There was a time where our perception or assessment of the state of our economy was based on a few key numbers - most often our focus was on the unemployment rate and GDP growth. Sometimes you might throw in the state of the stock market and inflation but jobs seemed to be the key element. And now there would appear to be many people who feel the state of the economy rather than accept officials numbers. On the surface, this sounds bad - as if many of us are not being rational or intelligent enough.
Yet, affordability is a serious issue for many people which helps to create that negative sense of the economy. And we do not have standard numbers to rate that issue. If you are now paying 35-50% of your disposable income on accommodation and inflation hits, you may be able to adjust to keep your head above water but you won’t feel positively about the situation. You might even answer a poll saying that your financial situation is stable right now but won’t be happy about it.
I know people who are renting an okay apartment for a decent monthly amount but are at a point in their lives where they would like to buy their own place. So, while they are doing reasonably well now they cannot save enough to buy a house. Perhaps they should be adjusting their aspirations to our current world but not surprising if they are not pleased with where they are and the future they see.
Regarding all surveys; in the last 10+ years if I don’t know who’s calling, I never answer the phones. Therefore, I am one of very many who are never counted in any survey. For the record I consider myself an independent but vote using my knowledge and common sense. However, with trumps running the GOP party I definitely lean towards the Dems. Trump is an incurable Cancer, and who I despise. He is a Hitler, Putin wantabe.
That’s what the Jewish people first thought of Hitler, and then look at what he did. And by the way, I know people (GOPs) who also laugh at me. If I’m wrong, and I hope I am, then there’s no harm. If you’re wrong, there’s big problems in America and the world.
Where is Trump's "Mein Kampf?" Where is the fascist economic program? Where did it come from, when was it popular, and why? Aside from puking out a word to make yourself feel righteous, have you actually studied the details? Nah, that's too hard. Hint: More like Mein Klown.
And by the way, if you are looking for vicious antisemitism, might I suggest looking within your own "progressive" group? After watching liberals turn against free speech in recent years, maybe I should not be surprised, but the resurgence of antisemitism in the Ivy League and other top, universities has been remarkable. My personal favorite is Queers For Palestine. Care to share pics of the Pride march in Gaza or Syria or Iran or Iraq a year ago, or Saudi Arabia or the Emirates?
If you actually care about any of this rather than simply jerking your knee as defensive deflection, I suggest that you look inward. Hatred of Jews is YOUR thing, not the other guy's thing. Republicans have their egregious sins and random bullshit, but not that. So, hotsi tatze another Nazi. Keep crying wolf when you are depressed, and the day just might come when people who might have paid attention will regard you as the shepherd boy.
You have already done it was racism. What other term do you want to de-fang? Used to be that Democrats were against illegal immigration, at least until they decided that labor unions were so yesterday. Tell us, what do you actually believe in?
I started doing some online polls that I get in my text messages. It's easy and so far at least it's only been about issues and not candidates, and I think it gives me chance to register my opinions. But I never answer any number I don't recognize. I'm old enough to remember when "Caller ID" first came out for like $5 a month. It took a few years but I was finally able to pay for it. A seriously good breakthrough.
Have to disagree that the economy is really great and the only reason we don’t think so is because of Republican shit-talking. I work at an org that provides services to a wide range of public and private sector companies and I can tell you that times are not great. Many orgs continue to lay people off and reduce costs, creating a domino effect for all.
From a 30,000-foot view, the pricing-setting power of corporations has never been so strong; with little competition, prices for goods with inelastic demand should rise to absorb all wage gains. However, if you personally did not see median wage gains (how much of the workforce did not? well, half…) you now see the price of your necessities jacked up *beyond* your ability to pay.
My wallet is closer to sea level than FL300, and down here, flyspecks like transaction charges, reductions in service, middlemen taking a “convenience fee” cut — they make a significant difference in true prices, particularly when oligopolies are working as hard as they can to disguise that all-in prices have changed. Before we dismiss complaints about poorer finances as purely political, we should look closely enough to make sure the headline figures in the WSJ match lived reality. This strikes me as the kind of reporting that would be of great value to multiple regional newspapers.
(Remainder of message: a rant about shelter, an inelastic good.)
Shelter has fewer oligarchs, but lack of competition in inelastic goods also sucks all wage increases out of the wallet without oligarchies. It’s a loose theorem that prevailing wages in an area will eventually converge with shelter costs — in the long term, this goes both ways.
