Capitalism Reform – The Wrongologist

Political Advertising: How Effective Is It?

The Daily Escape:

Wrongo’s calendar says there’s just 29 days to go until Election Day. The campaigns are in high gear, but what are they saying? And is what they’re saying getting through to both their base voters as well as to those who are “persuadable” enough for them to get out to the polls and vote? Time is running out.

Timing is a point raised in this NBC story, which describes that, after having taken the last 76 days to introduce the Vice President to voters, the campaign now plans to ratchet up negative advertising about how unfit Trump is to be President (emphasis by Wrongo).

“Leaning more heavily into negative campaigning is a strategic shift for Harris. While she has routinely been critical of Trump since becoming a candidate in July….Harris campaign officials said they intend to continue laying out her policy positions, background and plans…But emphasizing what Harris campaign officials view as Trump’s major vulnerabilities is seen as possibly one of the only ways to finally win over some voters who haven’t made up their mind in a static race that Democrats want to push in their direction.”

A recent poll by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs suggests that Harris’ attacks on Trump’s brand of hyper-masculinity appear to be working. As the Daily Beast summarized the findings, respondents:

“…chose Harris 59% over Trump’s 57% when it came to which candidate they felt was tough enough to be president…and favored Harris 55 to 46 % on “which candidate would change the country for the better,” and by 54 to 43% on who “was more likely to fight for them.”

Harris also is micro targeting the message of Trump’s weakness. From the WaPo:

“For the millions of football fans who tuned in from home for Saturday night’s much anticipated matchup between the University of Georgia and the University of Alabama, she also ran a new ad nationally on ABC that hammers home her point.”

The ad says:

“’Winners never back down from a challenge. Champions know it’s anytime, anyplace. But losers, they whine and waffle and take their ball home,’ the narrator says at the start of the spot, over images of a football game and washed-out footage of Trump missing a golf putt. The 30-second ad ends with footage of Harris challenging him to another debate, with the words “When we fight, we win” hanging on a sign in the background.”

The money quote:

“Well, Donald, I do hope you’ll reconsider to meet me on the debate stage. If you’ve got something to say, say it to my face,…

Harris also posted the ad on Trump’s Truth Social media platform.

Marcy Wheeler quotes CNN’s David Wright who tracks political spending by the candidates about where the money is headed in this final month as the ad wars intensify:

“You can see how each side is placing bets on their best path to 270 electoral votes. In the first week of October, the Harris campaign is spending the most in the critical trio of “Blue Wall” states – they’ve got more than $5 million booked in Pennsylvania, about $4 million booked in Michigan, plus about $2.7 million booked in Wisconsin. And that makes sense – if Harris wins all three of those states, plus Nebraska’s up-for-grabs electoral vote in the swingy second congressional district (where the campaign also has more than $300,000 in ad time this week), she’s the next president.”

Turning to Trump:

“…he’ s looking to the Sun Belt. This week, Trump’s campaign is spending the most on ads in Pennsylvania, $3.8 million – it’s really the linchpin to both sides’ strategies. But in addition to that, the campaign is also spending $3.4 million in North Carolina and nearly $3 million in Georgia, its other top targets, and if he wins those two states plus Pennsylvania, he’s heading back to the White House.”

The Electoral College will come down to which of the two campaigns potential voters consider more trustable, probably mostly on their personal economic situation and where that’s heading with each potential president. From the WaPo:

“Americans are finally starting to feel better about the economy, invigorating Vice President Kamala Harris’s pitch for the presidency as she narrows her Republican opponent’s longtime lead on an issue that is foremost on voters’ minds.”

“Although voters still favor former president Trump over Harris on handling the economy, his advantage has dropped dramatically in recent weeks. Trump now averages a six-percentage-point edge on the economy…”

But Trump’s only answers for the economy are lower taxes on the rich and more tariffs. Yet, like everything else, Trump has no idea what tariffs actually do.

However, a new survey by Data For Progress’s top line finds Harris leading Trump by 3 points among likely voters nationwide. Nearly half of voters (49%), including a plurality of Independents (46%), choose Harris, while 46% choose Trump.

On the all-important economy, Harris has a trust advantage on most of the economic measures tested, including: supporting small businesses (+10 points), taxes on middle class Americans (+9), increasing wages (+5), lowering housing costs (+5), handling labor union policy (5%), improving our infrastructure (+3), lowering grocery costs (+2), creating jobs (+1), and protecting domestic manufacturing jobs (+1).

That says her campaign messaging is getting through.

Also the survey finds Trump with just a +1-point trust advantage over Harris on “reducing inflation,” an issue that voters have consistently ranked as their most important when deciding whom to vote for. Here’s their chart:

They also surveyed candidate favorability, which now tilts towards Harris. Harris’ rating is +2, while Trump’s is -12:

Is this poll on the money? Difficult to tell. A shorter election season makes it harder for campaigns to assess where to place their bets. And which of their cohorts in the electorate demand the most attention. We’ve focused on Gen Z and younger voters as being primarily swayed by economics. Messaging to women is another important element. Harris can run ads attacking Trump’s hyper-masculinity, (which will help with women).

From The Economist: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“And Harris needs to focus there. In the Obama years the gap between young men and women identifying as liberals was just five percentage points, during the Trump-Biden years this has tripled to 15 points, according to Gallup. This change has been caused almost entirely by young women moving to the left, rather than young men tacking to the right. The fact that this generation’s formative years were during the #MeToo movement, the Trump years and the decision to overturn Roe v Wade helps explain it.”

In 2020 a majority of white women voted for Trump. He will be in the minority in 2024. Leading among women is a real advantage. Since the 1980s a greater share of women than men has turned out to vote. In 2020 women made up 54% of the electorate. A final indicator that Democrats might be winning this battle of the sexes: in battleground states, according to Target Smart, a data firm, between July and September, twice as many young Democratic women registered to vote than young Republican men.

