Economic Policy – Page 2 – The Wrongologist

Why People Say The Economy Is Terrible

The Daily Escape:

First snow, Doubling Point Lighthouse, Kennebec River, ME – December 2023 photo by Rick Berk Photography

Wrongo may have stumbled upon the reason why people say the economy is bad when so many economists say it isn’t. From a LendingClub report from last May: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“For some Americans, earning a six-figure income doesn’t guarantee a comfortable lifestyle….many Americans are struggling to make ends meet — with 61% of those surveyed saying they feel stretched too thin, and 49% of those earning $100,000 or more saying they’re living paycheck to paycheck.”

This ties together with other information, some of which comes from the issue, who reported this from the Aspen Institute: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Though routinely positive cash flow is the starting point for financial stability, it remains largely out of reach for many Americans. Even before the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly half (46.5%) of households reported that their income did not exceed their spending over the course of a year. For households with annual income of less than $30,000, this number increases to three in five (61.5%).”

Now there may be many reasons why people spend beyond their means. Some seem to be unable to defer gratification until there’s money in the bank, so they buy on credit. There was a $48.5 billion jump in spending from September to October 2023. For others who make less than a living wage, the problem isn’t one of choice, it’s existential.

The searing takeaway from the above is that negative personal cashflow was a problem even before the post-Covid inflation drove prices through the roof in America. The Aspen Institute provides this handy chart showing how individuals build financial security:

Financial security starts with having a routinely positive cashflow. But, nearly 50% of Americans today aren’t cash flow positive (see quote above), while 49% of people earning more than $100k are living paycheck to paycheck.

This dovetails with Wrongo’s Monday column which showed that “Nearly 3 in 10 Americans say they have had to forgo seeing a doctor in the past year due to costs.” If you’re one of the 7.5% of uninsured Americans, and have money in your checking account that isn’t going to necessities, you can definitely go to the doctor.

Aspen has another chart that shows the breakdown of who lives paycheck to paycheck by income levels:

Seventy-four percent of those making less than $50k are living paycheck to paycheck, and while the percentage gets smaller as annual income rises, it’s still 48.7% for people making more than $100k, in an economy where the median income is around $54K! FYI, the percentage of Americans who make $50k or less is 37.8%.

More from LendingClub: (brackets and emphasis by Wrongo)

“The share of consumers in the US earning over $100,000 per year who live paycheck to paycheck increased 7 percentage points in April year over year. High-income consumers are particularly likely to live in urban areas, at 36%, and these tendencies toward higher incomes…[don’t] prevent almost 70% of urban dwellers from saying they live paycheck to paycheck.”

It’s hard not to conclude that the majority of Americans are currently experiencing dire financial conditions, including many who live with negative cashflow. When your cashflow is negative, you either cut back, borrow or sell assets. For most people selling assets isn’t a real choice. So while some cut back, the majority borrow to make ends meet. According to the issue, the:

“…highest risk, and most expensive forms of debt are now growing fastest. Payday loans, online insta-loans, and so forth. That means that people are exhausting the more mundane forms of debt—credit cards, bank loans, government loans, etcetera.”

This squares with a report by Achieve, a personal debt management firm, that shows:

“In the first nine months of 2023, the average monthly participation in debt resolution programs increased by 119% compared to 2020, even though the average earnings rose by approximately 37% during the same period.”

It gets worse:

“In 2023, the typical household income of individuals enrolled in debt resolution programs was $59,900, which is a notable increase from $43,598 three years prior.”

Americans are earning 37% more but are still struggling with debt. Not a pretty picture to take before the voters.

Meanwhile, Democrats still are touting how “strong” the economy is. The aggregate numbers hide terrible personal experiences that are happening out of sight of our politicians and surprisingly, our economists. However, it’s clear from the polls that few Americans are buying that message apart from the true believers, the media and pundits.

The disconnect between economic data and the lived experience of average people needs to be addressed by Biden and the Democrats. If nothing is done to at least acknowledge the actual problems of many Americans specifically, their negative personal cashflow, these angry folks will certainly tilt toward giving Trump another chance.

Let’s give the issue the last word:

“What is this? What do we call it when the majority of people can’t make ends meet, as in, they’re literally spending more than they make, because they don’t make enough to live a stable or secure life?