Admittedly, I’m typing this outside an Irvine Company building, and I know about BlackRock’s venture into single-family residences. That’s driving prices up, but it will ultimately fail without political help, because the shortage of shelter is the result of existing-homeowner power in zoning: the ability to exclude competition.
Private equity will have to scare renters with “think of your traffic and parking if an apartment complex next to the Metro goes up…oh, there’s a one-car limit per unit? OK, think of all the poorer kids currently in a different school district elsewhere.” But renters can move if it’s a problem. Won’t hurt their home equity. (Private equity is pushing rent-to-own, which could be structured to align renter interests with the landlord. But otherwise, that’s an interesting incentive: “poor kids will drive down property values” “oh, a discount?”)
Expect legislatures to try to favor private equity’s capital investments, since it won’t be local zoning boards. The California legislature does this in end-of-term bills where nobody can quite figure out who inserted what language.
If this were true, why have profit margins not materially changed in groceries and food processing? There is a little elasticity there, and in fact we have seen volumes decline in some snack food (potato chips being a good example), but profit margins have not risen.
As for private equity, from reading your comment I suspect you know nothing about that, and don't want to know. So turn on Rachel Maddow, who I'm sure will tell you everything you want to hear, just as Sean Hannity feeds bullshit to his carnival marks. Its all about the two minutes of hate.
Yes, I really don’t know very much about large-scale private equity purchasing non-trivial amounts of SFR and renting it. It was considered conventional wisdom in real estate for decades that nobody could scale up tenant handling and property management with profit margins high enough for BlackRock to *care*. They are a very different kind of SFR real estate owner than most SFR landlords have been — usually local and politically engaged.
The grocery store sector index on Yahoo Finance is ^YH20550030 and with Discount Stores ^YH20550010 they’re up ~45% in nominal terms since 2021. In fact, they’re up 41% since 2023, mostly keeping up with the S&P500. Compare to other members of Consumer Defensive at ^YH205 (nominal ~18%) like Packaged Food ^YH20525040 which took an 11% nominal hit. Yes, stock value is not an estimate of rent extracted from producer or consumer, but Krogers and Wal*Mart certainly aren’t hurting.
So you are angry about stock prices being too high? That's your story, envy? You want people who own those shares to lose money? Why is that, because you don't have enough money? Is it because your life hasn't turned out well, and you want company in your misery?
You don't actually know anything. You offer meaningless, athetiocv word salads that lead nowhere. You are the Unabomber without explosives. So this is the Democrats on drugs? Good God, between you and Marjorie Taylor Greene, we have us the beginnings of a fun insane asylum.
The world’s biggest fool can say, “the sun is shining,” but that doesn’t mean it’s dark out. Still, sometimes it’s the way to bet.
Since you’re discussing civility over here, let me quote “John James” in a response to me:
> You don't actually know anything. You offer meaningless, athetiocv word salads that lead nowhere. You are the Unabomber without explosives. So this is the Democrats on drugs? Good God, between you and Marjorie Taylor Greene, we have us the beginnings of a fun insane asylum.
The opening sentence sure is…a sparkling way to say, “I don’t understand what you’re trying to say.” I honestly don’t understand their motivation, although it could be “document a martyrdom experience for reposting to another forum.” We’ll see if they actually know what a stock price is; since I don’t know anything, I should be easy to fool.
You would have any credibility if you had also played the Miss Manners card with Donald Pruden Jr. in this thread, who called me (and I quote) "a poor angry sot." Not that he is lazy or you are a typical "progressive" hypocrite or anything. Couldn't be!
Now, I have a very thick skin. Call me any name you want. It has happened on other liberal blogs, where the arrogance is thick enough to cut with a chainsaw and the skins are thin enough to slice with an x-acto knife. I will laugh and return the serve, as I did with Donny, even when he and you are being the usual one-sided zealots. Kumbaya! LOL
This is the worst write up I have read in a long time. What economy are you looking at? Gas prices in California are above $5.00. Illegal immigrants are taking over Home Depot and Walmart parking lots. Healthcare facilities are going bankrupt taking care of the influx of illegal immigrants that don’t have insurance (don’t pay for insurance) driving the current administration to tax the rest of us with jobs more $$. Our country is at risk of war which puts our sons and daughters at risk.
