←back to thread

1796 points koolba | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.593s | source
Show context
drawkward ◴[] No.42063854[source]
It's the economy, stupid:

-Inflation is not prices; it is the rate of change in prices. Low inflation doesn't imply low prices. -Aggregate statistics don't necessarily explain individual outcomes.

The Dems failed on this count massively, and have, for maybe the last 40 years, which is about the amount of time it took for my state to go from national bellwether (As goes Ohio, so goes the nation) to a reliably red state. This cost one of the most pro-union Senators (Sherrod Brown) his job.

replies(37): >>42063943 #>>42064224 #>>42064690 #>>42066206 #>>42066419 #>>42066536 #>>42066822 #>>42066913 #>>42067069 #>>42067564 #>>42067838 #>>42067963 #>>42068126 #>>42068182 #>>42068271 #>>42068402 #>>42068430 #>>42068606 #>>42068733 #>>42069182 #>>42069400 #>>42069554 #>>42069652 #>>42070319 #>>42070599 #>>42070710 #>>42070781 #>>42070796 #>>42071522 #>>42071614 #>>42072387 #>>42072420 #>>42073867 #>>42075648 #>>42079964 #>>42080368 #>>42088729 #
UncleOxidant ◴[] No.42066822[source]
> The Dems failed on this count massively

What was their failure here? The failure to explain to the economically illiterate that while inflation is now about where it was prior to covid that prices won't be going down (unless there's some sort of major recession leading to deflation)?

replies(19): >>42066848 #>>42066861 #>>42066959 #>>42066984 #>>42067112 #>>42067177 #>>42067270 #>>42067493 #>>42067618 #>>42067754 #>>42067895 #>>42068013 #>>42068042 #>>42068079 #>>42068425 #>>42069294 #>>42069341 #>>42069886 #>>42087968 #
ComplexSystems ◴[] No.42067493[source]
The failure is in this very common exchange

Average voter: I can't afford groceries at the store. Inflation sucks.

Response: Actually, here is the correct definition of "inflation." As you can see from the correct definition, inflation rates are now good! Hopefully this helps you understand why things will never get better.

What the average voter hears: I can't afford groceries. Your solution to this problem is to reframe the current situation as "good." I still can't afford groceries.

replies(13): >>42067645 #>>42067677 #>>42067909 #>>42068209 #>>42068893 #>>42069020 #>>42069063 #>>42069188 #>>42069480 #>>42069833 #>>42069964 #>>42070434 #>>42072291 #
crazygringo ◴[] No.42067909[source]
Where are you getting that "response" from? Here's a more accurate exchange:

Average voter: I can't afford groceries at the store. Inflation sucks.

Response: I know, inflation was caused by COVID and Biden got it back down. We had the best soft landing you could have asked for, Biden did a great job. But the original inflation wasn't under the president's control, it was a worldwide phenomenon, and you can't run it in reverse to go back to old prices.

What the average voter hears: I don't care about any of that. Prices were lower under Trump and he's a businessman, so I'll vote for him so prices go back down.

replies(10): >>42068010 #>>42068034 #>>42068260 #>>42068343 #>>42068382 #>>42068412 #>>42068475 #>>42068929 #>>42069507 #>>42070944 #
ComplexSystems ◴[] No.42068343[source]
Your rewritten "response" has the same problems I am pointing out. To the average voter, it says

1. Biden is good and inflation wasn't his fault

2. Biden's handling of it was good, he did all good things, Biden is good

3. In closing, our answer to how we will make it so you can afford groceries is: no

replies(2): >>42070323 #>>42071090 #
hackyhacky ◴[] No.42071090[source]
I'm not sure there's a better approach for an incumbent administration. The alternative would have been, "Inflation is bad, but we're going to fix it if you elect us," which to the average voter raises the question: "Why not just fix it now?"
replies(1): >>42077335 #
1. DecoySalamander ◴[] No.42077335[source]
One option would be to reply with "out plans are measured in centuries, keep electing us and things will get better, eventually". But this would probably require to have such plans.
replies(1): >>42079371 #
2. hackyhacky ◴[] No.42079371[source]
> But this would probably require to have such plans.

No, just the concept of a plan.