Hardkill

Here's the response I got for this question from Meta AI: The recovery from the 1970s-80s stagflation crisis was indeed more challenging than the recovery from the 2021-2024 inflation crisis. Comparing the Recoveries Depth and Duration of Recession: The recession in the early 1980s was more severe and longer-lasting than the recession during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inflation and Interest Rates: Inflation peaked at over 19% in 1980, and interest rates soared to combat it. In contrast, inflation during the 2021-2024 period, although high, was not as extreme. Unemployment and Job Market: Unemployment rates in the early 1980s were significantly higher than those during the COVID-19 pandemic. Changing Expectations and Perceptions Economic Baseline: The economic baseline has shifted over time. Americans in the 1980s may have been more accustomed to economic volatility and higher inflation, making them more relieved by the recovery. In contrast, Americans today may be more sensitive to economic disruptions due to the prolonged period of economic stability and low inflation preceding the 2021-2024 inflation crisis. Media Coverage and Information Availability: The way people consume information has changed dramatically since the 1980s. The 24-hour news cycle, social media, and the internet can create a sense of perpetual crisis and amplify economic concerns, even if objective economic conditions are improving. Societal and Cultural Factors Changing Social Norms and Values: Societal values and norms have shifted since the 1980s. Today, there may be a greater emphasis on economic security, stability, and equality, leading to increased anxiety and dissatisfaction with the economy. Growing Awareness of Economic Inequality: The growing awareness of economic inequality and its impacts on society may contribute to a sense of unease and dissatisfaction with the economy, even if overall economic conditions are improving. The confluence of these factors of the following factors has contributed to widespread dissatisfaction with the economy among Americans, despite the relatively stronger recovery from the 2021-2024 inflation crisis compared to the 1970s-80s stagflation crisis: Evolution of the media landscape: The 24-hour news cycle, social media, and the internet can amplify economic concerns and create a sense of perpetual crisis. Growing dissatisfaction with the system: Americans are increasingly dissatisfied with the economic and political systems, leading to a sense of unease and mistrust. Worsening economic inequality: The growing wealth gap between the rich and the poor has led to feelings of economic insecurity and frustration. Increasing cost of living: The rising costs of housing, healthcare, education, and other essential expenses have made it difficult for many Americans to make ends meet. Lack of familiarity with economic volatility: Unlike previous generations, many Americans today are not accustomed to economic volatility and higher inflation, making them more sensitive to economic disruptions. These factors have combined to create a perfect storm of economic anxiety and dissatisfaction among Americans, despite the relatively stronger economic recovery. In contrast, while wages have been outpacing inflation in the US since early 2023, and inflation levels have been relatively stable, ranging from 2.5 to 3.5%, many Americans still perceive inflation as a significant problem. By 1984, Americans' perceptions of inflation had shifted, and it was no longer seen as a major concern. This was despite the fact that inflation remained relatively high, around 4%. This disparity can be attributed to the factors we discussed earlier: Changing expectations and perceptions: Americans' expectations and perceptions of inflation have shifted over time, influenced by factors like the media landscape, economic inequality, and cost of living. Lack of trust in institutions: Growing dissatisfaction with the economic and political systems has led to decreased trust in institutions, making people more skeptical of economic data and more prone to perceive inflation as a problem. Increased sensitivity to price changes: The rising cost of living, particularly in areas like housing, healthcare, and education, has made Americans more sensitive to price changes, even if inflation is relatively low. These factors have contributed to a disconnect between Americans' perceptions of inflation and the actual economic data, making it more challenging for people to feel confident about their economic prospects. Additionally, even though the Fed has already been lowering interest rates significantly since a few months ago from what have actually been historically average Fed Funds rates: Lingering economic uncertainty: The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent inflation crisis have created a sense of uncertainty and unease about the economy, which may take time to dissipate. Ongoing cost of living concerns: The rising cost of living, particularly in areas like housing, healthcare, and education, continues to be a significant concern for many Americans. Growing wealth inequality: The widening wealth gap between the rich and the poor has contributed to feelings of economic insecurity and anxiety among many Americans. Now how did most people feel about the high prices in the US by 1948? By 1948, the US economy was in a period of transition. World War II had ended just three years earlier, and the country was shifting from a wartime to a peacetime economy. Post-War Economic Conditions Inflation Concerns: There were concerns about inflation in the immediate post-war period, driven by pent-up demand, shortages, and the transition from a wartime economy. Price Controls: The US government had implemented price controls during World War II to manage inflation. These controls were gradually lifted after the war, leading to some price increases. Wage Growth: Wages were growing rapidly in the post-war period, driven by strong economic growth, low unemployment, and the rise of organized labor. Public Perception of High Prices Economic context: The post-war economic boom and the rise of the middle class created a sense of economic optimism and opportunity. Social and cultural factors: The sense of national unity and purpose following World War II contributed to a more positive outlook on the economy. Public perception: The high inflation rate in 1948 was seen as a temporary phenomenon, and many Americans were more focused on the opportunities and benefits of the post-war economic boom. The main differences between 1948 and 2024 were: Economic anxiety: The COVID-19 pandemic, supply chain disruptions, and geopolitical tensions have created a sense of economic uncertainty and anxiety. Growing wealth inequality: The widening wealth gap between the rich and the poor has contributed to feelings of economic insecurity and frustration. Changing expectations and perceptions: The low inflation rates of the 1990s and 2000s created a new normal, making people more sensitive to even moderate inflation rates. Plus, the media landscape has undergone significant changes between 1948 and 2024, which have contributed to differences in how people perceive and respond to inflation. In 1948: Limited media outlets: There were fewer media outlets, and news was primarily disseminated through print newspapers, radio, and newsreels. Less frequent news cycles: News cycles were less frequent, and people were less exposed to constant updates and analysis. More trust in institutions: There was generally more trust in institutions, including the government, media, and financial systems. In 2024: Proliferation of media outlets: The rise of cable news, social media, and online news sources has created a 24-hour news cycle, with constant updates and analysis. Increased polarization: The media landscape has become increasingly polarized, with different outlets catering to specific ideologies and demographics. Decreased trust in institutions: Trust in institutions has declined, with many people questioning the credibility of the media, government, and financial systems. These changes in the media landscape have contributed to: Increased anxiety and uncertainty: The constant stream of news and analysis can create a sense of perpetual crisis, contributing to increased anxiety and uncertainty. Confirmation bias and polarization: The proliferation of media outlets has enabled people to selectively consume information that confirms their pre-existing biases, contributing to increased polarization. Decreased trust and credibility: The decreased trust in institutions has made it more challenging for people to distinguish between credible and non-credible sources of information, contributing to confusion and mistrust.