Trump’s bet is that Harris is the one with the turnout problem. They think their base is more committed to their candidate than is Harris’s. But Marcy Wheeler points to Harris’s investment in the Dem ground game:

“The Harris campaign claimed in late September to have 330 offices and more than 2,400 staff. They completed 25,000 weekend volunteer shifts on the final weekend of last month, contacting over 1 million voters over three days and completed the 100,000th event of the campaign.”

BTW: Ms. Oh So Right got a postcard from Harris to vote early this week.

Cartoons of the Week Plus Commentary – October 6, 2024

Cartoons this week were mostly about Vance failing to answer the “Who Won?” question. Here’s one Wrongo liked:

There’s always something in October:

Wrongo wants to update his last column about why Harris needs to speak with more empathy to Gen Z and younger voters. Friend of the Blog John S. left this comment:

“I believe Harris is speaking but perhaps not loud enough or Gen Z isn’t listening. Her plans do include downpayment money for new housing, tax incentives for builders to sell to first time home buyers, 3 million new homes constructed, business startup credits, earned income credits for low wage earners, newborn tax credits, food price regulations, and reduction of medical debt. Maybe you can say it won’t be enough or that some of these things can’t be implemented but nonetheless they are in “the plan”. Perhaps if her message was stronger on social media, as you mentioned in another column, the “Z’ers” would listen.”

He’ s right but Harris like most Dem politicians, isn’t offering sufficient “feel your pain” context to get people to listen. Obama was one of the few Democrats to place policy in a human context, but most of the time, the Democrats are relying on a laundry list of policies that may or may not ever be enacted.

America had good economic news yesterday, but no Republican was willing to cede that to Biden or the Democrats. Sen. Rubio (R-FL) claimed in a post on Twitter/X that the great jobs numbers were “fake” because past months had to be revised (most jobs reports are revised in subsequent months).

It’s true that the economy added jobs. But most were low-income service jobs. Meanwhile, the pathways to the middle class, manufacturing and white collar jobs, actually shrank. The Gen Z and younger workers suspect that the American Dream is fading because middle class jobs are going away, and they’re precisely correct in that intuition.

The GenZ’ers can’t square their lived reality with the commentary that comes from on high, particularly regarding the economy. Over time, they’ve come to distrust institutions. That’s true at a social level—levels of trust have cratered over time. And this is a key reason why this gulf between what young people live, experience, feel, and the skin-deep recitation of the miracle of the “Booming Economy”. It doesn’t reach deeply enough into their lives.

Harris shouldn’t cede any of this ground to Trump. Wrongo quoted Vance during the VP debate:

People are struggling to pay the bills. Times are tough.
The American Dream is fading, and feels unattainable.
We should stop shipping jobs offshore.

And Republicans understand the task at hand is to peel younger voters in swing states away from Harris. FWIW reports that a constellation of Right-wing groups are spending millions online to get their messaging in front of swing state voters. Probably the biggest line of attack being used against Harris has to do with inflation and the state of the economy: (brackets by Wrongo)

“For example, Duty to America is specifically targeting Gen Z and Millennial men in battleground states with ads bemoaning the state of the economy, saying: ‘According to…Harris, the economy is fixed [repaired]…at our age, our parents owned a home, had kids, saved for retirement, and we can barely buy groceries, gas, or pay our rent.’”

“This ad is running across platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and Google, but also on Roku devices and streaming services where young people actually watch TV shows. Duty to America has spent the majority of its ad dollars targeting Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia and North Carolina.”

“Similarly, Preserve America is running direct-to-camera video ads on Facebook and Instagram from a trio of white women who are complaining about high inflation and grocery prices, sometimes tying the issue to illegal immigration. You can browse through some of those ads here.”

FWIW adds a chart about ad spending: (note that the red and blue here are 100% pro-Trump spending)

A few other groups have also emphasized economic attacks among younger members of the electorate. One from Our American Century says “Kamala Harris thinks young people are stupid” when it comes to the economy, and Right for America is also running with the “stupid” line.

FWIW notes that Harris is outspending Trump on Facebook and Instagram: Harris spent $8.1 million to Trump’s $1.1 million between September 21 to 28. Meanwhile, political campaigns spent $40.3 million on Google and YouTube ads last week, with Harris and affiliates spent $10.8 million to Trump’s $2.8 million.

Here’s a recap of spending by both campaigns:

The Democrats instead should invest more money where the young people are. They should challenge the Republicans by admitting that things look pretty dire for Gen Z and younger people. That over time, the American Dream’s faded. That times are rough. That people are struggling.

They should use exactly those words like Vance did, because they’re the ones that count. They resonate. You have to hope that the Harris brain trust will match Trump’s initiative by spending some of this money targeting Gen Z and younger voters with empathetic messaging like the Republicans are already doing.

The policy details can come once they’re listening.

Harris Needs To Speak To Gen Z’s Reality

The Daily Escape:

Before tackling the major subject for today, Wrongo wants to briefly cover something you probably missed. There was an abortion ruling in Georgia that overturned the state’s anti-abortion law. The judge plowed new ground with his reasoning: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“While the State’s interest in protecting ‘unborn’ life is compelling, until that life can be sustained by the State — and not solely by the woman compelled by the Act to do the State’s work — the balance of rights favors the woman….Women are not some piece of collectively owned community property the disposition of which is decided by majority vote. Forcing a woman to carry an unwanted, not-yet-viable fetus to term violates her constitutional rights to liberty and privacy, even taking into consideration whatever bundle of rights the not-yet-viable fetus may have….It is not for a legislator, a judge, or a Commander from The Handmaid’s Tale to tell these women what to do with their bodies during this period when the fetus cannot survive outside the womb any more so than society could — or should — force them to serve as a human tissue bank or to give up a kidney for the benefit of another….When someone other than the pregnant woman is able to sustain the fetus, then — and only then — should those other voices have a say in the discussion about the decisions the pregnant woman makes concerning her body and what is growing within it.”

The ruling is unlikely to be the final word on abortion access in Georgia, since the case will ultimately be decided by the Georgia Supreme Court.

The judge has a solid argument: Why does society have an interest in a viable fetus when we know society won’t lift a finger to financially and medically support the newborn? Why allow the government to intervene at a time when the costs involved for the mother to continue with the pregnancy increase substantially?

