https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/05/23/views-of-the...

The problem is, if that's the case, who's buying all the output? It's not just going into warehouses. So people must be able to buy all this stuff.

An alternate view would be that people have been buying all this stuff, mostly on credit, and are realizing that they're maxed out on credit, especially if interest rates rise.

But ultimately, the "sentiment" view matters. It may not matter as much as the actual output numbers, but it matters, because people are not purely "homo economicus". They make decisions on how they feel about how things are going, and if they think things are going badly, they buy less, and eventually that influences the actual figures.

You figured it out.

Maybe replace "the rich" with "those with capital and market power" but that's mostly a distinction without a difference.

Again none of this stuff is super groundbreaking. Shantytown hills overlooking mansions surrounded by high walls and barbed wire is kind of a global norm.

As America edges closer it only feels unfamiliar to those of us that have become accustomed to something different.

Take cars specifically. The US makes 11 million new cars a month. If regular people can't afford them, are billionaires really buying up all those cars? How many new cars does a billionaire need? Where are they parking them all?

I can believe your explanation with money. I can even believe it with houses, with rich people buying up houses as an investment. But I can't believe it with cars. Regular people are buying new cars, and regular people think they can't afford new cars. How do we make sense of that?