Was just trying to explain to someone why everything is going to shit, specifically companies, and realized, I don’t fully get it either.

I’ve got the following explanation. The sentences marked with “???” are were I’m lost. Anyone mind telling me, if they’re correct and if so, why?

The past few years, central banks were giving out interest rates of 0% or even negative percentages. Regular banks would not quite pass this on, but you could still loan money and give it back later with no real interest payments.

This lead to lots of people investing in companies. As long as those companies paid out more money than those low interest rates, it was worthwhile. But at the same time, this meant companies didn’t have to be profitable, because they could pay out investors from money that other investors gave them???

This has stopped being the case, as central banks are hiking interest rates again, to combat inflation???

  • Millie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Literally money. More specifically, the financial need under a capitalist system for businesses to constantly grow and increase profits, and to focus on shareholder profits over making a good product. Most businesses on any sort of large scale today aren’t in it to do a good job at making whatever it is they make, they’re in it to make money. Their actual ‘business’ is just an incidental stop on the way to making more money.

    You see this literally everywhere. Remember Odwalla? They made these great, super-thick bottled smoothy-like juices. Easily the healthiest thing you could find to drink in most of the places they were sold. Then Coca-Cola bought them out, changed the name to Naked Juice, and watered them all down. What we have now, as a result, is a pale imitation of what we once had.

    Why? Because Odwalla was profitable, so it was profitable for Coca-cola to buy up a competitor for shelf space. But once they were bought up, there’s no incentive to deliver the same quality of product. They have no remaining competition, so they can release a shittier version and we’ll basically just suck it up because it’s still healthier than soda.

    Our reward for worshiping currency is for everything ever made out of love of a craft or an art to be exploited and turned into a shittier version of itself.

    The solution, to my reckoning, is to start making things you love because you love to make them and to refuse to sell out when they come knocking.

    • GFGJewbacca@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s only one thing I would alter in your statement. You said:

      …and to focus on shareholder profits over making a good product.

      I would say, "and to focus on shareholder profits over making a good product anything else, including life itself.

      It’s more profitable for a health insurance company to deny someone’s claim than to pay for their healthcare in the US. The insurance company won’t care if that ultimately leads to the person’s death - they have to answer to their shareholders.

      It’s more profitable for Nestlé or Google to siphon water from countries in the global South than it is to have sustainable practices that don’t exacerbate climate change. So what if that means that millions of people will die in the years to come? That’s their problem for being poor.

      We need to bring about the kind of change that has politicians recognize that there is more to human life than a dollar amount, and that poverty is not a moral failing on the part of the individual. But until that happens, poverty is akin to a death sentence.

      • Lemmylaugh@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ok but what you are asking is to crash the market, that will lead to more harm than good. Any better less drastic idea?

            • radix@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Is it evil to prioritize human life over the state of the market?

              Is it good to prioritize the economy over human lives?

    • Gyoza Power@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I wouls just add that it’s all about making profits and increasing them year per year, but always focusing on the short term. To the CEOs, shareholders and other directives, it doesn’t matter if the company goes bankrupt 10 years from now, as long as they suck in all the profits they can now.

      Even if the company is very successful, with a very good product(s) and they could just go into easy-ride mode continuing to provide those products. They only want to make as much money as quickly as possible and once they get their hands on the company, the enshitification for the sake of quick profits ensues.

      • Samus Crankpork@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is why I feel bad about any company releasing their “best product ever”, because it’s all downhill from there. The only thing left for the shareholders to do is cut costs, worsening the product.

  • porkins@lemmy.basedcount.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There was a global supply chain shortage due to COVID. This meant that the demand for everything backed-up. This was compounded by people having more time at home and potentially more money to repurpose from services to goods, so the shift also drove up demand. When there is more demand for goods than the amount available, the cost of goods sold goes way up until you reach a threshold where people are forced to buy less or go broke. This is the elasticity of demand. Their is a point where certain goods are no longer appealing in price or affordable in general. It’s really bad when these are mandatory commodities like food.

    This runaway inflation is always dealt with in the same way. The central bank raises interest rates for their notes/loans that they make with the banks across the country. This makes consumer and business loan interest rates rise, which makes them less appealing and also staves free cash flow, so people have less money to spend from loans, but potentially their salaries might be affected as well. This has the benefit of forcefully lowering demand. Whenever demand goes down, the cost of goods will start to go down. During the lull of demand, the supply chain can catch up as well. This is not the first time interest rates were raised to fix runaway inflation. Over time, interest rates will go back down again. It is cyclical.

    One difference though is that the government is also in a cycle of under-regulating and over-regulating business. At the moment, we were promised more monopoly-busting and cracking-down on driving up prices in a collusive manner to fight the fed’s deflationary tactics and attempt to make windfall profits. Meaning, whole industries are not supposed to band together behind closed doors and agree to not lower their prices. That is called collusion and is supposed to be illegal. As long as that keeps happening, interest rates will keep getting hiked. The current administration seems to have more of a tolerance for this than they should. If things are going to shit, it’s due to this type of corporate cronyism with the government.

    Additionally, you have outside actors like China who are buying up land and businesses and contributing to the turmoil in clever ways like making housing and food less affordable.

    Source: Am MBA.