Let’s move to a powerful idea that emerged in the VP debate. Wrongo thinks the key to winning the election will be how Harris reaches out to Gen Z (those born between 1997 and 2012). PBS Newshour interviewed Kyla Scanlon, who reminds us that Gen Z now has more people in the workforce than the Boomer generation, but they aren’t faring as well. Scanlon says that Gen Z has had a tough go of it, being essentially born into the tech bubble, growing up during the Great Recession and then graduating or being in college during the pandemic.

From Scanlon: (brackets by Wrongo)

“…I think for a lot of Gen Z’ers, rent is definitely not as affordable as it used to be. Real wages have increased, so [have] wages adjusted for inflation, but rent has increased much more. And that’s sort of the foundation of how everyone experiences the economy. It’s where you live and how you have to pay for where you live….people look at the price of rent, they look at the price of gas, they look at the price of food, they just look at the inflation that we have experienced over the past few years, and it’s sometimes just not enough to even make those real wage gains worth it.”

“It’s also the cost of childcare, eldercare, these things that are economically quite painful, but don’t necessarily show up in traditional economic measurements like GDP….They’re things that are… hidden costs that people experience.”

Scanlon also talked about the negative bias in the media that’s driving how people feel about their economic circumstances. Media sentiment on the economy has trended either skeptical or negative for a very long time, so people are reading negative headlines despite the economists and pundits saying the economy is OK. This is a big disconnect for the younger generations who get most of their news from social media.

In the debate, Vance said a few things that certainly resonate with Gen Z and others. He noted three things in particular:

People are struggling to pay the bills. Times are tough.
The American Dream is fading, and feels unattainable.
We should stop shipping jobs offshore.

It’s hard to disagree with any of that, and Harris shouldn’t cede any of this ground to Trump. How hard is it to build this into your stump speech? She could easily acknowledge that we’re in the midst of a global cost of living crisis. The biggest one in half a century.

But it was left to Vance and Scanlon to say the things that most Americans feel.

Gen Z and their younger cohorts mistakenly think that the economy is a zero sum game, meaning that if China is doing well or immigrants are coming here and finding work, that regular Americans must be doing worse, even though the economic statistics say otherwise.

Harris needs to deliver an economic message that’s grounded in the reality that Gen Z and others are experiencing. It can be as simple as acknowledging what Vance or Scanlon called out as problems for many younger Americans.

All she needs to do is “Just Say It”.

Many of Wrongo’s 12 grandchildren (17-32 years-old) largely feel that the American Dream is beyond their reach. They’re certain Social Security won’t be there for them. Most think that they’ll never own a home.

Why can’t Harris speak to this? Harris and the Dems talk vaguely about “the opportunity economy” but a more emotional and empathetic call out is required. People with economic problems need to trust the head of the ticket, and that trust starts with acknowledging their reality: That things aren’t as good for the younger generations as the economic statistics say they are.

The Dems have an actual track record: Investing in infrastructure and encouraging domestic production of strategic goods. Investment in manufacturing is at an all time high. We’re starting to produce advanced chips in Arizona. Unions are stronger than in recent years.

Harris needs to show empathy for those in Gen Z (and younger) who are not fully participating in the opportunity economy.

It will help her win in November.

The Gap Between Economic Statistics (good) vs. People’s Perception Of Economic Situation (terrible)

The Daily Escape:

Monument Valley, Navajo Tribal Park, AZ – May, 2024 photo by Hung Ton

From The Lever:

“Americans paid roughly 25% more on groceries and dining out this March than they paid in January 2020, outpacing the rate of general inflation. Over that same period, the companies behind the country’s 10 largest grocery and restaurant brands have together returned or pledged to return more than $77 billion to shareholders.”

“In March 2024, consumers spent 95% more for a carton of eggs, 33% more for a pound of ground beef, and 22% more for a gallon of milk than they did before the pandemic.”

According to an analysis by Food and Water Watch, a corporate watchdog group, food costs for an average family of four living on a “thrifty” budget increased 50% from January 2020 to January 2024, from $654 to $976 a month.

When economists and pundits talk about the disconnect between America’s overall economic performance and how badly Americans view the economy, this unprecedented spike in food costs is at the heart of the problem.

In 2021, as food costs were skyrocketing, America’s biggest chains and grocery brands blamed the price hikes on supply chain issues and economy-wide inflation. But these same companies have expanded profits and quietly authorized billions of dollars in stock buyback programs and dividend payouts to shareholders.

Former PepsiCo CFO Hugh Johnston told Bloomberg last year that consecutive double-digit price hikes on the company’s products in recent years were “just there to cover inflation”. But in 2023, PepsiCo reported $91 billion in net revenue, a 35% increase over prepandemic income. And it used $7.7 billion of its profits to repurchase stock and issue dividends. Those buybacks increased by a whopping 843% compared to 2021.

More from The Lever: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Matt Gardner, senior fellow at the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy, a tax policy advocacy group, said buybacks boomed right before the pandemic when Trump-era tax cuts left corporations with extra cash on hand.”

Advocates for the Republican tax cuts said that companies would reinvest that tax windfall back into the economy via manufacturing and jobs (more trickle down). But many began plowing money into buybacks instead.

Tyson Foods more than doubled its profit margins between 2021 and 2022 after hiking prices for beef, pork, and chicken by 30%. The company claims it raised prices because it needed to offset increased costs in labor, transportation, and grain for animal feed. But data from earnings reports show that while increased operating costs set the company back $1.5 billion dollars in 2022, price increases expanded profits by $2 billion, meaning consumers covered Tyson’s inflation costs plus they also shelled out $500 million more. That year, Tyson repurchased $702 million of its own shares and raised dividends by 4%.

Some Americans trying to save money by eating fast foods have seen those prices increase too. A study of the country’s biggest fast food brands by Finance Buzz found that at all of them, menu prices have outpaced inflation. The Food Institute’s survey shows that: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Due to inflated costs, 78% of respondents say they now view fast-food as a luxury. The percentage increases to 80% or higher among those making less than $30,000 a year.”

