- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
As they’re living with their parents because they can’t afford an apartment of their own.
This is a serious point. I couldn’t afford a place until I was in a relationship. And that was a long time ago. I can’t imagine how difficult it would be with today’s rent.
Having a roommate turned an apartment from unaffordable luxury to merely 25% of my paycheck.
I honestly think having roommates is fun, particularly if you’re old friends anyway. But its crazy that a spot at the ass end of town was eating so much of my take home pay even after we cut the bill in half.
Don’t worry though we solved inflation. We just removed it from our calculations. If we don’t count it: it’s not there!
Investment funds stocking up on US farmland in safe-haven bet
Investment funds have become voracious buyers of U.S. farmland, amassing over a million acres as they seek a hedge against inflation and aim to benefit from the growing global demand for food, according to data reviewed by Reuters and interviews with fund executives.
The trend worries some U.S. lawmakers who fear corporate interest will make agricultural land unaffordable for the next generation of farmers. Those lawmakers are floating a bill in Congress that would impose restrictions on the industry’s purchases.
Though their acreage is a small slice of the nearly 900 million acres of U.S. farmland, the pace of acquisitions by investment firms like Manulife Investment Management and Nuveen has quickened since the 2008 global financial crisis drove firms to seek new investment vehicles, according to Reuters interviews with fund managers and an analysis of data from the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries (NCREIF).
The number of properties owned by such firms increased 231% between 2008 and the second quarter of 2023, and the value of those holdings rose more than 800% to around $16.2 billion, according to NCREIF’s quarterly farmland index, which tracks the holdings of the seven largest firms in farmland investment.
Farmland offers steady returns even in periods of high inflation, and firms hope crop demand will remain steady as the United Nations predicts the world will need 60% more food by 2050 due to population growth.
You don’t want to confuse “inflation” with “economic growth”. One makes prices go up because the evil bad salaries are increasing. But the other makes profits go up because of the smart efficient business net revenues are increasing.
A prosperous nation needs big new investments in the future. And that means speculating in our domestic breadbasket, so we can maximize the price of inelastic commodities in an effort to optimize consumption habits. You don’t like waste, do you? Optimizing price reduces waste. Its all right here in the book Basic Economics by totally non-problematic and very smart guy Thomas Sowell.
Do we REALLY need to quiz people to know this? Ffs.
I assumed it was housing.
If we could afford housing, then that would be it.
https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2024/04/16/generation-z-is-unprecedentedly-rich
Y’all are buying homes just fine compared to the last few generations.
Y’all
Rich = Full Time Employed?
You seem to mistake having a salary for having money.
America now has more than 6,000 Zoomer chief executives and 1,000 Zoomer politicians.
Also, what if you’re not a CEO or a politician? Also, plus, too, how on earth is “small town city councilman” or “part-time New Hampshire legislator” a sign of wealth?
I don’t get the point you’re trying to make with your graph. Obviously there wouldn’t be many Zoomers working full time; most are still in school.
Zoomers born after 2006 haven’t graduated high-school, and those born between 2002-2006 are in college. That’s leaves only a 5 year window of people you’d expect to be employed full time.
The line for millenials looks about the same as Zoomers.
The line for millenials looks about the same as Zoomers.
shrug
Take that up with the Economist, its their claim and their chart.
I’m trying to understand your argument against the article and what point you’re trying to make by using their chart.
That was one single indicator. I agree it’s not the best, to your point, unemployment, homeownership, and salary averages are the ones that show middle class wealth.
I don’t see any of that in the article. Is it hidden behind the paywall?
