US consumers remain unimpressed with this progress, however, because they remember what they were paying for things pre-pandemic. Used car prices are 34% higher, food prices are 26% higher and rent prices are 22% higher than in January 2020, according to our calculations using PCE data.

While these are some of the more extreme examples of recent price increases, the average basket of goods and services that most Americans buy in any given month is 17% more expensive than four years ago.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      266 months ago

      I could work two hours a day and still get all my tasks done. I could do that, go to my next job, and do another two hours of work and double my income. But because I have to have my butt in a chair in an office eight hours a day on the off chance my boss thinks of something additional for me to do, I’m stuck being four times more inefficient than I need to be.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      246 months ago

      This is the answer. For 50 years now wages have remained stagnant while productivity has gone up through the roof. We are being robbed decade after decade, and by now claims of “strongest economy” feel like slaps in the face. Many of us are earning more than ever before, yes, but also have less purchasing power than ever before.

      Remember that in the 1950s a high school grad could support a family of 4 with a house and car on a single income. That’s how much has been taken from us by the rich and corporations.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        29
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Disclaimer: I don’t have a degree in economics. I read your post and I think I have countering points to make, but if you can rebut my points below specifically I’ll try to listen. (Also just want you to know I’m not the one who down-voted you since you seem to be arguing in good faith and I’m all about that. Sometimes I’m wrong.)

        • You talk about making things more cheaply and that resulting in a cheaper product. If companies agree to all charge the maximum they can get away with, it kills industry price competition (a foundational necessity of functional capitalism) and renders price elasticity a falsehood. If Coke and Pepsi both charge 1.50 for a can of cola, it doesn’t matter if increased productivity means Coke can make a can for 20 cents instead of 30 cents - the savings are just converted into extra profit. You can see this in record profits for many sectors as productivity has increased - the savings of needing fewer people to do the same work isn’t passed on to customers. As proof, here’s an article about how much more things cost today than in the 1970’s (adjusted for inflation). Yet we know that people are over 3x as productive per person over the same period, so clearly companies are not passing along savings in the form of cheaper goods. I know more than productivity affects price, but those factors would have to be overwhelmingly more costly to justify the increase and I don’t think things like shipping are that much more expensive.

        • Inelastic demand for necessary products like fuel, utilities, food, health care, etc also means that in many industries increased productivity does not need to translate to savings. Pharmaceutical companies, either as an industry of multiple providers or where they hold exclusive patents, will raise prices of products to whatever they can get away with because people will either pay or die. So again cheaper products and competition is a myth.

        • Speaking of getting fewer people to do the same work, companies lay off people all the time when individual productivity or automation goes up. You talk about employing 1/5th the Bobcat workers and net lost 4 workers being forced to find other work. This may make economic sense but it’s terrible societal sense. It results in financial insecurity and homelessness among educated, capable people with all the associated national problems like mental health, crime, drug addiction, etc.

        • As US economics function now, companies do not pass along the value of increased productivity to their customers in savings, nor to their employees in increased wages, shorter work weeks, or stable employment (re: layoffs). Instead they maintain or raise prices depending on what they can get away with and employ as few people as possible to maximize profit. This has the societal consequences we’re seeing now, such as in OP’s article.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          18
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          This long explanation supporting capitalism and ‘the market’ fails to take something crucial into account that all these market promoters forget:

          Labor cannot have an undistorted market so long as the option to not sell your labor isn’t a valid one.

          For any market to be relatively undistorted, a seller must be free to choose not to sell at all if none of the offers are equal or greater than her assessment of the value of her product.

          However, as long as labor is needed in order to procure food, shelter, and adequate living conditions, this cannot be the case - people are coerced into selling their labor at values lower than their assessment of its value because to not do so means being denied adequate living conditions.

          If people were free to choose not to sell their labor without this coercion, then those seeking to purchase people’s labor would find they likely cannot find anywhere near as many people willing to sell at the price they are offering.

          Basically, you are making excuses for the fact that due to this market distortion coercing people to sell their labor, the divide between productivity and wages has grown. It is not necessary to lock wages to productivity - if people have the option, and they see massive profits being pocketed off their work with increasingly minimal compensation, they would choose not to sell…except there comes the coercion to ensure they don’t do that.