These high food costs have been largely caused by the food industry increasing prices faster than their costs.

Americans are largely supportive of efforts to regulate how much companies charge for food. In a new Data for Progress poll, 69% of respondents said the government “should do more to regulate grocery stores that raise prices to maximize profits.”

Sad to say, the Democrats will not do anything meaningful to bring down the cost of food.

And the higher expense of putting food on the table may partly explain the so-called “vibecession”. There’s a great divide in the US between how people see their personal financial situation (pretty good) and their view of the overall economy (terrible). Here’s another chart:

Data: Federal Reserve Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking; Chart: Axios Visuals

In the above poll by the Federal Reserve, respondents are asked to choose from four options when it comes to how they’re doing. The top two choices were “living comfortably” and “doing OK.” 72% of Americans landed in those categories.

Respondents are also asked about the financial well-being of the national economy — the top two choices, “excellent” and “good,” were chosen by only 22% of Americans. In addition, that gap between people’s perceptions of their financial well-being and that of the national economy has nearly doubled since 2019. From Axios: (brackets by Wrongo)

“This divide is showing up in plenty of surveys. The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index for May [2024] came in lower than 84% of readings since 1978….Just 22% of respondents to a May Gallup poll said they were satisfied with the way things were going in the US, compared to 77% dissatisfied. That’s a wider gap than three-quarters of the time since they started asking the question in the 1970s. A Harris poll last month showed that 56% of Americans think we’re in a recession.”

Brian Beutler reminds us that if Trump were in office today — presiding over full employment while Americans enjoyed more purchasing power than ever before, and inflation was hovering steadily around three percent — he and Republican politicians would claim credit for building the greatest economy in US history.

But Biden and his handlers are vacillating about how to address the economy’s perception gap. From Beutler:

“Nevertheless, the emerging Democratic consensus seems to be that Biden should continue to ‘meet people where they are’: sympathize with the plight of the struggling, implicitly concede that the economy—which would poll through the roof with Republicans stealing credit for it—is actually bad.

Within the White House…aides are pushing for a message that makes empathy toward the economic plight of certain Americans more central….Some noticed a preview…when the president described the April inflation report…‘I know many families are struggling, and that even though we’ve made progress we have a lot more to do.’”

That can’t be right if we can swap Republicans for Democrats without changing anything else, and the perception gap would somehow magically go away.

But Biden shouldn’t be speaking as though the economy is one where more people need help when the truth is that fewer people need it. That would affirm the false notion that economic suffering is broadly based and something must be done to alleviate it.

The WaPo’s answer was an editorial saying that “Nearly everything Americans believe about the economy is wrong”. The same issue also had a story saying that people can’t make ends meet.

Are both of those things simultaneously true? Politicians better figure out which is primary (great economy) and which is secondary (bad personal financial situation).

We know that people are struggling to pay rent and mortgages and now, fast food’s a luxury. This is what is making many people think that this is the worst economy ever. And if you look closely this isn’t just “anecdotal”. The statistics supplied above seem to bear it out in some detail.

Biden needs to brag about the economy but he also must call out the food industry, and show people who are struggling that he’s trying to help.

Oops, Boeing Does It Again

The Daily Escape:

Lenticular cloud at sunrise, Salton City, CA – May 2024 photo by Paulette Donnellon

At a time when Boeing is facing calls by the flying public as well as from governments to return to its focus on safety, the company has scored an “own goal” by deciding to pick a fight with its in-house firefighters union, who help to keep Boeing itself safe.

From The Stand, a Seattle-based newsletter about working people:

“The more than 120 fire fighters who protect Boeing employees and facilities in Washington state — members of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local I-66 — are struggling to get a fair contract from the Arlington, Virginia-based company.”

At the heart of the dispute is Boeing’s insistence on raising the time it takes for firefighters to reach the maximum pay scale from 14 years to 19 years. Negotiations have been ongoing through a federal mediator for more than two months, with no deal reached. Nineteen years is nearly the entire work span of a firefighter’s career. If this deal is accepted, they will hit the top of their pay scale and retire soon after. It’s understandable why that would be good for the company. From Boeing: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Despite extensive discussions through an impartial federal mediator, we did not reach an agreement with the union….We are disappointed the union chose not to even bring our offer to its members for one final vote….We have now locked out members of the bargaining unit and fully implemented our contingency plan with highly qualified firefighters performing the work of IAFF members.”

Can We Make Billionaires Pay More Taxes?

The Daily Escape:

Sunrise, Cundy’s Harbor, ME – May 2024 photo by Eric Storm Photo

Economist Gabriel Zucman is a proponent of a global wealth tax. His column in the NYT explains what that is and how it would work:

“Until recently, it was hard to know just how good the superrich are at avoiding taxes. Public statistics are…quiet about their contributions to government coffers….Over the past few years…scholars have published studies…attempting to fix that problem. While we still have data for only a handful of countries, we’ve found that the ultrawealthy consistently avoid paying their fair share in taxes.”

The problem of billionaires paying very little in taxes is international. In the US, the problem is that billionaires rarely have any salaries to speak of:

”Why do the world’s most fortunate people pay among the least in taxes, relative to the amount of money they make? The simple answer is that while most of us live off our salaries, tycoons like Jeff Bezos live off their wealth. In 2019, when…Bezos was still Amazon’s chief executive, he took home an annual salary of just $81,840. But he owns roughly 10% of the company, which made a profit of $30 billion in 2023.

If Amazon gave its profits back to shareholders as dividends, which are subject to income tax, Mr. Bezos would face a hefty tax bill. But Amazon does not pay dividends to its shareholders. Neither does Berkshire Hathaway or Tesla. Instead, the companies keep their profits and reinvest them, making their shareholders even wealthier.

Unless…Bezos, Warren Buffett or Elon Musk sell their stock, their taxable income is relatively minuscule. But they can still make eye-popping purchases by borrowing against their assets. Mr. Musk, for example, used his shares in Tesla as collateral to borrow $13 billion to put toward his acquisition of Twitter.”