Our retirement funds dropped 30% 3 years ago and are just now getting back to the levels they were before they fell!! Every time we go to the grocery store we are in shock at how much we are paying and how little we are getting. Clearly prices have soared in the last 3 years and the inflation affects everyone. Not clear on how the current administrations economic, border, international policies have improved people’s lifestyles in the last 3 years.
I live in the Pacific NW and three weeks ago drove my diesel pickup to Berkeley for a high school friend's 40th wedding anniversary celebration. In northern California, I paid less than $6 a gallon only once. At home before I left, I paid $3.80, compared to $1.97 at the lowest point of the Trump years, and more often about $2.20.
Anyone who hangs out at the grocery store and actually talks to anyone knows that higher food prices have hurt a lot of people. The idea that happy days are here again is insulting. I am doing fine, but a lot of others are not.
Just go the grocery store and look around. Look at your Netflix bill or any subscription service. Or the price of Big Mac. Prices are up at least 25%+ from a few years ago. Look at the prices of houses, or the interest on credit cards or auto and home loans. What's the new monthly payment?
If you have stocks, a home loan at 3%, or income so that you can ignore the price of food, gasoline, insurance, utilities, everything is great. Perhaps the best it's ever been. It says a lot about the circumstances of the person writing this blog.
If your disposable income is 10-15% of your income, which for many Americans is generous, you're hosed and you're mad about it. The price increases are on unavoidable expenses.
To the entent that Democrats continue to deny that cost of living is an issue, you're conceding the election to Trump.
Biden has tried to attack the grocery stores and food industry. I am a former financial analyst and know my way around income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements. I looked up the last six years of gross margins and operating margins for the five largest publicly held grocers and food processors. No material changes.
Biden's "profiteering" accusation was false, and it disappeared quickly.
Alright, your chutzpah pissed me off a little bit, but because I actually *do* want a political space where lying is punished, I'll play along a bit: It seems like the way President Biden is treating his son's conviction could be contrasted with Trump's refusal to ever take accountability to great political effect.
"For Biden loved the country so much, he sacrificed his only living son..."
I have a lot of sympathy for this article. If “it’s the economy, stupid” then Biden should be walking away with the election. Also misdiagnosing the economy can lead to bad policy choices in the future. If we are to pretend that the economy is bad then our solution to the fake problem is likely to cause a bad result—such as pulling back on the “inflationary” Infrastructure Act or the CHIPS Act to cause a true loss of jobs.
But telling voters they are too dumb to take a win doesn’t sound like a good strategy. So I understand why the pros recoil at pushing a good economy message when “everybody” knows that isn’t true (and “everybody” is thick as a brick). I think the pros are trying to thread the needle by sounding sympathetic to the false critique while subtly pointing out the facts. Unfortunately, it’s not working. Plus the media won’t lift a finger to tell the truth for fear of upsetting their carefully curated bothsiderism.
Thus, I agree with the author and still understand why we can’t motivate the pros to get in the voters’ faces. Perhaps it’s a function of finding a narrative that competes with the Chicken Littles of our country? I wonder if we have the time?
"We need the bad guys to pay a price for their deceptions."
If this were c.2010 I'd be right there with you, but far too many deceptions have been played by Woke activists since then (just for starters, the origin of the phrase "Black Lives Matter" was a killing that was *clearly* in self defense -- Martin was *sitting* on top of Zimmerman and punching him in the head!). You can argue that they reveal a "deeper truth" (though again, why the State of Florida needs to be involved and put a man's freedom for the rest of his life at stake when the physical facts were clear upon initial investigation and the Attorney General's office only pressed charges under pressure, I'm not sure), but they are still very much deceptions that have warped many people's view of reality.
You contribute to this in this very article: The Huffpo Piece (and you, I guess) complain that Alito isn't being investigated, but it also shows that the investigation into Thomas continues to reveal further and further damning details of his corruption! Durbin even got a little "sugar daddies" dig at Thomas' benefactors! That seems pretty good, but you certainly wouldn't get that impression when you conflate "investigate" (what the Senate is doing) with "subpoena" (what Durbin actually said is "not going to happen", because they don't have the votes!)
Punish deceptions, you say? Start by looking in the mirror.
Most people when asked what is their most important issue just mindlessly toss off "the economy" without knowing what that means, to them it means my paycheck and what I spend on gas and eggs and rent and my car note and that's it. There will always be people who are struggling and they will always be given outsize deference by the media because it's always if it bleeds it leads. The trick for Democrats is how to break through. From where I sit the only way is by massive paid advertising, and to get the best guys on Madison Ave to head it up. The other method is to go negative early and often, accuse your opponent of going negative, and deny that you are going negative. It seems like that works every time.
