Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

2% is a joke because it doesn't stack up with inflation. At that point you're literally getting your salary lowered.


sort by: page size:

2% or less is a lot more common in my experience, irregardless of what inflation is.

2% barely compansates for inflation (2-3% in US).

A 2-3% is VERY common. Unacceptable even in the days of 2% inflation.

2% is not high inflation.

The annual inflation rate for the US is around 1.8% right now. 2% is better than nothing, but not by much.

Inflation already cut my salary by 12% a year lol.

In the past 17 years, inflation is about 42%, because we've had ridiculously low inflation.

2% isusually going to be sub-inflationary.


Isn’t 2% just the inflation? So back to the Paul’s model if you take account of it.

To put it mildly, this hasn't been my experience.

Inflation is only 2% because CPI is bullshit. CPI keeps getting changed so it would be 2%. There are no realistic housing options in there anymore, nor education, nor healthcare, nor ... and if you reinsert those inflation has never been below 4% per year.

While I've gotten above inflation pay rises, they have been exceptions (and due to exceptional performance, ie. usually more than 8h/day for quite a while).

Besides, it is very obvious that modern states and central banks are using inflation to minimize/eliminate the effect of debts on the actual economy. Given what has been going on, how can you realistically defend any other position?

Btw: given what has happened to these debts, you can safely bet your right arm that real inflation is going up to at least 5.3%. And that was before COVID-19 measures.


I got a 2% cut last year and a 4.5% cut the year before when considering inflation. Whee

You forgot to adjust for inflation. 2% drop on money that is worth 6% less or so.

Funny because it used to be 15% and in a few years, someone else will probably be saying 25%.

Why are you complaining about inflation? Just pay 10% more, it's that simple!


Not only is 2% a fairly tepid number, we’ve had to cut rates, make promises to “sustain the expansion”, stop the tapering of The Fed’s balance sheet just to get that 2%.

All throughout 2013-2017, the CPI number has hovered either close to 2% or been below it. Keep in mind that the Fed’s goal is symmetric, meaning that to make up for the times when CPI is below 2%, there needs to be other times when CPI is above 2%. It blows my mind that throughout the late 80s and 90s we were hitting anywhere from 3-5% and now we’re struggling to get 2%.


IN the UK it is with inflation, so the % is almost nothing

They want 2% inflation, not out of control inflation.

Were those 2% meant at the then-current 0% (or even negative) inflation or adjusted to modern inflation levels that tend to hover between 1 and 2%?

Inflation is more like 2%, and I don't think raises average that high.

Inflation is 2.3%.

Inflation in EU is like 2%?
next

Legal | privacy