Slashing the corporate tax rate and getting rid of the estate tax have also had dire effects in terms of wealth distribution:

“Historically, the rich had to pay hefty taxes on corporate profits, the main source of their income. And the wealth they passed on to their heirs was subject to the estate tax. But both taxes have been gutted in recent decades.”

In 2018, under the Trump administration, the US cut its maximum corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%. And the estate tax has almost disappeared. Relative to the wealth of US households, it generates only a quarter of the tax revenues it raised in the 1970s.

The effective tax rate (the percentage of someone’s total income that they paid in taxes in all forms) is now lower for the 400 richest American billionaires than it is for the bottom 50% of income earners. Here’s the effective tax rate in 1960 and 2018 for these two groups respectively:

Source: NYT

The US national debt is $35 trillion, almost all of which we acquired during the same period as the reduction of taxes on the rich. That isn’t a coincidence. And since capital and people are both completely mobile, the problem of taxation of wealth doesn’t end at our borders. More from Zucman:

“There is a way to make tax dodging less attractive: a global minimum tax. In 2021, more than 130 countries agreed to apply a minimum tax rate of 15% on the profits of large multinational companies. So no matter where a company parks its profits, it still has to pay at least a baseline amount of tax under the agreement.”

Zucman is proposing we apply a similar minimum tax to billionaires:

“Critics might say…this is a wealth tax, the constitutionality of which is debated in the US. In reality, the proposal stays firmly in the realm of income taxation. Billionaires who already pay the baseline amount of income tax would have no extra tax to pay. The goal is that only those who dial down their income to dodge the income tax would be affected.”

Critics of a minimum tax say it would be hard to apply because wealth is difficult to value. But according to Zucman’s research, about 60% of US billionaires’ wealth is in stocks of publicly traded companies. The rest is mostly ownership stakes in private businesses, which can be assigned a value by comparing them to the value of similar firms.

But the big issue is how to get broad international participation in this billionaire’s minimum tax. In the current multinational company minimum tax agreement, participating countries are allowed to overtax companies from nations that haven’t signed on. This incentivizes every country to join the agreement or lose tax revenue.

The same mechanism could be used for billionaires. For example, if Switzerland refuses to tax the superrich who live there, other countries could tax them on its behalf. Countries such as Brazil, have shown leadership on the issue, and France, Germany, South Africa and Spain have recently expressed support for a minimum tax on billionaires.

This is far from a done deal, although Biden has proposed a billionaire tax with similar objectives. And Zucman’s proposed tax wouldn’t impact the ordinary rich. He says there are about 3,000 people who would be required to give a relatively small bit of their profits back to governments.

Zucman’s closing words:

“The idea that billionaires should pay a minimum amount of income tax is not a radical idea. What is radical is continuing to allow the wealthiest people in the world to pay a smaller percentage in income tax than nearly everybody else.”

Great idea, one that almost everyone agrees with, EXCEPT those who have the power to do something about it. We’re looking at you, Republicans! Also, when a significant percentage of the (relatively) poor in this country support Trump who is dedicated to cutting taxes for the rich, is there any hope that taxes will be raised on the wealthy?

That’s more than enough thinking for this week. It’s time for our Saturday Soother, where we attempt to ignore the latest about the campus protests, or whatever else Gov. Kristi Noem is training her gun at, and gear up for another week in the political and cultural wars.

Here on the Fields of Wrong, the crab apple trees are in full bloom along with our weeping cherries. There is still plenty to do if we are to finish our spring cleanup before summer.

But, before we start down that backbreaking path, let’s grab a mug of coffee and a seat outside. Now watch and listen to Luigi Boccherini’s “Guitar Quintet No. 4 in D major “Fandango”, G.448”, recorded in the Unser Lieben Frauen Church, in Bremen Germany in 2019. Boccherini was an Italian composer and cellist. He wrote a large amount of chamber music, including over one hundred string quintets for two violins, viola and two cellos:

The Bridge Collapse Will Mean More Socialized Losses

The Daily Escape:

Ceanothus, Black Mountain Preserve, San Diego, CA – March 2024 photo by Michelle Duong

Everyone knows about the cargo ship MV Dali that struck the Francis Scott Key Bridge (FSK) in Baltimore, causing it to completely collapse into the frigid Patapsco River. Currently, we know that six people are presumed dead, while two people were recovered alive. Let’s talk about the ways capitalism figures into the FSK bridge collapse.

The BBC reports that:

“The America Pilot’s Association provided details on the ship that crashed into the Baltimore bridge. The association says the ship lost full power, with no lights, no electronics and no engine propulsion, making it essentially a “dead ship” within 20 to 30 seconds. The group says lights came back on in the ship thanks to an emergency generator, but that doesn’t give the engine power. Video shows lights flicker back on briefly before the vessel hits the bridge.”

There are backup generators on ships because power can fail at critical times. In the case of the MV Dali, it has one propeller driven by one engine. The fuel and steering systems of the ship require electricity to function.It is believed that the Dali had 3-4 backup generators, but did they function as designed?

Wrongo knows from his experience with backup generators in the commercial world that they don’t start up instantaneously. It might take them 30-60 seconds to start and longer to come up to full power to restore control of the ship. Without electric power, both the navigation and the steering systems would have been disabled in the critical minutes prior to the collision. No one on the ground in the Port of Baltimore performs testing to see if the MV Dali’s back-up generators are working properly. Why? Because it would be very costly to do.

There are several other factors unique to shipping that will make it difficult for Maryland or US taxpayers to collect enough to cover all of Maryland’s costs from the ownership of the MV Dali. From VOX:

“The Dali was a Singapore-flagged ship, with an all Indian-nationality crew, operated by the Danish company Maersk….”

This organization structure, dividing ownership and operations, is a classic method used in shipping to limit liability when bad things happen, like when your vessel knocks down a bridge in a foreign country.