I can confidently say one thing. Of course, I live in flyover country, but such is life. To the extent that the Democrats point to the stock market, it will backfire. People don't spend the S&P 500, they spend what's in their wallet.
I think the happy days are here again message that Beutler is stating here will fail, and fail badly. Prices are 20% higher than they were when Biden was inaugurated, and it's been more acutely felt at the grocery store, the gas station, and for renters, in the check to the landlord. I wonder, Brian Beutler, do you have a grocery budget? My guess is that you do not. Do you pay for every restaurant dinner yourself? Do you eat fast food?
If the Democrats try to tell people to ignore their lying eyes, good luck.
Say Brian? Speaking of bullshit partisanship, it is not your place to tell the public what to think about the economy. Nor do you have any evidence that Trump supporters who are in financial difficulty have said that because their responses are "are shaped by partisanship and tribalism." How do you know that this so-called "partisanship and tribalism" isn't generated by economic circumstances?
You maintain that the economy has enjoyed "a remarkable run of economic good fortune, as we’ve seen in the past year," and say that "We wouldn’t go looking for obscure metrics to explain why the strong economy is secretly weak." Instead, you simply maintain that happy days are here again, and that you will consider no other alternatives.
So I won't bother citing more than one detail of the many other economic indicators that conflict with your bullshit partisanship and tribalism. Instead, I will cite a hard fact that you have not mentioned and that you can look up at the link I will include.
There have been 19 presidential elections since WW2. With only one exception in 1956, when the unemployment rate rose during the second quarter of an election year, the incumbent party's candidate lost. (See 1948, 1952, 1980, 1992, 2008, and 2020.) The reason this happened is that when someone who needs a job doesn't have one, it's a scary and even soul crushing development that translates into voting behavior.
The 1956 exception happened because the change was very small (only 0.1%) and it was an isolated event. There was no unemployment trend that year, and other economic indicators were strong. This year, unemployment has risen from 3.8% to 4.0% since March, and the other obscure metrics point toward a further increase. The June unemployment rate will likely be at least 0.3% higher than March, and possibly 0.4%. It might seem small, but political history says otherwise.
Barring Trump being sent to prison or either he or Biden melting down in some fashion, the economic situation will weigh heavily against Biden's re-election chances. There is a 72-year relationship between the direction of second quarter unemployment and presidential election results. Brian Beutler, in your bullshit partisanship and tribalism, I expect you will ignore this. Zealots commonly ignore facts that contradict their bullshit partisanship and tribalism, and you are a zealot.
Myself, I was a write-in voter in 2016 and 2020 and will be again this year. I think that this year, as in the last two presidential elections, both parties will nominate insulting, manifestly unqualified candidates. The UE/results relationship might not hold this year, and if it does not, then so be it. I am one person who has dropped out at the presidential elections, and thus have no partisan stake in this. But I do recognize bullshit partisanship and tribalism, in this case yours.
I do follow all of it across the spectrum, Brian Beutler, and have seen your prior writing. You are no different than the unbalanced Trumpers. You have met the enemy, and he is right smack in your shaving mirror. Someone needs to say so, and I just did. Now toddle on in arrogance, your hands over your eyes an d your fingers in your ears. You will, and so will they.
Your economic input/electoral output bullshit notwithstanding, you clearly miss the point. Your prediction of a June unemployment increase ignores yearly job growth in warmer weather, especially with agricultural jobs and service sector work (like restaurants). Then there is the persistent overperformance in job growth overall in the last quarter. And the quarters before that.
I don’t intend to change your mind, but if you insist on claiming that Beutler’s economy is in his mirror, then the rest of us can posit that your argument is little more than a species of projection.
Diligent genius, the numbers are seasonally adjusted. Past that, I am very well equipped to talk numbers, but you (and Beutler, and your equally zealous wingnut brothers under the skin) don't like facts. LOL
There was a time where our perception or assessment of the state of our economy was based on a few key numbers - most often our focus was on the unemployment rate and GDP growth. Sometimes you might throw in the state of the stock market and inflation but jobs seemed to be the key element. And now there would appear to be many people who feel the state of the economy rather than accept officials numbers. On the surface, this sounds bad - as if many of us are not being rational or intelligent enough.