Today the averages are hiding a truth: that a near-majority of American citizens are financially underwater. These are big numbers. The Census Bureau says as of now, 258.3 million Americans are adults. And the Aspen Institute says that 46.5% of them can’t make ends meet. That’s 120 million of us that are going deeper in debt every month.

That can only happen when those at the very top are skimming off more than 100% of the growth in the economy. This suggests that Biden et al need to run on policy that will help the majority of voters, not simply the moneyed people who finance political campaigns.

Wake Up To Monday’s Hot Links

The Daily Escape:

Cypress trees, Lake Verritt, LA – November 2023 photo by Rick Berk Photography. Note the egret in the background.

For today’s Wake Up Call, we return to a staple of yesteryear, some hot links that caught Wrongo’s eye over the past few days.

Wrongo isn’t happy with how the Ukraine War has slipped from the consciousness of America’s media and thereby, from our view. Saturday’s WSJ offered an intriguing idea with its column, “Does the West Have a Double Standard for Ukraine and Gaza?” (free link). The article makes two excellent points. First, how these two wars have divided the world. Here’s a view of the division:

From the WSJ: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Outrage and political mobilization have become subordinated to geopolitical allegiances—a selective empathy that often treats ordinary Ukrainians, Palestinians and Israelis as pawns in a larger ideological battle within Western societies and between the West and rivals such as China and Russia.”

Second, the article concludes by saying that the main difference between the two wars is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with all its complexities, lacks the moral clarity of the Ukrainian resistance to Russia. They quote British lawmaker Alex Sobel:

“There is no moral justification for the Russian invasion. Zero. It’s just about Russian imperialism….But in Israel and Palestine, it’s about the fact that there are two peoples on a very small amount of land, and political and military elites on both sides are unwilling to settle for what’s on offer.”

Yes, America may have the moral high ground in both cases, and views can differ on how both wars are being waged. But as the article says in its second paragraph:

“The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 was unprovoked, while Israel sent troops into Gaza because of a mass slaughter of Israeli civilians…”.

Make of the article what you will, but it’s important to think through why you (like Biden) think both wars are morally equivalent.

Link #2 is apropos of the COP28 conference now underway in Dubai. Grist Magazine has an article: “Where could millions of EV batteries retire? Solar farms.” As solar energy expands, it’s becoming more common to use batteries to store the power as it’s generated and transmit it through the grid later. One new idea is to source that battery back up at least in part from used electric vehicle batteries:

“Electric vehicle batteries are typically replaced when they reach 70 to 80% of their capacity, largely because the range they provide at that point begins to dwindle. Almost all of the critical materials inside them, including lithium, nickel, and cobalt, are reusable. A growing domestic recycling industry, supported by billions of dollars in loans from the Energy Department and incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act, is being built to prepare for what will one day be tens of millions of retired EV battery packs.”

“Before they are disassembled…studies show that around three quarters of decommissioned packs are suitable for a second life as stationary storage.”

Apparently there are already at least 3 gigawatt-hours of decommissioned EV battery packs sitting around in the US that could be deployed, and that the volume of them being removed from cars is doubling every two years.

Link #3 also shows the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act. Wolf Richter writes that:

“In October, $18.5 billion were plowed into construction of manufacturing plants in the US ($246 billion annualized), up by 73% from a year ago, by 136% from two years ago, and by 166% from October 2019.”

“The US is the second largest manufacturing country by output, behind China and has a greater share of global production than the next three countries combined, Germany, Japan, and India.”

All of this construction spending will take time to turn into production. When these new plants are up and running and producing at scale, manufacturing’s share of US GDP will rise. And much of the new construction is happening in fly-over America, which can use the help.

Finding factory workers in sufficient numbers to support the new capacity will be a key. America has energy in abundance and has robotic manufacturing. So pulling production from overseas with fewer workers needed will be a giant plus for the US.

Link #4 is a downer. Civic Science says in this week’s 3 things to know column, that “Nearly 3 in 10 Americans say they have had to forgo seeing a doctor in the past year due to costs.” Here’s their chart”:

Civic Science says that 12% of US adults have had to miss or make a late payment on medical bills in the last 90 days, a two percentage point increase over September 2022.