Cargo ships have become exponentially bigger while US bridges have been aging. When the Francis Scott Key Bridge was being built between 1972 and 1977 the average container ship carried between 500-800 twenty-foot shipping containers (called TEUs). But they ballooned to an average of 4,000 TEUs by 1985. The MV Dali, manufactured in 2015, had a capacity of 10,000 TEUs. According to bridge experts, no bridge pylon could have survived being hit by a vessel of this size.

This continuous upsizing has pitted US ports against each other in order to attract bigger vessels. The 2016 expansion of the Panama Canal caused ports along the US East Coast to dredge their harbors and build higher bridges to accommodate the larger ships now traveling through the Canal.

Back in 2015, Wrongo wrote about the upsizing of US bridges:

“Consider NJ, where, at high tide, 151 feet of empty air lies between the waters of the Kill Van Kull and the deck of the Bayonne Bridge. The Kill, a narrow tidal strait between Staten Island, NY and Bayonne, NJ, is one of the busiest shipping channels in the country. When the Bayonne Bridge opened in 1931,151 feet easily accommodated the world’s largest vessels. But the new ships won’t fit, so, the roadway will be elevated…to 215 feet, more than enough to let these big ships pass underneath. The five-year Bayonne Bridge project costs $1.3 billion.”

This imposed costs on NJ taxpayers beyond what it should have, because then-Gov. Christie (R), signed a bill that ended the collection of any cargo facility charge by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Christie was attempting to offer something to ship owners and operators that would make Bayonne more competitive vs other US ports.

So the taxpayers of NY & NJ not only paid for allowing the bigger Panamax ships under the Bayonne Bridge, but no ocean-going vessel had ANY stake in paying the costs of that bridge expansion. Instead, NJ turned to a “Public-Private Partnership” to finance this project.

The Port of Baltimore also expanded to accommodate supersized ships in 2013, but it didn’t need to raise the height of the FSK bridge. Since then, it has grown into the 9th-busiest port for receiving foreign cargo. The Port of Baltimore is the largest in the US for roll-on/roll-off (Ro-Ro) ships carrying trucks and trailers.

Meanwhile, the FSK bridge has remained largely unchanged since the 1970s. From 1960 to 2015, there were 35 major bridge collapses worldwide due to ship or barge collisions, 18 of which happened in the US.

There are now about thirty ships stranded in the Harbor. They will stay there until the damaged bridge remains are removed from the ship channel. That includes container ships, Ro-Ro ships, and bulk carriers. There are also three US Naval ships stranded there. The collapse is almost sure to create a logistical nightmare for months, if not years along the East Coast. The accident will also snarl cargo and commuter traffic.

And who will pay the costs to repair the bridge, or compensate the people who died, or cover the lost revenues for the many years it will take to rebuild the bridge? Or the tax receipts that Baltimore won’t be in a position to charge while the port is closed?

According to Business Insider, the majority of the financial fallout is likely to lay primarily with the insurance industry:

“Industry experts told the FT that insurers could pay out losses for bridge damage, port disruption, and any loss of life. The collapse could drive “one of the largest claims ever to hit the marine (re)insurance market…”

The Dali is covered by the Britannia Steam Ship Insurance Association Ltd., known as Britannia P&I Club, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence. Britannia is one of 12 mutual insurers included in the International Group of P&I Clubs, which maintains more than $3 billion of reinsurance cover. Although the ship’s owner and it’s operator have insurance, their policies will in no way cover the all-in costs of this event.

Some are saying that this is a “black Swan” event. But this is almost certainly the result of operational pressure for more containers, faster turnaround, and more profit. The ship owners have traded reliability for economy. Unless we force the container trade to transition to more reliable and more costly vessels, we’ll continue to see events like this every few years.

That’s the price of cheap goods in our stores and of the profits it generates for ship owners.

Once again, the losses will be socialized, and the US taxpayer will be gouged again, all in service to our capitalist overlords who will laugh all the way to the bank. Wrongo certainly isn’t a Marxist, but Marx was absolutely right when he said that capitalism contained the seeds of its own destruction.

Why is it that no legislator is willing to consider the costs of externalities (a cost that is caused by one party but financially incurred by another) to its taxpayers when they approve partnering with big industry?

Are the tax revenues in Baltimore going to be enough to cover the costs to all US taxpayers when the US government rebuilds the FSK bridge? They will not. You know they’ll be minuscule compared to the real costs.

And the big shipping players will sail off towards the horizon with hardly a financial scratch.

35% of Americans Meet The Criteria To Be Middle Class.

The Daily Escape:

Stoney Brook Grist Mill, Brewster, MA – February 2024 photo by Michael Kerouac

Wrongo and Ms. Right spent Sunday with one of our daughters and son-in-law. We spoke about the Ezra Klein op-ed in the NYT about why Biden should step aside. One of Klein’s points is that in presidential campaigns, the candidate is always the campaign’s biggest asset, and that Biden isn’t being used by Democrats as if he is their biggest asset.

Elsewhere, some pundits are saying that the Democrats need to forget campaigning on policy: Dems always try to find things people like and tell them they’re going to help them — and after that, show them the candidate’s character, biography, and qualifications for office.

Instead, the Republicans campaign by appealing more to emotion than intellect, using a negative message to develop enthusiasm.

While Wrongo is happy that Dems want to campaign again on an anti-Trump message, he still thinks policy is the right way to appeal to at least two types of voters: Those who rarely vote, and those who voted Democratic last time but are less enthusiastic this time. These voters think our political system hasn’t produced results for them, and they’re looking for promises to change that in order to get their votes.

While we keep touting Biden’s economic performance, Wrongo recently found a very important poll taken last November by the WaPo that asked Americans how they defined being in the middle class:

“About 9 in 10 US adults said that six individual indicators of financial security and stability were necessary parts of being middle class….Smaller majorities thought other milestones, such as homeownership and a job with paid sick leave, were necessary.”

They also asked how many of those markers of being in the middle class people said they had achieved, and the results are a staggering rejection of how well the US economy is working for many people:

“Just over a third of Americans met all six markers of a middle-class lifestyle. While about 9 in 10 Americans had health insurance, only three-quarters had health insurance and a steady job. With each added measure of financial security, more Americans slipped away from the middle-class ideal.”

