Why do you assume they are not?
Because the data I did find had average wages going up a decent amount between 2020 and 2021.
It looks to me like, if you look 2021-2024, 10th percentile wages went up by 25%.
Yeah that makes more sense.
Anyway I think we’re mostly in agreement here. I can’t believe I just had a productive discussion on Lemmy.
On dbzero we have a governance community and instance users have the right to vote out mods/admins if they are unpopular
Most leftist thing I’ve ever seen.
Does that make sense?
It makes sense and I admittedly didn’t know a lot of this (I revised my thought process to reflect that new information, in case I sound like I’m moving the goalposts), but it’s kind of running parallel to the point I was trying to make. Let’s take this from the top:
but the idea that inflation would be way different if they were included makes perfect sense, but it isn’t true. The prices of things that are excluded have been rising at about the same rate (on a timescale as years go by) as the prices of things that are not excluded. Even for housing, which is a little surprising.
That makes sense, but not very relevant to my point. To a working class person, the big three items in their budget are food, energy and housing. Therefore to them, core inflation being X% implies that at some point they’ll look at the items in their budget and find that they inflated X%. It doesn’t, however, say anything about their present state, which is that everything is expensive as hell. The core issue here is that “at some point” isn’t “now”. The DNC missed that distinction in their campaigning strategy, and bragged about their (sort of real, to be fair) accomplishments rather than doing damage control.
That’s the percent inflation in meat over the time Biden was president. It’s 15% cumulative. Your low-income worker who made 30% more, nominally, is able to buy 15% more meat now then they were in 2020.
You’re using 2019-2023 wage growth with 2021-2025 inflation, so this comparison is meaningless. Now I actually can’t find 2021-2025 (or 2021-2024 for that matter) wage growth numbers, but they’re probably not 30%.
They still have 3% more, though, and they can buy more meat now though (22% nominal gain over 15% meat inflation).
Again time intervals don’t match.
I’m saying that there is a big disconnect, now that we’re talking numbers, between the numbers you are saying and the vibes that they should imply.
That disconnect is because core inflation, as it pertains to working class finances, is a promise rather than a statement of fact. That promise wasn’t fulfilled by election season, a fact which completely flew over the DNC’s heads. Fundamentally, that’s the source of the disconnect.
Remind me when Canada occupied New York again?
Its insane to be against science and intelligence and knowledge.
The “science” behind neoliberalism is supply-side economics, which I hope I don’t need to say doesn’t work.
You didn’t read the link, did you.
I did, but it seems you didn’t read what I wrote. To quote myself: Inflation as a statistic is rigged to make things look better than they actually are. The link’s thesis—the idea that “real” wages increased and therefore low-wage workers’ finances materially improved—relies on the false assumption that “real” wages are real, or equivalently that core inflation (which is the method used to calculate inflation in the united states) reflects price changes as experienced by the common person. This assumption is false, because among other things core inflation excludes food and energy, which is… uh… what? Now don’t get me wrong, there are things core inflation is good for, but measuring the lived experience of the working class is not one of them.
Here’s one example off the top of my head: The retail price of beef rose 33% from 2019 to 2023. More relevant to the election, Energy rose 30% between 2019 and 2024. Get the idea? This is what people actually feel in their day to day lives.
How much, in your world, did wages change for people in that 80%? Median or average, it’s up to you. I want to know what you think the numbers are. Not the vibes, the numbers.
Reverse engineering from the article’s numbers got me 22% for nominal wages, 3.3% for “real” wages. Sure as hell not keeping up with the price of meat.
You need to build a new paradigm,
No need for that; there’s already a perfectly fine paradigm that can be used. It’s the leftist-progressive economic policy exemplified by FDR’s New Deal.
So only 50% of Democrats think Israel is even “going too far.” Yeah, sounds about right.
I mean yes, and more than 35% are “not sure”. Less than 15% of democrats felt Israel what Israel was doing in Gaza was appropriate. Therefore, the answer to what you said was the question is “yes”.
Yeah here’s the thing: Inflation as a statistic is rigged to make things look better than they actually are. Now Biden did good things for low-wage workers don’t get me wrong, but the idea that things got better for them is outright wrong, as evidenced by how many of them voted for Trump—the "things are horrible and I’ll fix them—candidate. Things just got less bad for them than they did for everyone else, which is a good thing and something he can take credit for but it’s not the massive accomplishment that Biden and the DNC seem to think it is. It certainly doesn’t allow them to gloat about how good things are, because things simply weren’t good. To reiterate, things were simply less bad than they could’ve been, not good, for all segments of the population other than the ultra-rich. Almost nobody could afford more things in 2023 than in 2019.
And even if we accept the proposition that things did get better for the bottom 10%, there are a whole 80% of the population between the bottom 10% and the top 10%. For those people things undeniably got much worse.