Yet, affordability is a serious issue for many people which helps to create that negative sense of the economy. And we do not have standard numbers to rate that issue. If you are now paying 35-50% of your disposable income on accommodation and inflation hits, you may be able to adjust to keep your head above water but you won’t feel positively about the situation. You might even answer a poll saying that your financial situation is stable right now but won’t be happy about it.
I know people who are renting an okay apartment for a decent monthly amount but are at a point in their lives where they would like to buy their own place. So, while they are doing reasonably well now they cannot save enough to buy a house. Perhaps they should be adjusting their aspirations to our current world but not surprising if they are not pleased with where they are and the future they see.
Regarding all surveys; in the last 10+ years if I don’t know who’s calling, I never answer the phones. Therefore, I am one of very many who are never counted in any survey. For the record I consider myself an independent but vote using my knowledge and common sense. However, with trumps running the GOP party I definitely lean towards the Dems. Trump is an incurable Cancer, and who I despise. He is a Hitler, Putin wantabe.
But again, I don’t get involved with surveys.
Jerry Yospin
Hotsi tatze, another Nazi! Trump is a clown, but the Nazi stuff only makes people laugh at you.
That’s what the Jewish people first thought of Hitler, and then look at what he did. And by the way, I know people (GOPs) who also laugh at me. If I’m wrong, and I hope I am, then there’s no harm. If you’re wrong, there’s big problems in America and the world.
Where is Trump's "Mein Kampf?" Where is the fascist economic program? Where did it come from, when was it popular, and why? Aside from puking out a word to make yourself feel righteous, have you actually studied the details? Nah, that's too hard. Hint: More like Mein Klown.
And by the way, if you are looking for vicious antisemitism, might I suggest looking within your own "progressive" group? After watching liberals turn against free speech in recent years, maybe I should not be surprised, but the resurgence of antisemitism in the Ivy League and other top, universities has been remarkable. My personal favorite is Queers For Palestine. Care to share pics of the Pride march in Gaza or Syria or Iran or Iraq a year ago, or Saudi Arabia or the Emirates?
If you actually care about any of this rather than simply jerking your knee as defensive deflection, I suggest that you look inward. Hatred of Jews is YOUR thing, not the other guy's thing. Republicans have their egregious sins and random bullshit, but not that. So, hotsi tatze another Nazi. Keep crying wolf when you are depressed, and the day just might come when people who might have paid attention will regard you as the shepherd boy.
You have already done it was racism. What other term do you want to de-fang? Used to be that Democrats were against illegal immigration, at least until they decided that labor unions were so yesterday. Tell us, what do you actually believe in?
I started doing some online polls that I get in my text messages. It's easy and so far at least it's only been about issues and not candidates, and I think it gives me chance to register my opinions. But I never answer any number I don't recognize. I'm old enough to remember when "Caller ID" first came out for like $5 a month. It took a few years but I was finally able to pay for it. A seriously good breakthrough.
Have to disagree that the economy is really great and the only reason we don’t think so is because of Republican shit-talking. I work at an org that provides services to a wide range of public and private sector companies and I can tell you that times are not great. Many orgs continue to lay people off and reduce costs, creating a domino effect for all.
But that's just from a micro perspective. From the 30,000 foot view it has never been better in all of history.
From a 30,000-foot view, the pricing-setting power of corporations has never been so strong; with little competition, prices for goods with inelastic demand should rise to absorb all wage gains. However, if you personally did not see median wage gains (how much of the workforce did not? well, half…) you now see the price of your necessities jacked up *beyond* your ability to pay.
My wallet is closer to sea level than FL300, and down here, flyspecks like transaction charges, reductions in service, middlemen taking a “convenience fee” cut — they make a significant difference in true prices, particularly when oligopolies are working as hard as they can to disguise that all-in prices have changed. Before we dismiss complaints about poorer finances as purely political, we should look closely enough to make sure the headline figures in the WSJ match lived reality. This strikes me as the kind of reporting that would be of great value to multiple regional newspapers.
(Remainder of message: a rant about shelter, an inelastic good.)
Shelter has fewer oligarchs, but lack of competition in inelastic goods also sucks all wage increases out of the wallet without oligarchies. It’s a loose theorem that prevailing wages in an area will eventually converge with shelter costs — in the long term, this goes both ways.
Admittedly, I’m typing this outside an Irvine Company building, and I know about BlackRock’s venture into single-family residences. That’s driving prices up, but it will ultimately fail without political help, because the shortage of shelter is the result of existing-homeowner power in zoning: the ability to exclude competition.