          I wonder if the same excuses would be made if we turned it around and told companies they must sell their products, no matter how little the customers are offering…

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        jeezus Christ Lemmy. what’s up with the downvotes?there is one response at this time and 16 downvotes. the response isnt even disagreeing with the sound theory presented, just saying that our system is too fucked up to work right.

        I thought this community was better than this.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          116 months ago

          Because it’s a wall of text trying to justify why we’re all struggling, and I think people are just done trying to engage with such “galaxy brained” theories that are completely removed from our lived realities. Especially when people probably have better things to do than some point-counterpoint internet argument.

          Not to mention, this “sound theory” is just that: a theory. Frankly, all of economics is entirely made up! That’s not to say it’s not a valuable and important study, but it’s also not based on any natural laws. It’s an entirely human construct and something we don’t fully understand. ANY economic theory can be torn apart in thousands of ways by adjusting the models a bit. In the west we’ve been fed the theories from Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan for longer than most of us have been alive, and it seems like those theories are falling apart around us! I think a lot of people are seeing that when GDP goes up and “the markets” go up, we don’t get anything. But when “the markets” go down, we have to immediately shoulder the burden. We see our hard work being absorbed by investors seeking their ROI. We see our loyalty repaid by mass layoffs so executives and investors can earn even higher profits.

          So when someone tries to justify it all using the same theories and models that seem to be causing the problem, I don’t blame people for just down voting and moving on.

          We’re tired of being trickled down on and it’s time for a new theory.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Anyone who argues against knowledge and science should immediately be disbarred from the democratic process.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            16 months ago

            the downvote button shouldn’t be a disagree button, but a your not adding anything to the conversation button.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          Because, as it turns out, Leftist fee-fees are more important than facts.

          I swear, they’re just MAGAs painted blue. Same lack of critical thinking. Same rage. Same propensity for being manipulated.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          46 months ago

          They may be but they aren’t a very honest one if they are. The idea that the only options are letting corporations take all the gains or a riot at the job site is very anarcho-capitalism.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      46 months ago

      Except that doesn’t explain how as soon as there’s a Republican president, people suddenly think the economy is great.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        616 months ago

        I’m so tired of repeatedly posting this but you fucknuggets just refuse to learn.

        America has a ridiculous growth in the number of millionaires these last 10 years.

        And nearly ALL of them are children from wealthy families.

        They skew the median income bracket making it look like most Americans are making 65k+ a year.

        This isn’t the case, and 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck.

        And people like you are actively trying to hide this.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          96 months ago

          Look, if the median is 70K it means 50% of households are making this much

          That’s what median means

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            24
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Median as you’re using it doesn’t tell us much beyond a very general bit of information.

            For example both of these data sets have 5 as a median. But in the second one you would not say 5 is representative of half the country.

            [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]

            [1,1,1,1,5,5,6,8,9]

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              76 months ago

              Yes, but the average is HIGHER than the median so it’s more like [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 12, 15, 22]

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                46 months ago

                Well yeah, those weren’t meant to be representative. That would look something like,

                [1,1,2,2,5,6,7,15,22]

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                16 months ago

                It’s more like [2x10, 3x20, 4x20, 5x10, 6x10, 7x5, 8x5, 9x5, 10x5, 12x5, 13, 15, 20, 40, 200]

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              16 months ago

              The whole point of using median is that 0 is fixed, but the upper bound is not, so median is way better than average.

              So sure in your example it is not a good measurement, but your example does not represent the real world distribution.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                26 months ago

                The real word distribution of wealth is actually kind of insane.

                And that’s forcing people into Quintiles. When you look at the income distribution before the median it becomes very clear it’s not a straight slope or at least not in the good way. This was ten years ago. As you can see the median does not represent the mode. Which is what people think of when you say median.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              96 months ago

              I’m a Europoor, and 70k USD wouldn’t be “comfortable” even here. Maybe in Eastern Europe, but rents and house prices are soaring there as well, so I’m not sure.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              26 months ago

              That’s right, but the average in those more expensive states is also higher. But I do agree the states that don’t build new housing (the states where rents grow faster) are not affordable

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        216 months ago

        There is a disconnect between the statistics and reality. I am not sure where, but I suspect inflation is not being calculated correctly. It may be that lower cost items rose at a higher rate, so even though it averages out, it’s harder to reduce spending. 17% doesn’t seem to match the numbers I’ve seen for take out and home prices for example.