One of the characteristics of populism is being anti-establishment, even against the established academic and technocratic paradigm.
Yeah that’s a good thing, because as you said in your other reply the established academic and technocratic paradigm is fucking stupid. You should want them to be against the established paradigm if you want anything to change.
The only case of misogyny that I can see is that Biden ran the same campaign.
Biden didn’t, though. Biden ran a centrist-ish campaign, to be clear, but he also coopted many of Bernie’s popular promises and generally ran on making things better for the average American. He promised a move left, while Harris promised a move right. They were not running the same campaign.
They have lost legitimacy in my book and will only support them as opposition to the fascists because there isn’t another option.
Here’s my perspective as a non-American watching this shitshow unfold: Y’all will need to create another option before it’s too late. The DNC isn’t an option; it’s losing by default.
Small correction: The DNC isn’t employing technocrats and experts; they’re employing neoliberals concerned first and foremost with extracting money from the poor and putting it in the hands of the rich. If they were concerned with improving people’s lives they’d have implemented progressive economic policy like everyone with two braincells to rub together has been telling them to.
“25% sympathize more with Israelis than Palestinians while 15% feel the opposite.”
True enough, but crucially Republicans are overrepresented in those 25%, and being Republicans they can be disregarded for the sake of Democrat electoral strategy.
For example, more Republicans than Democrats (46% vs. 10%), … sympathize more with the Israelis than the Palestinians
See also: https://apnorc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Pearson-AP-NORC-2024-Report-Final.pdf page 11.
The numbers are this bad in part because Republicans are morally bankrupt, which isn’t really news. Another poll with more focus on partisan politics from the same time period got this result:
That reflects a success of propaganda. Notice that the other strong option for why they might not have voted for Harris was “the economy,” even though Trump is an objective catastrophe for the economy and Biden pulled off a minor miracle for working people even having come in during still-pretty-apocalyptic conditions with double normal unemployment and a big chunk of people still dependent on Covid assistance.
Trump economy voters are nuts no questions asked, but it should be stressed that the only reason that propaganda was so effective is because the Biden/Harris campaign, and later Harris/Walz campaign, gave it room to be effective. Biden said he was going to keep doing what he was doing, which simply wasn’t enough. He also claimed that the economy was good when it really wasn’t and patted himself on the back for it, which was just… no. More people than ever were (and are) living paycheck to paycheck and the dunces in the DNC decided that campaigning on status quo politics was a good idea. GOP propaganda also had a big role, don’t get me wrong, but this was an it takes two to tango affair.
The relevant question isn’t “did some people decide that Harris was responsible for the war in Gaza and decide not to vote as a result.” Of course the answer to that is yes. The question is “did more people decide that, than the people who would have decided that she was supporting terrorism if she took a different position, and made her lose even harder?”
From the data above, I think the answer is a pretty clear no. For example, 67% of Democrats put reaching a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas as very important, while 25% put supporting Israel in the war as very important. And, perhaps more importantly, pro-Palestinian voters were much better positioned to tank Harris’s campaign in crucial swing states compared to pro-Israeli voters, who are more evenly distributed.
So first, you might want to take a look at this. Poll is linked in the article. Gaza was a lot more important than you seem to think.
But this whole fantasy-world where the election was hers for the taking if she’d only taken the side of the Palestinians is pure fantasy.
Yes, but it would’ve made it a lot easier. She’d have only had to be a halfway decent candidate, instead of an actually good candidate.
Uh… In my country I can go to jail for criticizing the government. Does that mean criticizing the government is bad?
Unfortunately, that’s probably true for the whole world order.
That’s fortunately for us here down in the global South. Let the oppressors (which Europe also is to be clear) fight each other and leave us alone. Sucks for Ukraine though.
There was literally already a recall election against this governor
With 61% voting no. I mean,
The recall petition focused on a variety of grievances, on issues such as sanctuary policies, homelessness, high taxes, and water rationing.
-Wikipedia. This was a conservative effort to remove Newsom because he was too “woke”, and the fact you used it as supporting evidence makes your whole argument questionable.
there’s also impeachment,
Needs the Democrat-dominated state legislature to cooperate, and saying one bad thing about trans women in sports once just isn’t enough of a Bad Thing for that.
and good old fashion pressure to resign from the public and leadership.
See above. Good luck getting the normies engaged.
So to reiterate my point: As long as he doesn’t do something disastrously corrupt or incompetent, there’s literally nothing you can do to remove him from office before his term ends.
No, but then what does it mean? You literally can’t remove him until his term ends.
I literally did not say that.
Y’all should bring it back to common use and rejoin the civilized world by overmorrow evening.
Welcome to Israel. They did this for most of the war.