How are red states in the US able to make any substantial progress if they are constantly dominated by so much conservative ideology? How do states like West Virginia, Alabama, Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Mississippi, which face very significant economic and social challenges, manage to develop their economies and improve the lives of their residents? Why aren't most people in those states angry at their elected officials for not doing enough to improve public education, healthcare access, economic opportunities, environmental infrastructure, crime, and so on? In fact, contrary to right-wing claims, crime rates have been worse overall in red states than in blue ones. So, why haven't many residents in those states not been holding their elected officials accountable?

It's all fake populism. Right-wing populism, which is arguably more detrimental than left-wing populism, still involves welfare chauvinism that benefits the working-class, middle-class, and working poor who are native-born citizens; albeit it excludes all racial and ethnic minorities and primarily yields short-term benefits. Even Hitler, who was the Devil incarnate, I believe enacted policies that significantly helped out his own citizens in Germany, at least for the short-run. Yet, Trump hasn't even ever provided any meaningful welfare support or major benefits for white Americans from working-class, middle-class, and low-income backgrounds in our country.

Even Roland Martin, a liberal Democrat who I like because of his no-nonsense takes on politics, mentioned how delusional TYT's latest strategy of trying to work together with the MAGA "populists" is:

Obama was kind of spineless. He was a great president, but not a true liberal/progressive warrior like TR, Wilson, FDR, Truman, and LBJ were. Obama didn’t have enough guts to be a partisan advocate and party builder for his party.

Tell that to the great liberal/progressives like TR, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Truman, JFK/LBJ, Obama, and Biden, all of whom saved and dramatically improved our country in many dimensions. What about the civil rights leaders like MLK and Malcolm X, the women's rights movement, and the gay rights movement?

If we don't get a handle on both this terrible media landscape and political environment we are in, then even the youngest generations of people in every developed nation will succumb to living in an Orwellian dystopia for God knows how long.

Well, this probably never would've happened had America had the very same kind of gun control laws that all other developed nations have.

Well, I can say from my own experience, that people can't live on looks alone. Men, especially more so than women, have to do more than look pretty to succeed in life.

How can conservative/Republican officials in a safe red state ever be held accountable for their terrible policies? Why don't people in red states, especially in the poorest red states, feel like their state-level officials are letting them down even in education, healthcare access, economic opportunities, environmental infrastructure, crime, etc.?

I never thought that a very young girl, especially one who was pretty, would commit a school shooting. It's crazy how there was already a young, attractive-looking man who made national headlines for killing someone with a gun, and then just a few weeks later, a young, attractive-looking girl also made national headlines for killing more than one person with a gun. It must be part of some kind of fad going on where more and more people are trying to get a lot of attention through the news after being influenced by what they see in violent movies/shows and news stories of previous mass shootings.

Well, there are still more racists amongst those 40 and over than those under 40 years old. However, apparently there was about a 12-point swing from voting Democrat in 2020 to voting Republican in 2024 amongst the youngest cohort, 18–24 year-olds. I never thought this would happen, especially with Trump in the 2024 election.

Yeah, but what about the fact that a lot of young people have gotten seduced by MAGA and have gotten their brains rotted by the internet/social media more than many of us thought possible?