        At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what’s on a chart it matters how many things people had to choose to not buy or do because they couldn’t afford it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          236 months ago

          Didn’t they just adjust the whole inflation index again to not count a bunch of significant things? It’s a joke.

          Same with unemployment. It only counts “able individuals who are actively searching for a job”. A lot of people aren’t included in those numbers when they should be.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            76 months ago

            The inflation index is and has always been a metric for the rich.

            The reason that most of the excluded things are not goods or services the wealthy use is so that those companies can profit more from the already economically burdened all while shaming those same burdened people by saying 'You can’t be struggling, inflation has ONLY been 6%!

            Sure for yachts and luxury cars the prices have barely changed but generic meat and fresh vegetables have literally doubled in price in 4 years while the high end offerings have gone up less than 20%.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          166 months ago

          Food goes up 20%, Consumer electronics go down 20% and they’ll call it zero inflation. Not an exact example but an illustration of why things dont feel right. The things you have to buy most often are rising faster than the luxuries. Education, Healthcare, Housing it’s a similar story there.

          • nickwitha_k (he/him)
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Correction: Food goes up 20%, housing prices go up 80%, Consumer electronics go down 20% and they’ll call it negative inflation. The things most important to people and their biological survival are intentionally not part of the CPI so, they get ignored in most inflation reports.

            EDIT: To be clear, the CPI tracks “in-place” or active rent paid by tenants plus utilities (and subsidies, where applicable). It does not track current asking prices or purchase price as it considers purchasing a home to be an investment. This means that it is a very poor way of measuring the housing situation.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          36 months ago

          Rent/housing is like a third of CPI, it’s already being taken into account. Remember, CPI already talked into account these numbers, including higher food costs. But it also takes into account that energy costs did not increase as quickly. Even if some things went up 30%, if other things go up 10% the average can’t possibly be 30%

          Also consumer spending is very strong in America right now, so even if some people can’t afford things, other people are way outspending them

          • nickwitha_k (he/him)
            link
            fedilink
            36 months ago

            The CPI only takes rental prices into account, not home purchases or rental values. Additionally, it only captures active rentals, not asking prices, meaning that it has significant lag and is a poor indicator for trends in rental prices.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              This is true, but the average person is paying a mortgage or rent, not moving every single month so the current rental price is the most relevant to people’s expenses

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          There is a disconnect between the statistics and reality.

          No, there is a disconnect between statistics and perception.

          The statistics are reality.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            9
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            That is a shocking take in my opinion, one that borders on delusional. Statistics are the result of specific metrics collected by people who chose what specific data points to collect, the methods of collecting those metrics and chose the methods of presenting the data. They can reveal interesting aspects of reality that aren’t otherwise obvious and can depict a fairly accurate representation of reality as a whole if they are created in ernest using sound data collection techniques, but I’m pretty sure that the most qualified data scientists will disagree with the statement that “statistics are reality”. Especially if anyone in control of any part of that process has significant motivation for them to depict something specific.

            Statistics are only meaningful when you put them into context of their intent, limitations and error rate.

            Lies, damn lies, and statistics

            And even if the statistics hold true in aggregate, it’s not the full picture and can’t accurately describe or predict individual experiences. Perception is anecdotal, so it is not a perfect depiction of reality either. But if perception does not match the data, it’s an indicator that the data might be suspect.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              26 months ago

              but I’m pretty sure that the most qualified data scientists will disagree with the statement that “statistics are reality”.

              Only because scientists are absurdly cautious in nature.

              Statistics are reality when compared with a different interpretation that is wildly diverging from all statistics. Fuck the equivocation and the “maybe” and the “suggest that possibly”. On something this stark, we can use very clear language:

              The statistics represent reality. The complaining about the economy represents perception.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                36 months ago

                I feel like you’re putting me in a position to argue against the scientific method, but I don’t think that’s actually the case. Statistics can be scientific, they can also be wrong. The scientific process allows for skepticism. To not consider questioning the methods given opposing perspective is not scientific, it’s dogmatic.

                The statistics may very well be accurate, but your level of faith in them is disturbing.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  26 months ago

                  You’re suggesting that since statistics are fallible, it’s entirely possible that the sun doesn’t shine during the day, despite the wealth of evidence that the sun does in fact shine during the day.