A far larger percentage of Americans – 27% of the general population and about 30% of respondents under 55 years old or with an annual household income under $100,000 – report they could not go to a doctor in the past 12 months because they could not afford the cost. Gen Z adults and households making between $25K-$50K are more likely to have held off seeing a doctor due to cost (34% and 31% respectively).

We all know that medical costs have continued to rise and that medical debt is the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the US. If Congress was really interested in helping provide for the general welfare, they would deal with this out of control problem.

Time to wake up America! There’s plenty going on that isn’t getting visibility in the mainstream media or on social media. You have to cast your net widely to be on top of the good and bad happening in the US.

To help you wake up, we turn to Shane MacGowan, frontman for the Irish group the Pogues who died last week. He left behind a body of work that merged traditional Irish music and punk rock. He wrote many songs that could easily be mistaken for traditional Irish tunes including this one, which was also used as the music for wakes by the Baltimore Police Department in the great, great HBO series, “The Wire“. Here’s “The Body Of An American” from their 1986 album, “Poguetry in Motion”:

RIP Shane.

Democrats Need New Messaging

The Daily Escape:

Cholla Cactus at sunrise, Joshua Tree NP – November 2023 photo by Michelle Strong

Yesterday’s column described how confusing current polling data is with less than a year to go before the 2024 presidential election. We can easily overdose on polls, but in general, they seem to be pointing toward a very difficult re-election for Biden.

At the risk of contributing to the OD, here’s another example of terrible poll for Biden. It comes from Democratic stalwarts Democracy Corps, run by James Carville and Stanley Greenberg:

“President Biden trails Donald Trump by 5 points in the battleground states and loses at least another point when we include the independent candidates who get 17% of the vote. Biden is trying to win these states where three quarters believe the country is on the wrong track and 48% say, “I will never vote for Biden.”

What to make of all this? Wrongo thinks it’s time to take a different approach to the Democrat’s messaging. Let’s start with a quick look at the NYT’s David Leonhardt’s new book, “Ours Was the Shining Future”. Leonhardt’s most striking contention is based on a study of census and income tax data by the Harvard economist Raj Chetty: Where once the great majority of Americans could hope to earn more than their parents, now only half are likely to. From The Atlantic:

“Of Americans born in 1940, 92% went on to earn more than their parents; among those born in 1980, just 50% did. Over the course of a few decades, the chances of achieving the American dream went from a near-guarantee to a coin flip.”

As we said yesterday, the American Dream is fading. Leonhardt says that the Democrats have largely abandoned fighting for basic economic improvements for the working class. Some of the defining progressive triumphs of the 20th century, from labor victories by unions and Social Security under FDR to the Great Society programs of LBJ, were milestones in securing a voting majority. More from The Atlantic:

“Ronald Reagan took office promising to restore growth by paring back government, slashing taxes on the rich and corporations…gutting business regulations and antitrust enforcement. The idea…was that a rising tide would lift all boats. Instead, inequality soared while living standards stagnated and life expectancy fell behind…peer countries.”

Today, a child born in Norway or the UK has a far better chance of out-earning their parents than one born in the US. More context from The Atlantic: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“From the 1930s until the late ’60s, Democrats dominated national politics. They used their power to pass…progressive legislation that transformed the American economy. But their coalition, which included southern Dixiecrats as well as northern liberals, fractured after…Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy” exploited that rift and changed the electoral map. Since then, no Democratic presidential candidate has won a majority of the white vote.”

The Atlantic makes another great point: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“The civil-rights revolution also changed white Americans’ economic attitudes. In 1956, 65% of white people said they believed the government ought to guarantee a job to anyone who wanted one and to provide a minimum standard of living. By 1964, that number had sunk to 35%.”

America’s mid-century economy could have created growth and equality, but racial suppression and racial progress led to where we remain today.

Leonhardt argues that what Thomas Piketty called the “Brahmin left” must stop demonizing working-class people who do not share its views on cultural issues such as abortion, immigration, affirmative action and patriotism. From Leonhardt:

“A less self-righteous and more tolerant left could build what successfully increased access to the American Dream in the past: a broad grass-roots movement focused on core economic issues such as strengthening unions, improving wages and working conditions, raising corporate taxes, and decreasing corporate concentration.”