Not to mention that even all of the hottest looking celebrities didn't just win the genetic lottery. Almost all of them have also had a ton of work done on their bodies and faces, surgically. Plus, don't forget all of the makeup all of the female celebrities constantly put on along with the top-notch editing done on every professional photo they take and in every film they are in.

What will be Bernie's legacy when he passes away? I understand that progress doesn't happen as fast as many of us want. However, what did Bernie Sanders really accomplish for the country? None of his policies and ideas will ever get enacted in our lifetimes and he was in great partly responsible for the election of Trump in 2016 thanks to his whole widespread "Bernie or bust" effect. So, then there is: Correct me, if I am wrong, but it seems like even Leo has been suggesting that he lately has come to the realization that he was wrong about that. I liked Emerald about progress in the long-run: Yet, even if enough people finally begin to realize what a disaster Trumpism is, it might already be too late to fix all of the unfathomable damage that will be done to this country and perhaps every bit of progress ever made in this country since the 1930s will have been erased by Trumpism. Also, the country will still elect another center-left Democrat for president. Also, attacking, neoliberalism, centrism, and corporate Democrats backfires. So, in the end, was Sander's movement a complete failure and should progressives and Democrats move back to the center for the next 1 to 5 decades?

So, attacking neoliberalism, centrism, and corporate Democrats is inevitable even though Leo doesn't like it when hard left-wingers attack those mainstream politicians or ideologies. You think that Democrats may shift back more to the right or center, but only temporarily during these next 4 years, before they swing again towards liberalism/leftism/progressivism more than ever before?

Well, yeah, top-down Democratic policies won't force the red states to change their overall ideology from conservativism to centrism or liberalism quickly. However, we can't deny that they've always worked to make real progress for those states' economy, physical infrastructure, human rights, opportunities, access to various essential resources, etc.

Like Tulsi Gabbard, she also betrayed the Left.

So, what do you think the red states will need to no longer be dominated by conservative ideology?

I see what you're saying. Otherwise, it will have to come from either top-down Democratic control at the federal level or from grassroots campaigning or ballot measures. Combating the right-wing propaganda in those states would also be of terrific help. I also just remembered that we need to wait for a lot more educated folk and more non-whites to migrate from blue states to red states as well.

That's crazy! During the 1600s, 1700, 1800s, 1900s, the aughts, and even to some extent during the 2010s, all of those same red states kept improving significantly in the long-run. I even pray that if none of the laws that Biden and the Democrats in Congress passed ever get repealed then those policies will actually continue developing all of those red states tremendously in so many ways for many years. Are you saying that those states have now reached a dead end forever? Okay, these are the ways I think any more real progress can be made in those parts of the country are: During times when the Democrats control both chambers of Congress and the presidency simultaneously and enact serious liberal/progressive-leaning policies? The passage of liberal/progressive-leaning ballot measures in those states grassroots movements that can pressure their state and local level elected officials to enact liberal/progressive-leaning policies How about all of that?

I know, but then how do they ever get to a point where they're like "That's it! This isn't working anymore! Where done with our Republican/conservatives!"? and how do those states ever improve their public education, healthcare access, economic opportunities, environmental infrastructure, crime, etc.?

Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot about that qualification you made in that post. Yeah, I figured she would more likely do the fringe horseshoe way, which is what Cenk has also been doing for years. Both them mistakenly believe that both the "left wing populists and right wing populists will be able to take on the establishment together."

Generally, when things get really bad enough at the national level under the watch of either the Democratic party or the Republican party, then the people vote the politician(s) and his/her party out of the White House, the US Senate, and/or the US House. However, that hasn't really happened at the state level, in most congressional districts, in most state legislative districts, and in many cities throughout the US since around 2010 because of how increasingly polarized our country has gotten. So, even if say a Democratic governor in a blue state does a terrible job of governing his/her state, that politician will either be re-elected or be replaced by another Democrat in the next election. Conversely, if say a Republican governor in a red state does a terrible job of governing his/her state, then that politician will either be re-elected or be replaced by another Republican in the next election. How terrible do things in a certain state, district, or city have to get for voters in that respective area of the country to finally vote out the party in power or vote the party out of power to be in charge of the area? Don't voters in Mississippi, which is one of the reddest states and the poorest state in the country, feel betrayed by their leaders for not taking care of the problems in their state that desperately need to be addressed such as education, infrastructure, the economy, healthcare, crime, etc. What about people in blue states? Couldn't there be a point where people in those states get sick and tired of Democrats or liberals being in charge of the state?

With all due respect, so much for your take that Ana was moving on to stage Yellow. Even though she claims to no longer be a part of "the Left" and still believes in all reasonable progressive policies, she is still bitching a lot about the Democratic party never being good enough, still has very unrealistic ideas about how to replace the whole system, and naively believes that there's a real shot that progressives and MAGA can work together to take down the whole establishment. She's still no different than Cenk. I am certainly not at full stage Yellow myself, but as far as I am concerned, I don't see how she will ever develop into a true stage Yellow individual anytime soon.