                  No. Fuck that. The cautiousness of the “global warming is just a theory” scientists enabled the regressive anti-science bastards. I’m not placing the whole of the blame on the scientists. I’m just saying that equivocating when there is a preponderance of evidence can have real world harm by giving credence to fabrications.

                  If we were in a situation where we all agreed on a basic level about the general accuracy of the statistics, then we could drill down into what, specifically, is more accurate than others. I definitely have my qualms about how the CPI is calculated for example, and how the unemployment rate is calculated.

                  But when we’re in a situation where bad faith actors are trying to discredit the broad findings that all the stats and scientists agree on, we need to close ranks and tell them in no uncertain terms that they are wrong.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      156 months ago

      Ding ding ding. I have no idea where they’re pulling these numbers from when my grocery bill has doubled since the pandemic. I wish it was only 26% higher.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        96 months ago

        Yeah I agree, anecdotally my wife and I spend roughly $200 a trip when we used to spend about $100. It may not be exactly double but it’s very close.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          That’s pretty much exactly my experience. I’m a perpetually single dude so it’s just me, but my weekly bill went from ~$60 to ~$100 and it hasn’t budged since.

          Supply and demand is such a fucking disgusting “theory” that is only used as an excuse to raise prices, never to lower them…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    456 months ago

    Middle class is the new poor. Shit broke in the 70s and it ain’t likely to get fixed. Get used to it.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    366 months ago

    I’m not a R but the Democrats seriously need to stop pushing this shitty “economy is awesome” narrative. Because everytime someone hears it who isn’t feeling the economy, it makes them hate the Democrats a little more. Staying home and not voting because your candidate has pissed you off, is just as bad.

    For anyone who hasn’t recieved a 20% pay increase, the economy is not good. In fact you’d need about a 35% to 50% pay increase to be feeling the same as you did pre pandemic. If you job hopped during the super awesome fun times of Covid hiring and got a boost in salary, then yeah you’re new salary offset by new higher prices makes the economy feel better than it was.

    But if you’re the majority of people who did not get 50% adjustments, you are having a bad time. You are factually worse off financially than you were.

    The idea of blaming who or what made the bad economy is a lost game. Bush tanked the economy, Obama got the blame. Trump tanked the economy, Biden got the blame. But just because Biden didn’t tank it, doesn’t mean it isn’t tanked.

    There is nobody, not a single person, I know of that is doing better today than 2020.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      136 months ago

      It’s the gaslighting that’s pissing people off. “The economy is great!” … “For who?!”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        56 months ago

        Yes but the data is skewed. The 20.6% is true. But if you don’t buy those items that’s not the amount. Many items are double what they were. Lots over 50% increase.

        Vehicles, insurance rates, computer components, huge increases. Eggs, milk, and bread 20%. Not everyone is buying only staples.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      36 months ago

      I’m doing better. Though I did switch jobs in 2020 and 2022, which offset most the inflation.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        26 months ago

        Yes you’d be one that job hopped during the best time to. Before layoffs with huge increases. For you with 2 hops even with high inflation, you’re probably better off. Which is awesome. But abnormal.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      36 months ago

      I did increase my salary by close to 50%! I still hate it. I still can’t get out of debt without spending the next 5 years repaying it and you bet your ass I’m not seeing a possibility to ever buy a house unless I land a unicorn local first time buyer scheme which I imagine has a massive demand for.

      Shit is fucked. I’m in the top 1 or 2% but so much of my money goes to rent in a tiny ass village with a 30 min commute that the situation is just depressing.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        46 months ago

        So you’re making 200k+ a year and can’t afford to pay your debts? Sounds like a money management issue with that kind of salary. To put it in context a modest rent of $2000 a month would be about 24000 a year out of your 138000 take home pay. So either you’re not in the top 2 percent or something’s fishy.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          People accrue debt during bad times then have to pay it during good times, but often couldn’t have made it through to those good times without spending on the way. I am still paying off the accrued deficit from when we had a family of 4 living on 15k a year, then later 6 on 50k, we were always so close to ok but not quite and year after year it accrues. Well during that time I went to university, made more but still not enough for a family, eventually split with my ex, now in a functional 2 earner plus couple of part time jobs situation we are sorta raking it in now but both still paying for when we were not.