Can the Dems adapt both their priorities and messaging to meet people where they are today?

The priorities must change first. What would it take to establish the right priorities for the future? Stripping away the wedge issues that confuse and divide us, America’s priorities should be Health, Education, Retirement and Environment (“HERE”). It’s an acronym that sells itself: “Vote Here”.

(hat tip to friend of the blog, Rene S. for the HERE concept.)

Wrongo hears from young family members and others that all of the HERE elements are causing very real concerns. Affordable health care coverage still falls short. Regarding education, college costs barely seem to be worth shouldering the huge debt burdens that come with it.

Most young people think that they have no real way to save for retirement early in their careers when there’s the most bang for the buck. They also feel that Social Security won’t be there for them. From the NYT:

“In a Nationwide Retirement Institute survey, 45% of adults younger than 27 said they didn’t believe they would receive any money from the program.”

Today, only about 10% of Americans working in the private sector participate in a defined-benefit pension plan, while roughly 50% contribute to 401(k)-type, defined-contribution plans.

Finally, people today feel that their elders have created an existential environmental threat that will be tossed into their laps. A problem for which there may not be a solution.

As Leonhardt argues, these HERE problems should have always been priorities for Democrats. But for decades, the Party hasn’t been willing to pay today’s political price for a long term gain in voter loyalty. That is, until Biden started working on them in 2020.

But every media outlet continues to harp on inflation and the national debt. Much of what would be helpful in creating a HERE focus as a priority for Democrats depends at least somewhat on government spending. No one can argue that our national debt is high. It is arguable whether it can safely go higher or if it must be reigned in at current levels.

To help you think about that, we collected $4.5 trillion in taxes in 2022, down half a $trillion vs. what we collected in 2021. Estimates are that the Trump tax cuts cost about $350 billion in lost revenue/year.

Looking at tax collections as a percentage of GDP, it’s less than 17% in the US, well below our historical average of 19.5%. There are arguments to keep taxes low, but if you compare the US percentage to other nations, Germany has a ratio of 24%, while the UK’s is 27% and Australia’s is 30%.

If we raised our tax revenue to 24% of GDP, which is where Germany is now, we would eliminate the US deficit.

There’s a great deal of tension in the electorate between perception and reality. And it’s not caused by partisanship: Democrats and independents are also exhibiting a disconnect, too.

Democrats have to return to being the party of FDR and LBJ. They need to adopt the HERE priorities and build programs around them.

America’s Confusing Opinion Polling

The Daily Escape:

Oak Creek, Sedona AZ – November 2023 photo by Jim Lupton

Over single malt and martinis, our Thanksgiving guests talked about what a confusing time we’re living in. Americans are angry and anxious, and the polls continue to show problems for Biden across the board, despite that overall, the economy is fine.

Inflation has slowed significantly. Wages are increasing. Unemployment is near a half-century low. Job satisfaction is up. Yet Americans don’t necessarily see it that way From the NYT:

“In the recent New York Times/Siena College poll of voters in six swing states, eight in 10 said the economy was fair or poor. Just 2% said it was excellent. Majorities of every group of Americans — across gender, race, age, education, geography, income and party — had an unfavorable view.

To make the disconnect even more confusing, people are not acting the way they do when they believe the economy is bad. They are spending, vacationing and job-switching the way they do when they believe it’s good.”

Continuing with the confusion, the new WSJ/NORC survey of the American dream—the proposition that anyone who works hard can get ahead regardless of their background, has moved out of reach for many Americans. Only 36% of voters in the survey (conducted between Oct. 19-23 with a margin of error of ± 4%) says that the American dream still holds true: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“The American dream seemed most remote to young adults and women in the survey…..46% of men but only 28% of women said the ideal of advancement for hard work still holds true, as did 48% of voters aged 65 or older but only about 28% of those under age 50 agreed.”

And people think the dream is growing more remote. When last year’s WSJ poll asked whether people who work hard were likely to get ahead, 68% said yes—nearly twice as many as in this year’s poll (36%). More from the NYT:

“Economic difficulties are greater for those without a college degree, who are the majority of Americans. They earn less, receive fewer benefits from employers and have more physically demanding jobs.”