Let’s get into the findings. Here’s the WaPo chart about what factors Americans think it takes to be in the middle class:

It’s arbitrary to pick six, but they were the most frequently mentioned. A secure job. The ability to save. To afford an emergency. Paying the bills without worrying. Healthcare. Retirement. It’s a sensible list. And in the poll, huge majorities agreed those are the key criteria for a middle class life.

The Very Big Problem with this is that when the WaPo asked the same respondents if they had the ability to meet those criteria, the numbers are startling. Here’s the second WaPo chart:

Just 35% of people say that they meet the criteria that almost everyone, (~90%) agree should make someone middle class. If that’s true, America needs to redefine “middle” class. The majority in this survey did not have the financial security associated with being in the middle class. More from WaPo:

“The most common barrier was a comfortable retirement, something that about half of middle-income Americans over 35 felt they were on track to achieve.”

Think about what this research is really showing us. America no longer has a middle class. While ~90% of people agree on what a middle class life is, only a minority can afford it. This means we have a “phantom” middle class: Americans want to be middle class, but only a minority of them are. So what class does that make the majority?

What this research appears to show is that America is building something more like a permanent underclass.

Acknowledging this issue would be a great starting point for Biden to gain traction with low propensity voters and with the Gen X and younger voters who make up most of the low enthusiasm cohort of Democratic voters.

As Anat Shenker-Osorio puts it:

“Democrats rely on polling to take the temperature; Republicans use polling to change it.”

This time around the Democrats need to emulate Republicans who work at moving the needle instead of chasing it. And this middle class problem is an issue that will move the needle.

Fortune Magazine’s Tiffani Potesta writes that Gen Xers personify the problem of middle class life: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Gen Xers expect to keep working longer than they planned–and will be the first generation to go into retirement with less financial security than their parents and grandparents.”

Gen X will be the first to reach retirement under a new paradigm: the widespread move from Defined Benefit plans to Defined Contribution or 401(k) plans in the US. This is a barely cited yet fundamental societal change that shifted the responsibility to save for retirement from employers to individual employees. More:

“…the numbers do not add up: Gen Xers reported that on average they will need roughly $1.1 million in savings to retire comfortably, yet they expect to stop working with only about $660,000 saved–a savings gap of around $450,000.”

Still more:

“According to a report from the National Institute on Retirement Security, the average account balance in 2020 for private retirement accounts among working Gen Xers was $129,994. This is woefully short of the amount of savings most of us will need to be secure in retirement.”

What’s worse is that the median account balance was scarier: $10,000–and 40% have zero savings.

For a society to be staring at the next few generations not being able to retire and not to be members of the middle class is very troubling, particularly in terms of what’s likely to happen if that’s the case. Losing our middle class is almost a sure path to autocracy, possibly through the rise of fascism and/or authoritarianism.

Biden and the Democrats need to acknowledge these problems are real and pledge to do everything possible to return America to having a true, bell-curve shaped middle class. They can run generally against Trump as “order vs. chaos”, but Trump is running on “America’s decline”, which includes the financial insecurity of millions of Americans. Biden needs to call that out specifically, along with ideas on how to fix the problem. That would make financial insecurity an issue for Democrats equal to abortion, something that targets a specific group and encourages them to get to the polls in November.

If Bernie Sanders isn’t too old to rage against economic insecurity, then Biden is old enough to do the same.

Another Reason Why People Think The Economy Sucks

The Daily Escape:

Sunrise, Camden Harbor, Camden, ME – January 2024 photo by Daniel F. Dishner Photography

The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) has crunched the latest Social Security Administration (SSA) wage data. It shows the average American workers haven’t made much money since the 1970s:

“The latest SSA data demonstrates how vastly unequal earnings growth has been between 1979 and 2022. Over that period, inflation-adjusted annual earnings for the top 1% and top 0.1% skyrocketed by 171.7% and 344.4%, respectively, while earnings for the bottom 90% grew just 32.9%.”

That’s 33% over 43 years, less than 1% per year. The largest share of total earnings in the US economy have accumulated at the top of the wage ladder. The EPI is describing “labor market earnings”, the pay (including benefits) of the 80% of workers who are not managers or supervisors at work. For decades before 1980, these workers’ hourly pay largely tracked economy-wide productivity growth.

When productivity growth slowed significantly, hourly pay growth collapsed even faster, leading to a growing gap between these typical workers’ pay and overall growth. That difference in missing pay for typical workers went to workers at the top or to business owners.

The EPI study shows that if you’re in the bottom 90% of wage earners, you’ve seen annual wage growth of less than 1% per year over the past 43 years. If you’re in the “upper middle class” things were very different. Here’s a chart from EPI:

Average wages in the 95th to 99th percentile have almost doubled, from $120K to $234K (all figures are in 2022 dollars). But this leaves out the real winners, the top 1%. Average wages for them went from $289K in 1979 to $786K in 2022. But even this huge growth is eclipsed by the wages of the top .1%, which increased an astounding 344%, going from $634K to $2.82 million.

Note that the data are for average annual wages which for the bottom 90% were $40,845 in 2022. Data on average wages are all that’s available, but it’s misleading. The MEDIAN wage for all workers is around $34k. That means half the bottom 90% are making LESS than 34k. Also, median household income is around $76k; which is two people working in the same household.

The media and the rest of us really have no idea how little the average person is earning.

And this is just income from wages. People at or near the top of the pyramid own the vast majority of the equity capital in the US — the top 10% of households own 85% of the total corporate stock owned by households.

The economic debate in America since the 1880s has been between those in favor of lightly regulated heavily financialized consumer capitalism, with some very modest income redistribution, sufficient — barely — to keep the losers in that economy from starving or freezing to death.

The other side are the Republicans who think England in the Industrial Revolution, is a model for what America ought to look like today. And Chase’s CEO Jamie Dimon says we should listen to Republicans more. He’s specifically talking about NATO and immigration.

And this has been the GOP’s pitch forever:

Democrats need to address the negative impacts of US wage distribution as part of their 2024 pitch to keep the presidency, and return to controlling the House and Senate in November.