          People who make good money probably didn’t always make good money. People who raised other people also take a financial hit for awhile. I’m assuredly better off from having kids, wouldn’t have bothered getting the degree and better job without them, but the payoff is slow not immediate.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            16 months ago

            That’s why there are bankruptcy protection laws. If you have a debt you cannot pay off you should strongly consider bankruptcy. Your credit can recover in a couple of years.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 months ago

      It’s the same reason Republicans are asking “are you better off than you were four years ago?”

      Anyone with an existing ideology probably knows who they are voting for. Swing voters are emotional.

      Republicans are whistling to those just willing to judge the economy based on a Democrat being in office.

      Biden is trying to thread the needle by pointing out there have been positive indicators without shirting on his own policies or advocating straight up anti capitalist messages.

      After the primaries, the race is always a race to the middle.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        46 months ago

        The issue is the Republicans are correct. Are you better off now vs 4 years ago financially? For the majority of Americans, that’s a no. For almost all Americans that’s a no.

        Even on MSNBC they never answer that question financially. It’s always about being locked up during Covid, stacking the courts, etc. The only thing doing better are stocks which are worthless until you cash them out. And the minority of people who job hopped.

        Democrat voters aren’t idiots like republicans. Telling them you’re doing better when they factually are not will grind many peoples’ gears.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          26 months ago

          Yes the Biden years have not been some sort of economic triumph, but if you take the question at face value, how were things four years ago? They were horrible. Unemployment was record highs. Stocks had tanked. Hundreds of thousands of people were about to die. Etc etc etc.

          That’s the problem with the binary decision, about the role of president, who doesn’t even make a lot of the critical economic decisions anyways.

          The economy is not “good” but many indicators have been improving or are better than expected. But mishandling an event like a pandemic will certainly tank the economy, just like neoliberal policies will generally lead to a good stock market and little else.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            But the Democrats are specifically touting you are better off financially. The whole pandemic thing and death and unemployment is a different topic. If you add up all the Americans that switched to a higher paying job in the past 4 years that offsets inflation I don’t know what the number would be.

            If it’s 6 million jobs a year (6.4m in 2021) and 50% get a raise, that’s 3million peeps a year better off. 4 years, 12million people. 12/300 is 4%. So the economy is factually better for 4% of the country.

            That’s not a “the economy is doing great!” slogan. That’s a “4% of the working class is doing great! The other 96% can suck rocks and like it”

            Edited: The 50% came from a self reported study in 2022 that said 50% of respondents said they were paid the same or more in their new job. Even if it was 5% more they’re included in the above number. So I feel this is a very generous number of 4%.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        46 months ago

        They really be cherry picking the numbers to tell us everything is fine and we’re the ones who are wrong.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          They’re taking averages, that is literally the opposite of cherry picking. If your experience doesn’t match the national average that doesn’t mean the average is wrong

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      66 months ago

      Yea, most of these estimates I’ve seen are wildly understanding the increased costs of everything.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        16 months ago

        Tbf these are national averages and rent increases are highly localized.

        My rent gone up 11% since 2019. Which is good, because I already can’t afford medical care.

        My sister’s rent has gone up almost exactly 50% in the same time period.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    196 months ago

    the average basket of goods and services that most Americans buy in any given month is 17% more expensive than four years ago.

    That’s 4% per year

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        176 months ago

        It’s literally just wheat meal with honey, it costs literally 12 cents a box to make.

        The packaging is more expensive.

        But capitalism says ‘lol it’s ok to charge whatever!’.

        And 1/3 of the internet will defend them for ‘reasons’.

        • natecheese
          link
          fedilink
          56 months ago

          Where did you get “it costs literally 12 cents a box”? Is that a random number for effect or do you have some insider knowledge and know that for sure?

          Either way is fine with me, just curious because it seems like a very small amount after paying for the raw materials, the workers wages, the shipping costs, and the grocery store overhead, etc.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          And 1/3 of the internet will defend them for 'reasons

          I’m one of the people that often jumps in on posts like these. It’s hardly defending them, hear me out.

          I’m not in the us, I looked at that picture for 45 seconds straight to understand what’s wrong with it, I assume it’s the price but I have no idea what that shit is so I had to read all the words on the package to understand if it was another issue…

          The good news is that your life doesn’t depend on eating this shit. Don’t like the price, don’t buy it.