Voters without a college degree are Trump’s strongest cohort.

Adding to the cloudy forecast, the Economist/YouGov weekly tracking poll of registered voters says most people are happy with their jobs:

Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way things are going in your life today? Satisfied 64%, Dissatisfied 35%
How happy would you say you are with your current job? Great deal/somewhat 80%, A little/not at all 19%.
Do you consider yourself paid fairly or underpaid in your job? Paid fairly 56%, Underpaid 38%.
Do you think your family income will increase or decrease in 2024? Increase 45%, stay the same 41%, decrease 15%.

But the same Economist/YouGov poll gives a different impression when you ask about the American economy more broadly:

Do you think the economy is shrinking or growing? Growing 22%, staying the same 25%, shrinking 37%. That’s 47% thinking its growing or staying the same. (The reality: The economy has grown at 3% on average under Biden, the highest for any President since Clinton.)
Are the number of jobs in the US increasing (42%), staying the same (36%) or decreasing (22%)? (The reality: 14 million new jobs have been created under Biden.)
How would you describe the current state of the American economy? Excellent/good 30%, fair/poor 64%. (The reality: We’ve had the fastest job growth perhaps ever, very strong GDP growth, inflation is way down, wage growth is very strong, and the annual deficit is way down from Trump’s presidency.)

What’s going on here? These data suggest something tragic – either the American people have no idea what is happening in the country, or what they do know is deeply wrong.

A final nail in this conundrum. Ed Kilgore in NY Magazine says that the youth vote is swinging against Biden:

“Until recently, Democrats’ biggest concern about the 2024 youth vote was that millennial and Gen-Z voters …might not turn out in great enough numbers to reelect Joe Biden. Young voters were…the largest and most rapidly growing segment of the Democratic base in the last election. But now public-opinion surveys are beginning to unveil a far more terrifying possibility: Trump could carry the youth vote next year.”

The latest national NBC News poll finds President Joe Biden trailing Trump among young voters ages 18 to 34 — with Trump getting support from 46% of these young voters and Biden getting 42%, while:

“CNN’s recent national poll had Trump ahead of Biden by 1 point among voters ages 18 to 34.

Quinnipiac University had Biden ahead by 9 points in that subgroup.

The national Fox News poll had Biden up 7 points among that age group.”

Hard to know what to believe from those surveys. More from Kilgore:

“According to Pew’s validated voters analysis (which is a lot more precise than exit polls), Biden won under-30 voters by a 59% to 35% margin in 2020. Biden actually won the next age cohort, voters 30 to 49 years old, by a 55% to 43% margin.”

So, what’s wrong? It’s important to note that yesterday’s younger voters aren’t today’s. From Nate Silver:

“Fully a third of voters in the age 18-29 bracket in the 2020 election (everyone aged 26 or older) will have aged out of it by 2024, as will two-thirds of the age 18-to-29 voters from the 2016 election and all of them from 2012.”

Silver says, So if you’re thinking “did all those young voters who backed Obama in 2012 really just turn on Biden?” Those voters have aged into the 30-to-41 age bracket.

We need to remember that today’s young voters share the national unhappiness with the performance of the economy, and many are particularly affected by high cost of living and higher interest rates that make buying a home or a car difficult. Some are angry at Biden for his inability (thanks to the Supreme Court) to cancel student-loan debts. And most notoriously, young voters don’t share Biden’s strong identification with Israel in its ongoing war with Hamas (a new NBC poll shows 70% of 18-to-34-year-old voters disapprove of Biden’s handling of the war).

And there’s this tidbit from the NYT:

“Younger people…had concerns specific to their phase of life. In the poll, 93% of them rated the economy unfavorably, more than any other age group.”

What exactly are kids in their 20’s supposed to be feeling at this stage of life? Unless you come from money, your 20’s are a financial struggle. Wrongo’s certainly were, and that’s decades ago when the economy was great. This isn’t to dismiss today’s very real economic uncertainties. Wrongo’s own grandchildren run the gamut of (relative) struggle financially.