Private equity will have to scare renters with “think of your traffic and parking if an apartment complex next to the Metro goes up…oh, there’s a one-car limit per unit? OK, think of all the poorer kids currently in a different school district elsewhere.” But renters can move if it’s a problem. Won’t hurt their home equity. (Private equity is pushing rent-to-own, which could be structured to align renter interests with the landlord. But otherwise, that’s an interesting incentive: “poor kids will drive down property values” “oh, a discount?”)
Expect legislatures to try to favor private equity’s capital investments, since it won’t be local zoning boards. The California legislature does this in end-of-term bills where nobody can quite figure out who inserted what language.
If this were true, why have profit margins not materially changed in groceries and food processing? There is a little elasticity there, and in fact we have seen volumes decline in some snack food (potato chips being a good example), but profit margins have not risen.
As for private equity, from reading your comment I suspect you know nothing about that, and don't want to know. So turn on Rachel Maddow, who I'm sure will tell you everything you want to hear, just as Sean Hannity feeds bullshit to his carnival marks. Its all about the two minutes of hate.
Yes, I really don’t know very much about large-scale private equity purchasing non-trivial amounts of SFR and renting it. It was considered conventional wisdom in real estate for decades that nobody could scale up tenant handling and property management with profit margins high enough for BlackRock to *care*. They are a very different kind of SFR real estate owner than most SFR landlords have been — usually local and politically engaged.
The grocery store sector index on Yahoo Finance is ^YH20550030 and with Discount Stores ^YH20550010 they’re up ~45% in nominal terms since 2021. In fact, they’re up 41% since 2023, mostly keeping up with the S&P500. Compare to other members of Consumer Defensive at ^YH205 (nominal ~18%) like Packaged Food ^YH20525040 which took an 11% nominal hit. Yes, stock value is not an estimate of rent extracted from producer or consumer, but Krogers and Wal*Mart certainly aren’t hurting.
So you are angry about stock prices being too high? That's your story, envy? You want people who own those shares to lose money? Why is that, because you don't have enough money? Is it because your life hasn't turned out well, and you want company in your misery?
You don't actually know anything. You offer meaningless, athetiocv word salads that lead nowhere. You are the Unabomber without explosives. So this is the Democrats on drugs? Good God, between you and Marjorie Taylor Greene, we have us the beginnings of a fun insane asylum.
What does a stock price represent?
All true, yet, even so still the best economy in history.
Keep believing, and say hello to Bigfoot for me.
Your level of maturity undercuts your thesis. You sure you wanna go there?
The world’s biggest fool can say, “the sun is shining,” but that doesn’t mean it’s dark out. Still, sometimes it’s the way to bet.
Since you’re discussing civility over here, let me quote “John James” in a response to me:
> You don't actually know anything. You offer meaningless, athetiocv word salads that lead nowhere. You are the Unabomber without explosives. So this is the Democrats on drugs? Good God, between you and Marjorie Taylor Greene, we have us the beginnings of a fun insane asylum.
The opening sentence sure is…a sparkling way to say, “I don’t understand what you’re trying to say.” I honestly don’t understand their motivation, although it could be “document a martyrdom experience for reposting to another forum.” We’ll see if they actually know what a stock price is; since I don’t know anything, I should be easy to fool.
You would have any credibility if you had also played the Miss Manners card with Donald Pruden Jr. in this thread, who called me (and I quote) "a poor angry sot." Not that he is lazy or you are a typical "progressive" hypocrite or anything. Couldn't be!
Now, I have a very thick skin. Call me any name you want. It has happened on other liberal blogs, where the arrogance is thick enough to cut with a chainsaw and the skins are thin enough to slice with an x-acto knife. I will laugh and return the serve, as I did with Donny, even when he and you are being the usual one-sided zealots. Kumbaya! LOL
Wow,
This is the worst write up I have read in a long time. What economy are you looking at? Gas prices in California are above $5.00. Illegal immigrants are taking over Home Depot and Walmart parking lots. Healthcare facilities are going bankrupt taking care of the influx of illegal immigrants that don’t have insurance (don’t pay for insurance) driving the current administration to tax the rest of us with jobs more $$. Our country is at risk of war which puts our sons and daughters at risk.
