society. That’s not a good thing.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s not a good thing, but it’s better than the blatant “rich get richer, everyone else gets fucked” economy we’ve had for the past few decades.

        And doesn’t it make sense that we improve the situation of the poorest first?

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          blatant “rich get richer, everyone else gets fucked”

          and now you have a rich get richer, almost everyone else gets fucked economy. Yay, progress.

          Looking at history, it feels more like an attempt to make sure the poorest don’t fall into the “nothing left to lose” category that can cause so much trouble.

          • biddy@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Looking at history, it feels more like an attempt to make sure the poorest don’t fall into the “nothing left to lose” category that can cause so much trouble.

            That’s because it is. That’s the point of welfare, give the poorest something to lose and they won’t revolt. Even if it’s the most meager, unfair, dehumanizing scraps.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            Oh no, what a…terrible…thing…?

            and now you have a rich get richer, almost everyone else gets fucked economy. Yay, progress.

            Yes. Things were more bad, and now they are less bad. Vote in more Democrats, and things will continue to get less bad. Eventually, things will be good. That’s how progress works.