Opinion Inflation Ate Your Free Lunch, But You’re Still Better Off - Yoi will eat shit, and you will like it


Believe it or not, we live in the best of times. It’s been a crazy few decades, with a pandemic, rising inequality, slowing growth and productivity, and major changes in the economy. But generally, most people experienced huge gains in living standards. We shudder to think what life was like in the 1980s or 90s, when air-conditioning was still a luxury, as were dishwashers; people had to defrost their freezers, we were tied to landlines, and homes had only one or two televisions — and they weren’t even flatscreens. The smartphone may not be the game changer that indoor plumbing was, but just stop and count all the ways it’s smoothed out the kinks in your daily struggle.

In the same way the first waves of industrialization made consumer goods (clothing, housewares) cheaper and more accessible, the tech boom made services that were once luxuries (car services, delivery, handymen, digital butlers) widely available and contributed to rising prosperity. It’s indisputable that our standards of living are remarkably higher than they used to be.

Here’s the bad news: We’ve basically been living a free lunch and now it’s about to end. And that means a drop in our living standards, at least for the next few years.

The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson recently wrote that we have been under-paying for many services we now take for granted. That $10 Uber ride never really made sense when you thought about the cost of fuel and labor. The same is true for food delivery and other app-services that became a way of life for many urban dwellers. Many of the tech firms that supplied these services lost money to keep prices down, gain customers and dominate their markets.

In the tech world, network effects are valuable, but it’s not clear what the long-term business model was for many app-based services. Perhaps they planned to increase prices once they drove off competition. Or maybe they believed that with enough volume, even negative profits would turn positive.
Such concerns were not top of mind in an era of very low interest rates.

Investors — often venture capital firms — flush with cheap capital and public-sector pension money (which we are all on the hook for), were hungry for risky long-shots. If a few of those long-shots paid off big, everyone would still make money. So they were willing to tolerate losses if their investments could demonstrate a growing market share. Except then the pandemic hit and labor wasn’t so cheap anymore. Then interest rates started to increase and tolerance for losing money evaporated. So now what was once a $10 car ride is $50.

Low rates didn’t just allow investors to sustain money-losing tech ventures. They also meant companies could bulk up on corporate debt, which subsidized even more cheap services. Before the pandemic, Netflix earned a junk bond rating because it took on so much debt to offer endless content. Now higher rates have increased the cost in borrowing and subscriptions have declined, so we’ll all have to watch ads (effectively a tax on our time) or pay more every month.

Inflation is the other shoe to drop. Alexis Leondis wrote a rage-inducing column last week on “drip-pricing.” This is when we are charged extra fees for things that used to be included in the price, from picking your airline seat to paying for credit card transactions. Now with higher inflation, firms are trying new, more opaque way to pass on their costs to customers. But even if inflation goes back down, many of these fees will probably remain. And if you’re suddenly paying “fuel surcharges” and “kitchen appreciation fees,” you probably won’t be indulging quite as often.

This means that, in addition to the inflation we’re already experiencing, we’re going to start paying for things that were previously subsidized by low rates and low price growth. Odds are, prices for these services will never be so cheap again. Rates and prices are going up and may stay higher for the foreseeable future. So unless you have unlimited money, things like car services will become a luxury again. This is an unambiguous fall in living standards: Instead of getting more, we’ll get less, and it will be painful.

Take heart. It may not last forever. I don’t know what will happen to interest rates or if future consumption might be subsidized. But I am optimistic that new, even-better technology and rising prosperity are in our long-term future.
It may feel like a small consolation now, but all this new technology did make us better off. Even without the subsidy of low interest rates, we still have more choices and cheaper services than we did 20 or 30 years ago. Perhaps people hate loss so much that it’s worse to lose a subsidized Uber than to have never Ubered at all. But I don’t think so.
 
But generally, most people experienced huge gains in living standards. We shudder to think what life was like in the 1980s or 90s, when air-conditioning was still a luxury, as were dishwashers; people had to defrost their freezers, we were tied to landlines, and homes had only one or two televisions — and they weren’t even flatscreens. The smartphone may not be the game changer that indoor plumbing was, but just stop and count all the ways it’s smoothed out the kinks in your daily struggle.
Well that sounds familiar...

Why is it that AC and smartphones used to be unthinkable luxuries when demanding I accept this fuck up, but they're deflections when it comes to wages "not increasing" in decades?

Am I allowed to make this argument now, or would that still make me an ultra bigot that hates poors?

Perhaps people hate loss so much that it’s worse to lose a subsidized Uber than to have never Ubered at all. But I don’t think so.
Well that says a lot about their target audience. I have never Ubered at all.

Geez what the fuck, at least with the stagnated wages aren't that bad because buying power argument, you're still expected to have access to things. You're supposed to be able to access AC even if you have to go to the public library to do it (where they'll also conveniently have Other resources as well). Hell depending on where you live and if it's necessary to survive, there are likely programs to give those things to qualified poors for free. The "evil" version of the argument says you can buy things now while the "good" version says you should never have bought that shit in the first place.

Again I don't even use Uber. I'm MATI, but I'm not MATI because I am losing Uber. I'm MATI at the hypocrisy and of how only certain people are allowed to say things, and then of course the "good" version that is allowed to be spoken is more psychotic than the version that proves I'm a wrongthinker.
 