Our retirement funds dropped 30% 3 years ago and are just now getting back to the levels they were before they fell!! Every time we go to the grocery store we are in shock at how much we are paying and how little we are getting. Clearly prices have soared in the last 3 years and the inflation affects everyone. Not clear on how the current administrations economic, border, international policies have improved people’s lifestyles in the last 3 years.
He's looking at the economy without racism googles, made up tax increases, or bullshit war risk.
Also looks like you made some shitty financial decisions. The drop due to covid was in 2020, 4.5 years ago, and VTI is up more than 50% from Feb 2020.
Yeah, it's all racism! Could you be any more stereotypically nutcase "progressive?"
I live in the Pacific NW and three weeks ago drove my diesel pickup to Berkeley for a high school friend's 40th wedding anniversary celebration. In northern California, I paid less than $6 a gallon only once. At home before I left, I paid $3.80, compared to $1.97 at the lowest point of the Trump years, and more often about $2.20.
Anyone who hangs out at the grocery store and actually talks to anyone knows that higher food prices have hurt a lot of people. The idea that happy days are here again is insulting. I am doing fine, but a lot of others are not.
Just go the grocery store and look around. Look at your Netflix bill or any subscription service. Or the price of Big Mac. Prices are up at least 25%+ from a few years ago. Look at the prices of houses, or the interest on credit cards or auto and home loans. What's the new monthly payment?
If you have stocks, a home loan at 3%, or income so that you can ignore the price of food, gasoline, insurance, utilities, everything is great. Perhaps the best it's ever been. It says a lot about the circumstances of the person writing this blog.
If your disposable income is 10-15% of your income, which for many Americans is generous, you're hosed and you're mad about it. The price increases are on unavoidable expenses.
To the entent that Democrats continue to deny that cost of living is an issue, you're conceding the election to Trump.
Biden has tried to attack the grocery stores and food industry. I am a former financial analyst and know my way around income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements. I looked up the last six years of gross margins and operating margins for the five largest publicly held grocers and food processors. No material changes.
Biden's "profiteering" accusation was false, and it disappeared quickly.
Alright, your chutzpah pissed me off a little bit, but because I actually *do* want a political space where lying is punished, I'll play along a bit: It seems like the way President Biden is treating his son's conviction could be contrasted with Trump's refusal to ever take accountability to great political effect.
"For Biden loved the country so much, he sacrificed his only living son..."
If only the world was fair…
I have a lot of sympathy for this article. If “it’s the economy, stupid” then Biden should be walking away with the election. Also misdiagnosing the economy can lead to bad policy choices in the future. If we are to pretend that the economy is bad then our solution to the fake problem is likely to cause a bad result—such as pulling back on the “inflationary” Infrastructure Act or the CHIPS Act to cause a true loss of jobs.
But telling voters they are too dumb to take a win doesn’t sound like a good strategy. So I understand why the pros recoil at pushing a good economy message when “everybody” knows that isn’t true (and “everybody” is thick as a brick). I think the pros are trying to thread the needle by sounding sympathetic to the false critique while subtly pointing out the facts. Unfortunately, it’s not working. Plus the media won’t lift a finger to tell the truth for fear of upsetting their carefully curated bothsiderism.
Thus, I agree with the author and still understand why we can’t motivate the pros to get in the voters’ faces. Perhaps it’s a function of finding a narrative that competes with the Chicken Littles of our country? I wonder if we have the time?
"We need the bad guys to pay a price for their deceptions."
If this were c.2010 I'd be right there with you, but far too many deceptions have been played by Woke activists since then (just for starters, the origin of the phrase "Black Lives Matter" was a killing that was *clearly* in self defense -- Martin was *sitting* on top of Zimmerman and punching him in the head!). You can argue that they reveal a "deeper truth" (though again, why the State of Florida needs to be involved and put a man's freedom for the rest of his life at stake when the physical facts were clear upon initial investigation and the Attorney General's office only pressed charges under pressure, I'm not sure), but they are still very much deceptions that have warped many people's view of reality.
You contribute to this in this very article: The Huffpo Piece (and you, I guess) complain that Alito isn't being investigated, but it also shows that the investigation into Thomas continues to reveal further and further damning details of his corruption! Durbin even got a little "sugar daddies" dig at Thomas' benefactors! That seems pretty good, but you certainly wouldn't get that impression when you conflate "investigate" (what the Senate is doing) with "subpoena" (what Durbin actually said is "not going to happen", because they don't have the votes!)
Punish deceptions, you say? Start by looking in the mirror.