The Fields of Wrong are covered in snow, mostly due to temperatures being below freezing for the past several days. We had a tree fall into the road during the big windstorm last Sunday. Now it sits, snow-covered, on our property waiting for our next chain sawing event.

It’s Saturday, and professional football will be all over the television for the rest of the weekend. Good luck to those of you who follow one of the remaining eight teams. It’s time for our Saturday Soother, where we try to forget about the Red Sea, the New Hampshire primaries and funding the government, and instead try to calm ourselves for a few moments. Hopefully we’ll be in better shape to launch into the roller coaster ride of next week’s horrors.

Take a few minutes and grab a chair by a window. Now, watch and listen as John Williams is persuaded to conduct the National Symphony Orchestra in a performance of his “Imperial March” from Star Wars during a gala to celebrate his 90th Birthday.

There are many seriously talented people on the stage, including track star Florence Joyner, cellist Yo-Yo Ma, Steven Spielberg, violinist Anne-Sophie Mutter, and Star Wars actor, Daisy Ridley. Williams is 91, still going strong, and an example to those who think young Biden is too old to run again. Bravo, Maestro:

Boeing’s Max Jet Fails Again

The Daily Escape:

Desert sunflowers at dawn in Anza-Borrego SP, CA looking west to the San Ysidro Mountains – January 2024 photo by Paulette Donnellon

Wrongo didn’t expect to again be writing about Boeing’s problems with its MAX aircraft, but here we are. From CNBC:

“The Federal Aviation Administration on Saturday ordered a temporary grounding of dozens of Boeing 737 Max 9 aircraft for inspections, a day after a piece of the aircraft blew out in the middle of an Alaska Airlines flight.”

“…video of Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 that were shared on social media showed a gaping hole on the side of the plane and passengers using oxygen masks before it returned to Portland shortly after taking off for Ontario, California, on Friday afternoon.”

What blew off of the plane is a “door plug”, not a door. The configuration used by Alaska Airlines didn’t require an emergency exit door in that location so Boeing installed a door plug, which is attached to the plane’s skin and covered on the inside so that it appears to be a windowless wall.

Seats adjacent to the blowout were by chance, unoccupied. The accident depressurized the cabin and headrests were detached from two nearby passenger seats, the back of one seat was gone. Here’s a picture taken after the plane landed safely:

Boeing and the Alaska Airlines passengers were very lucky in two respects: First, that no one was sitting in the seats where it happened, and Second, that it didn’t occur at cruising altitude. The sudden depressurization at altitude would have been a disaster with many lives lost.

This happened on a plane that had been in service for just 10 weeks! And it happened a few days after Boeing asked every airline to check their Max-9’s for missing rudder bolts:

“Last month, the company urged airlines to inspect the more than 1,300 delivered Max planes for a possible loose bolt in the rudder-control system. Over the summer, Boeing said a key supplier had improperly drilled holes in a component that helps to maintain cabin pressure.”

And that was only a couple weeks after Boeing asked the FAA to give them a pass on a design flaw in the plane’s engine de-icer.

You remember that this is the plane that Boeing famously mis-programmed to nosedive into the ground. You may have forgotten that Boeing paid a big price:

“In 2021, Boeing agreed to pay more than $2.5 billion to settle a criminal charge related to the crashes. Under the deal, Boeing was ordered to pay a criminal penalty of $243.6 million while $500 million went toward a fund for the families whose loved ones were killed in the crashes. Much of the rest of the settlement was marked off for airlines that had purchased the troubled 737 Max planes.”

These are huge issues with quality and quality control. There are also problems with suppliers. The WSJ reported:

“Fuselage maker Spirit AeroSystems is responsible for installing the emergency-door configuration involved in Friday’s incident. Spirit AeroSystems was working with Boeing on Saturday to determine what went wrong….Spirit AeroSystems was also responsible for the misdrilled holes on the fuselages that disrupted production in 2023.”

Spirit changed CEOs in October 2023, hiring Patrick Shanahan, a 30-year Boeing veteran. Since then, Boeing has invested in and worked more closely with Spirit to address “production” problems.

The Max is the best-selling plane in Boeing’s history. The more than 4,500 outstanding orders for the plane account for more than 76% of Boeing’s order book. Of the nearly three million flights scheduled globally this month, about 5% are planned to be made using a Max, mostly the Max 8.

Wrongo has written about Boeing before and how it lost its culture of engineering prowess and expertise. It began valuing financial engineering over aerospace engineering in 2009-2017 by engaging in $30 billion in stock buybacks, an amount that exceeded its earnings. Then in 2018, buybacks of $9 billion constituted 86% of annual earnings and late in 2018, they approved $20 billion more in buybacks.

Rank capitalism is a big element in this story. Passenger safety has been sacrificed to Wall Street profit-taking and bonuses for Boeing’s shareholders and executives. Until the culture changes back to one focused on engineering, the company will continue to be a hot mess.

Boeing needs a senior management change, and fast, before more people die on their airplanes. Wrongo will certainly avoid flying a 737 Max in the future.

Time to wake up, Boeing! You’re using euphemisms like “production problems” or “supplier problems” to describe improperly drilled holes. There should be no circumstance where a section of the fuselage falls off an airplane in flight. This is systemic, an organization-wide failure.

To help you wake up, watch and listen to Larkin Poe, who Wrongo has featured before, doing a cover of Son House’s “Preachin’ Blues”:

Sample Lyric:

I’m gonna get me some religion
I’m gonna join the Baptist church
Gonna be a preacher
So I don’t have to work

The Wrongologist

Geopolitics, Power and Political Economy

Category: Capitalism Reform

Harris Needs To Speak To Gen Z’s Reality

The Gap Between Economic Statistics (good) vs. People’s Perception Of Economic Situation (terrible)

Oops, Boeing Does It Again

Can We Make Billionaires Pay More Taxes?

The Bridge Collapse Will Mean More Socialized Losses

Another Reason Why People Think The Economy Sucks

Boeing’s Max Jet Fails Again