Last edited:
Here’s the bad news: We’ve basically been living a free lunch and now it’s about to end. And that means a drop in our living standards, at least for the next few years.
>free lunch
>FREE LUNCH
>FREE FUCKING LUNCH
Getting paid for my fucking work is not a free fucking lunch you subhuman parasite. Being able to afford gas and food and a house is not a free fucking lunch, you venomous snake. Jesus fucking Christ these same people just a year ago could not stop telling us how unlivable the minimum wage, how horrible poor people have it in this country. Now they were getting a FREE FUCKING LUNCH.

Fuck this asshole, they make me want to post things that'd get me SigSegV'ed.
 
>free lunch
>FREE LUNCH
>FREE FUCKING LUNCH
Getting paid for my fucking work is not a free fucking lunch you subhuman parasite. Being able to afford gas and food and a house is not a free fucking lunch, you venomous snake. Jesus fucking Christ these same people just a year ago could not stop telling us how unlivable the minimum wage, how horrible poor people have it in this country. Now they were getting a FREE FUCKING LUNCH.

Fuck this asshole, they make me want to post things that'd get me SigSegV'ed.

The free lunch the article is talking about is the wealth streaming into cities via investors high on low interest rates, which allowed people who produce little or nothing of any real economic value to enjoy a high standard of living. She didn't even mention the imperial wealth pump, which is also breaking down. The bill for the past 20 years of easy money and exporting dollars is coming due, and everyone is going to pay for it.
 
I'm curious to see if anyone could show evidence of newspaper articles during the Great Depression, blog posts from 2008, or otherwise that indicates inflation is actually a good thing and we should be thanking the economy for tanking. I nearly see one every other day in current times.

Losers, cucks, and liars are the only ones happy to pay more rather than less for something.
 
The free lunch the article is talking about is the wealth streaming into cities via investors high on low interest rates, which allowed people who produce little or nothing of any real economic value to enjoy a high standard of living. She didn't even mention the imperial wealth pump, which is also breaking down. The bill for the past 20 years of easy money and exporting dollars is coming due, and everyone is going to pay for it.
The problem is the use of the term "we". I never saw the benefit of any of that shit. I've struggled most my life to make it to a small fraction of the QOL my parents had. The QOL has been dropping constantly since before I was born, I didn't get a free lunch, I'm just paying for someone else's.
 
It’s indisputable that our standards of living are remarkably higher than they used to be.
I dispute your assertion but I do not define my quality of life by how many devices I have around me or how many services I can employ to allow me to sit on my ass and write articles about how the economy exploding is really a good thing.

By the way: I was living in NYC during the last recession and while it was noticed it was not a major factor in my life or the lives of many people around me. There is a certain insulation cities can provide against the realities of economic downturns. Insulation this journoscum clearly enjoyed.
 
Screenshots_2022-06-23-13-24-33.png

Iiiiiiit's time for Goymerica's favorite game,

GUESS!

THAT!

SURNAME!


Screenshots_2022-06-23-13-24-06.png
Every fucking time
 
Everyone except wall street and the banks. Government will hand them another blank check while everyone else deals with the fallout.

Whoa, you got a problem with the free market, buddy?

The problem is the use of the term "we". I never saw the benefit of any of that shit. I've struggled most my life to make it to a small fraction of the QOL my parents had. The QOL has been dropping constantly since before I was born, I didn't get a free lunch, I'm just paying for someone else's.

Most of the goods that you use (including and especially your computer) are imported at a financial deficit thanks to the magic of Uncle Sam's money-press. We've rebuilt the American economy around printing money and clicking on ads, and expect everyone else on the planet to provide us computers, phones, medical equipment, etc in exchange. Party's over.

Trump tried to reorient the American economy to actually providing net value to the world instead of being based around investor scams, but that was pretty racist, so they had to fortify our elections to make sure that doesn't happen.
 
The free lunch the article is talking about is the wealth streaming into cities via investors high on low interest rates, which allowed people who produce little or nothing of any real economic value to enjoy a high standard of living. She didn't even mention the imperial wealth pump, which is also breaking down. The bill for the past 20 years of easy money and exporting dollars is coming due, and everyone is going to pay for it.
lol look at this faggot actually reading the article instead of instantly raging and sperging after reading only the headline
 
Not really a free market if the government has to prop up the corpses of business that should have failed and been replaced by something better.
Oh, haha, you're confusing the textbook definition of the free market with the Republican definition, which is ,"whatever's good for the Fortune 100."
 
In the same way the first waves of industrialization made consumer goods (clothing, housewares) cheaper and more accessible, the tech boom made services that were once luxuries (car services, delivery, handymen, digital butlers) widely available and contributed to rising prosperity. It’s indisputable that our standards of living are remarkably higher than they used to be.
Handymen weren't made widely available because of the tech boom. Whirlpool, GE, and other associated manufacturers used to dispatch repairmen; the way Xerox and other printer vendors do. Handyman were also a purvew of being a mechanically inclined person in town; back when a guy could own a garage, put his name on it, and do maintenance/repairs for people. What fucking lala land do these idiots live in to think shit didn't exist before the tech boom?
 
Back