          I hate how a serious issue, prices are going up is diluted down by people bringing in stupid arguments like Starbucks “coffee” costing a fortune or Netflix jacking up prices. My point I am not defending Graham, Starbucks nor Netflix, just stop buying overprinting that you don’t need or if you really do, stop complaining.

          Now if we want to talk about the price of actual groceries, like fruit vegetables and meat we can all have a serious convo

        • Flying Squid
          link
          fedilink
          46 months ago

          I lived in L.A. Getting to a Walmart would be a big challenge in a lot of parts.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      166 months ago

      There’s also the disconnect of what is being made by manufacturers versus what many people want. An overpriced and massive luxury SUV has never appealed to me, yet that is basically the primary vehicle being made. I could buy a new car if I wanted to, all 3 of mine are paid off but there isn’t a single new car being made that I want to drive more than my 2017 Ford Focus. If it was totaled tomorrow I would absolutely pay a premium to get it replaced rather than buy something new. When supply is low prices come up and used cars are a commodity that is desirable to many and not available from current manufacturers. 5000 lb EVs just do not appeal to me in any way.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        56 months ago

        Car companies have done the math, and the higher profit margins are worth the reduced sales. They’re going for the rich market.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          86 months ago

          And dealers have done the same math. Inventory is based on the highest spec they think they can force onto someone coming in for a mid tier vehicle. You want an F-150 with a regular or super cab? Too bad, that $40k truck simply doesn’t exist. Your options are a $65k SuperCrew® on the PLATINUM, which is marked up another $15k because there’s only one and 4 other people want it more than the $83k Limited, (also with a SUPERCREW cab). Meanwhile 2004 Rangers with 200k miles are solid gold on marketplace because you literally can’t buy them anymore.

          Everyone will say “they make what sells” but that’s bullshit. They spend millions to market and convince people they need the largest vehicle they can get away with producing. “Oh, you’re having your first kid? If you don’t have 14” of ground clearance and a 3rd row you won’t be able to survive.” A 2009 Jetta is just fine for a small family. If you need cargo space, they make a wagon. Just make fucking cars again.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              46 months ago

              Fwiw, the new ranger is basically the same size as the old f150. The maverick would be closer in size to the 04 ranger, but they don’t make anything other than crew cab for those.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              26 months ago

              Small imported trucks are subject to the chicken tax, they could still be produced domestically without the penalty. Unfortunately manufacturers refuse to make them. The new Maverick is virtually the exact same size as the F-150 was when they discontinued the Ranger the last time around and the new Ranger is even bigger. Everything has grown immensely in size and price.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            16 months ago

            Everyone will say “they make what sells” but that’s bullshit. They spend millions to market and convince people they need the largest vehicle they can get away with producing.

            I guess it could be rephrased to “they make what they can sell”.

          • @MyNamesNotRobert
            link
            16 months ago

            Sounds like I’ll be keeping my 2008 Toyota alive until the end of time then

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      66 months ago

      The chip shortage is the auto industry own fault. Historically auto manufactures used older prosses nodes (40nm) as it was cheap and widely available however that node they are on is now outdated to the point where there’s not that many fabs manufacturing that size of chips anymore.

      To make things worse the silicon industry moved to a larger wafer design which would require the auto industry to invest in new hardware to support the larger wafer and redesign/validate the ICs for the smaller node all of which requires spending money they won’t see a return in for a significant amount of time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      56 months ago

      Manufacturers also cut production in march of 2020, stating that it was for worker safety. However, I believe it was because they figured sales would plummet if the pandemic was very bad. I assume their projections for death were much higher than in actuality. With COVID mainly affecting older people they did lose a large amount of new vehicle buyers as older people are much more likely to buy a new vehicle. When they shut down production, it had hysteretic effects down the supply chain due to jit (just in time) manufacturing. Without orders, may suppliers also had to cut production of vehicle parts, especially chip manufacturers, which are mainly in China. When vehicle production started back up, suppliers had to also catch up with demand.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      16 months ago

      And I’m sure the sources of this explanation are the very car companies who jacked up their prices.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    126 months ago

    Well that 1% guy wasn’t joking when he said “You will own nothing and be happy.” Except for the “you will be happy” part. They’re doing this to us on purpose and they have their reasons.