this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
677 points (96.7% liked)

Today I Learned

21679 readers
1604 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I swear I had Econ in college, but I don't remember anyone saying this so succinctly. It's from a weird place too, but this quote hits home. It's like population decline, but for money.

It was a truly baffling thing for an American president to say. And University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers explained on MSNBC that things could get very bad as Trump’s scheme becomes reality. Wolfers ntoed that the idea of how much you can afford to buy with your income is called “real income.” And if real income falls, that’s called a recession. Wolfers went on to explain that if things decline as badly as Trump’s example, where someone who bought 30 dolls could only afford to buy two dolls, that’s called a depression.

Video from MSNBC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAZxLm6M_V0

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] makyo@lemmy.world 54 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I have had this dream for a while now that the major media networks displayed real income changes next to the Dow and other stock tickers. Just so normal people are reminded of how their money is doing compared to rich people's money.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 29 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

Do you have the formula for that? I might be up for doing that here on Lemmy locally once a month or so.

[–] ozoned@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

holy shit! Both of you! PLEASE DO THIS! That'd be AMAZING!

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm not much a math person or econ person. Do you have any ideas on what that would like like? The Econ professor in the video said the real income is aka GDP. He was loosely speaking though, so I don't know if that's a one to one. I guess I could put something up and people will tell me how it's wrong? I don't mind that.

[–] ozoned@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

lol that's the BEST way to get the RIGHT answer on the internet. Put something up, say it's X and someone will tell you you're wrong and it's Y. Easier than asking how to do X. :-D

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago

Whelp, here you go. It only does a quarterly GDP or "real income" analysis.

https://sh.itjust.works/post/37116488

[–] shikitohno@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I, too, am far from being either of those things, but it sounds like you could just track purchasing power to get a rough idea. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding it, but it seems to me that, if inflation or other factors have eaten into your purchasing power and you haven't gotten a corresponding raise to offset it, you can reasonably conclude that the economy is getting worse for you in your personal circumstances.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Although I think it's great to track that too, I don't think that includes wage earnings and such. Like for the Big Mac Index by the Economist listed. the price of a Big Mac doesn't say much about the income levels of who is buying it. It seems to be more focused on the cost of production instead of the person buying it. Minimum wage is still so low across the country and hasn't been raised for so long, that the price could be kept low. Again, not an economist, but that's my insecure take.

[–] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There is a variable called Gross National Income (GNI) corrected for inflation which is likely the variable Wolfers refers to. You can report it, but it will not be very different from GDP corrected for inflation which the media writes about all the time. Essentially production =income except for some small nuances.

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

GDI is supposed to be basically equivalent to GDP, so it's not a better number to use. Sometimes the numbers diverge (see here for a discussion of this issue in 2022) because they use different methodologies to determine the number, but that's usually a sign that some kind of measurement is off, not that there's some kind of actual divergence in the true numbers of what they purport to measure.

And we moved away from Gross National Product/Income to Gross Domestic Product/Income because it was a better look at the domestic economy. We care more about the production/income within national borders rather than the production/income of a particular nation's residents.

[–] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

GNI still gives a slightly better measure of income which is what OP was asking for. For instance if an American gets dividend income from a foreign company that’s part of GNI but not GDP, and vice versa if a US company pays dividends to a foreign shareholder. But yeah in practice all of this will be negligible.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

https://sh.itjust.works/post/37116488

Did you see my first crack at it? I would love your input. I think the "Real GDP" might be not adjusted for inflation? I can't tell.

[–] Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Real GDP is adjusted for inflation. That’s what the term Real means. Nominal GDP is not adjusted. I always think that reporting should primarily focus on real GNI per capita, which is slightly more informative than real GDP, but in practice I think the differences won’t be shocking.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Thanks for taking the time to respond. IMO, economics has some easy concepts that are hidden behind terms. Every industry has it, but all this info is kind of hidden anyway for a noob like me.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Is every 101 college class really just "here's what all the terms mean in this field"? I suspect the answer is yes.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Mine wasn't, it was a university known for being one of the best for economics and had huge classes. I did not do well in that class. It was an advanced 101 class.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago

There is no formula. You're mainly interested in wages, and those are negotiated.