Most people when asked what is their most important issue just mindlessly toss off "the economy" without knowing what that means, to them it means my paycheck and what I spend on gas and eggs and rent and my car note and that's it. There will always be people who are struggling and they will always be given outsize deference by the media because it's always if it bleeds it leads. The trick for Democrats is how to break through. From where I sit the only way is by massive paid advertising, and to get the best guys on Madison Ave to head it up. The other method is to go negative early and often, accuse your opponent of going negative, and deny that you are going negative. It seems like that works every time.
I can confidently say one thing. Of course, I live in flyover country, but such is life. To the extent that the Democrats point to the stock market, it will backfire. People don't spend the S&P 500, they spend what's in their wallet.
I think the happy days are here again message that Beutler is stating here will fail, and fail badly. Prices are 20% higher than they were when Biden was inaugurated, and it's been more acutely felt at the grocery store, the gas station, and for renters, in the check to the landlord. I wonder, Brian Beutler, do you have a grocery budget? My guess is that you do not. Do you pay for every restaurant dinner yourself? Do you eat fast food?
If the Democrats try to tell people to ignore their lying eyes, good luck.
Say Brian? Speaking of bullshit partisanship, it is not your place to tell the public what to think about the economy. Nor do you have any evidence that Trump supporters who are in financial difficulty have said that because their responses are "are shaped by partisanship and tribalism." How do you know that this so-called "partisanship and tribalism" isn't generated by economic circumstances?
You maintain that the economy has enjoyed "a remarkable run of economic good fortune, as we’ve seen in the past year," and say that "We wouldn’t go looking for obscure metrics to explain why the strong economy is secretly weak." Instead, you simply maintain that happy days are here again, and that you will consider no other alternatives.
So I won't bother citing more than one detail of the many other economic indicators that conflict with your bullshit partisanship and tribalism. Instead, I will cite a hard fact that you have not mentioned and that you can look up at the link I will include.
There have been 19 presidential elections since WW2. With only one exception in 1956, when the unemployment rate rose during the second quarter of an election year, the incumbent party's candidate lost. (See 1948, 1952, 1980, 1992, 2008, and 2020.) The reason this happened is that when someone who needs a job doesn't have one, it's a scary and even soul crushing development that translates into voting behavior.
The 1956 exception happened because the change was very small (only 0.1%) and it was an isolated event. There was no unemployment trend that year, and other economic indicators were strong. This year, unemployment has risen from 3.8% to 4.0% since March, and the other obscure metrics point toward a further increase. The June unemployment rate will likely be at least 0.3% higher than March, and possibly 0.4%. It might seem small, but political history says otherwise.
Barring Trump being sent to prison or either he or Biden melting down in some fashion, the economic situation will weigh heavily against Biden's re-election chances. There is a 72-year relationship between the direction of second quarter unemployment and presidential election results. Brian Beutler, in your bullshit partisanship and tribalism, I expect you will ignore this. Zealots commonly ignore facts that contradict their bullshit partisanship and tribalism, and you are a zealot.
Myself, I was a write-in voter in 2016 and 2020 and will be again this year. I think that this year, as in the last two presidential elections, both parties will nominate insulting, manifestly unqualified candidates. The UE/results relationship might not hold this year, and if it does not, then so be it. I am one person who has dropped out at the presidential elections, and thus have no partisan stake in this. But I do recognize bullshit partisanship and tribalism, in this case yours.
I do follow all of it across the spectrum, Brian Beutler, and have seen your prior writing. You are no different than the unbalanced Trumpers. You have met the enemy, and he is right smack in your shaving mirror. Someone needs to say so, and I just did. Now toddle on in arrogance, your hands over your eyes an d your fingers in your ears. You will, and so will they.
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000?years_option=all_years
You poor, angry sot….
Your economic input/electoral output bullshit notwithstanding, you clearly miss the point. Your prediction of a June unemployment increase ignores yearly job growth in warmer weather, especially with agricultural jobs and service sector work (like restaurants). Then there is the persistent overperformance in job growth overall in the last quarter. And the quarters before that.
I don’t intend to change your mind, but if you insist on claiming that Beutler’s economy is in his mirror, then the rest of us can posit that your argument is little more than a species of projection.
Diligent genius, the numbers are seasonally adjusted. Past that, I am very well equipped to talk numbers, but you (and Beutler, and your equally zealous wingnut brothers under the skin) don't like facts. LOL