The single most persuasive way to convince young people that Trump isn’t the right answer is to show them what he’ll do in his own words. Many of them are too young to know much about Trump. Some of today’s college freshmen were just 14 or 15 when he was in office.

It’s Monday, and it’s time to wake up America! People need to pay attention. Once again, it will come down to effective messaging for the Dems. They must help voters understand who will serve their interests and who will literally crush their interests.

To help you wake up watch and listen to William Devaughn’s “Be Thankful For What You’ve Got”. It sold nearly two million copies in 1974. It takes us back to a time when there was more optimism in America. If you lived or worked in NYC in the1970s, the video will also take you back to a difficult period in the city’s history. In its own way, it’s a great Thanksgiving song:

How Can America Handle The Costs Of Elder Care?

The Daily Escape:

The start of US Highway 6, outside of Bishop, CA – September 2023 photo by Steve Wolfe

(There will be no Saturday Soother this week. Wrongo is on the road.)

Millions of older Americans from the Silent Generation and the Baby Boomers are facing a dilemma as they “age in place.” They must figure out how to pay for increasingly complex medical care. The NYT quotes Richard W. Johnson, director of the program on retirement policy at the Urban Institute:

“People are exposed to the possibility of depleting almost all their wealth….”

The prospect of dying broke is an imminent threat for the Boomers. About 10,000 of them turn 65 every day between now and 2030. They’re expecting to live into their 80s and 90s at the same time as the price tag for long-term care (LTC) is exploding. Currently LTC expense is outpacing inflation and approaching a half-trillion dollars a year, according to federal researchers.

By 2050, the population of Americans 65 and older is projected to increase by more than 50% to 86 million. The number of people 85 or older will nearly triple to 19 million. The Times has a chart of how many of those who need long-term care will die broke:

Some older Americans have prepared for this possible future by purchasing LTC insurance back when it was still affordable. Since then they’ve paid the monthly premiums, even as those premiums continued to rise. But this isn’t the norm. Many adults have no plan at all or assume that Medicare, which kicks in at age 65, will cover their health costs. But Medicare doesn’t cover the kind of long-term daily care, whether in the home or in a full-time nursing facility, that millions of elderly Americans require.

For that, you either pay out-of-pocket or you spend down your assets until you have less than $2,000 in assets in order to qualify for Medicaid. Remember that Medicaid provides health care, including home health care, to more than 80 million low-income Americans.

And even if you qualify, the waiting list for home care assistance for those on Medicaid tops 800,000 people and has an average wait time of more than three years.

Here is a snapshot of how long-term care is paid for in the US:

Governments provide 71.4% of the total. The largest non-government source is people who pay out-of-pocket, and private insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. More from the NYT:

“The boomer generation is jogging and cycling into retirement, equipped with hip and knee replacements that have slowed their aging. And they are loath to enter the institutional setting of a nursing home. But they face major expenses for the in-between years: falling along a spectrum between good health and needing round-the-clock care in a nursing home.”

That has led them to enter assisted-living centers run by for-profit companies and private equity funds. The NYT says that about 850,000 people aged 65 or older now live in these facilities and when in them, they are largely ineligible for federal funds. Some facilities provide only basics like help getting dressed and taking medication while others offer luxury amenities like day trips, gourmet meals, and spas.

In either case, the bills can be staggering. More:

“Half of the nation’s assisted-living facilities cost at least $54,000 a year, according to Genworth, a long-term care insurer. That rises substantially in many metropolitan areas with lofty real estate prices. Specialized settings, like locked memory care units for those with dementia, can cost twice as much.”

Home care is costly, too. According to Genworth, agencies charge about $27 an hour for a home health aide. Hiring someone who spends six or seven hours a day cleaning and helping an older person get out of bed or take medications can add up to $60,000 a year.

It’s worse for people with dementia because they need more services. The number who are developing dementia has soared, as have their needs. Five million to seven million Americans over age 65 have dementia, and that’s expected to grow to nearly 12 million by 2040.

The financial threat posed by dementia also weighs heavily on adult children who in many cases become guardians of aged parents. The Times included this chart:

The reality is that families go broke either caring for, or finding care for their loved ones. The alternative: Women in the family give up their lives and jobs to care for their family members instead, which worsens the gender wage gap.