  • Resol van Lemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because 2013 happened. And 2013 was bullshit. I’m sure Adobe Creative Cloud, iOS 7 and the Xbox One would gladly explain that to you. Oh, and I forgot Vine. I mean, it was really good, but it basically led to Musical.ly, which led to TikTok. YouTube also got rid of the customisable channel page, instead giving us a simple banner instead (I said instead 3 times now). And did I mention fingerprint scanners on phones? I’m sure you all remember Facebook Home. You don’t? Well, you’re better off not remembering it. Also, they killed Brian Griffin only to ressurect him from the dead all of a sudden. And finally, Office 2013. There’s nothing wrong with it, it just looked like garbage.

    All of this led to the dystopian lifestyle we’re currently living in.

    • vsis@feddit.cl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “that’s capitalism” is the new “the devil did that”

  • peto (he/him)@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem is that money is permited to generate money. So the more you have beyond the threshold to sustain yourself the more you can generate without labour. The business with no interest loans accelerates things but it isn’t the problem. It is that the system rewards idle investors at the expense of those whose labour actually generates value.

    Capitalism wasn’t fine until someone broke it. The core concepts behind it are flawed.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve said this plenty of times but it bears repeating, the problem isn’t capitalism or the type of social structure, the problem is people. Capitalism is a simplistic and ultimately ineffective solution, because it doesn’t account for the human problem.

      People will always try to game the system. We need a system that recognises and accounts for that.

  • Phantom_Engineer@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    But at the same time, this meant companies didn’t have to be profitable, because they could pay out investors from money that other investors gave them???

    Few, if any, of the big tech companies were playing out any kind of dividend to investors. It was more that they were content for companies to maybe someday make money as opposed to actually making money,

  • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Most of these businesses operated at near unsustainable levels with almost negligible interest rates on loans, and now they’re panicking because their business model is shit and they’re trying to recover however they can by enshittifying everything.

  • Nonameuser678@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cause 1% of people own 99% of everything. That’s never going to not be a shitty situation.

    But also shit has been bad for marginalised groups since like forever. Now we’re all just getting a taste of that as our masters pull the ladder up from under them.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s cyclical and it’s been happening for thousands of years. It’s part of our human nature.

    We all work together and build systems, societies and civilizations and do great things. We become wealthy and then slowly concentrate that wealth to smaller and smaller groups of people. Eventually the majority of the wealth is controlled by a very small group of people and everyone else has nothing. The system at this point can not sustain itself and collapses. Then the whole human system restarts again from the bottom.

    It’s happened many many times throughout human history.

    We are just at the height of one of those cycles.

    • OtakuAltair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe this can change in the software space with the advent of foss.

      It kinda is I suppose, even if very, very slowly.

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Based on what you’ve posted here alone:

    Companies that don’t have to be profitable is not quite the case to make. They have to either provide a service valuable enough to gather continual revenue from investors or subsidies to exist… or they have to have a plausible promise of becoming profitable. Easy money really lowers the bar on how plausible that promise needs to be.

    Ripping up on that E brake by hiking interest rates has a twofold effect: first it raises back the bar on how useful a service or profitable a company is or aims to be for investors. Secondly it has an overall effect on the economy, including profitable companies with strong investments since all loans are subject to the interest rates. So while that can produce the intended deflationary effect, the whole economy has to recalibrate.

    And that’s where things tend to feel like they’re going to shit.

    • Master@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The tail end of this ripple is large corporations death grip on increased profits every quarter. But the reality is that at some point you can not successfully grow profits past the peak without destroying everything. We are in the initial phase of the destruction onslaught.

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everything isn’t going to shit. The sky is still blue, food is growing, people have good lives.

    The current economic issues are cyclical in nature, due to our form of global capitalism, we have 7-10 year up swings and down swings.

  • rab@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Simple, the world already ended and we are feeling the slow burn.

    Too many humans on the planet to be sustainable. People will start dying en masse in my lifetime, that’s just mother nature correcting things as she always has.

    We were on borrowed time since humans discovered agriculture and the fun is over now.

    • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Alright, Thats all bullshit.

      The planet can easily support our population. Hell, the planet could support double our population.

      The only reason why everything has gone to shit is the Rich and their greed. They’ve bought off governments to continue destroying the planet in their draconic lust for larger piles of gold to sit on, and adamantly refuse to change course for fear of it taking even a single, meaningless coin from their horde to do it.

      We have more than enough food to feed the whole planet, but capitalism has decided its more “cost effective” to burn half of it to maintain shareholder prices.

      There would be more than enough water available for everyone, but cleaning its to costly so lets just find another aquifer to drain and pollute.

      The climate would have been fine, if corporations and their dumping of terratons of pollution into the air wasnt handwaved away as “Well, its consumers fault, if they just skipped meals and stopped using paper, none of this would have happened”.

      More time and money and research has been spent on how to let the rich and corporations escape blame, than has been spent on trying to prevent these problems that scientists have been warning about for over 100 years.

      • rab@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I somewhat agree.

        The thing is that even if we did everything perfectly, the human race would still reproduce until it is unsustainable. It is in our nature.

        We are supposed to be animals, but at some point (discovery of agriculture) we detached from the food chain and defied mother nature. It is not possible to be sustainable from this point onwards.

        Personally I believe that human conscienceness was a mistake in evolution. If I could press a button that would kill billions of people including myself I would do so without hesitation.

        Recommend reading the thoughts of Pentti Linkola.

        • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The thing is that even if we did everything perfectly, the human race would still reproduce until it is unsustainable. It is in our nature.

          Sure, if you ignore the fact that global birthrates are falling, and sharply in some places.

          • rab@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah that’s because we hit max population. Population will start decreasing pretty soon I think.

            I said that if we lived “sustainably” we would reproduce until we couldn’t anymore