The NYT article makes it clear that older Americans receive far less government support than their peers in other countries. The “why” question is easily answered: It’s a combination of the concerted effort for any public support to be demonized as “welfare”. It’s also partly the result of our failed experiment with long term care insurance. The politicians’ idea was that “the market” would take care of it, so government help for retirees could be limited to Medicaid-paid nursing homes.

But, the LTC insurance industry has largely imploded. Insurers had little experience with the product and grossly overestimated the lapse rates. If a policyholder stops paying, the insurer gets to keep the money and use it to provide services to everyone remaining in the pool. The surprise was that very few people stopped paying. A second miscalculation was that people who held these policies were living longer than forecasted. Longer life equaled higher and larger payouts (insurers also benefit when customers die before they’ve used up all the policy benefits).

A final factor is the rising levels of dementia described above.

And since demand for support outside of family members exceeds the supply of beds, nursing homes and assisted living facilities that aren’t terrible want residents to join during the independent living phase (which requires very little care, so those fees subsidize intensive nursing home care). Many of these facilities require a $400,000-$500,000 buy-in, which may not be refundable at death, even if the resident is current on their monthly fees.

There’s got to be a better way. Medicaid can’t be the only option to pay for LTC. Congress needs to establish a better system for middle-class Americans to finance LTC.

How we handle the growing costs of long-term care is just another reminder that we get LITTLE for our tax dollars beyond a giant military. Americans are responsible for their own medical care, childcare, college tuition, retirement and nursing home care. Some or all of which are provided in other rich countries.

This is a loudly ticking time bomb, and the demographics of the problem won’t change for decades. And yet, the Republicans seem bent on making it worse. They’re actively trying to bring about their dream of privatizing Social Security and Medicare.

Wake up America! We have real problems to solve.

Why People Say The Economy Is Terrible When It Isn’t

The Daily Escape:

Sunset, Thumpertown Beach, Eastham, MA – November 2023 iPhone photo by friend of the blog, KO.

We keep looking for good news that will buoy Biden’s polling numbers, and on Tuesday we learned that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) was flat in October. From Axios:

“Overall prices rose 3.2% in the 12 months through October, slowing from the 3.7% in September and well-below the peak levels reached last year. Core CPI rose 4%, compared to 4.1% the prior month.”

Among the good news was that last month, prices for gasoline and used cars and trucks fell outright, helping cool over inflation. Meanwhile, shelter costs rose at a much slower pace last month, possibly signaling that inflation could be ending in the next few months.

That gave investors reason to pile back into the stock market, since it may be a sign that the Fed won’t continue to raise interest rates.

But as always, analysis of the economic news could show why Biden polls so badly on the economy, and in particular why he hasn’t consolidated support among younger voters. Let’s take a different look at how some important economic indicators have performed under Biden.

From the Bonddad Blog:

“Below is a graph in which I compare average hourly earnings (nominal, not real) for non-supervisory workers (in red) vs. house prices (dark blue) and mortgage payments (light blue).”

It is important to note that Bonddad has set all of the values to 100 as of January 2021 so that we’re looking only at what has happened during Biden’s Administration. Bonddad compares the changes in average hourly earnings to the rate of fixed price mortgages and the price of homes. These are nominal rates:

Average wages have increased 16% since Biden took office, but existing house prices have increased by 32%, and monthly mortgage payments for new buyers have increased 279% (!), from roughly 3% to roughly 8%. Housing is close to unaffordable for many in America.

Turning to cars, new car prices have increased by 20%, and used car prices by 23%, compared to that 16% for wages. And new car loan payments (dotted line below) have increased almost 70% (from about 5% to 8.3%):

Houses and cars are the two biggest purchases that most average people make. And sorry to say, affording them has gotten much harder since Biden took office.

Finally, let’s look at the cost of two things people see every day: groceries and gas. First, grocery prices are up 29% since Biden took office in January 2021 (again, vs. 16% for average wages):

And gas prices, although they have come back down recently, are still up 55% since January 2021:

Looking at the economic data this way, would you be more likely to vote for or against Biden? This is a big Biden problem with voters who live paycheck to paycheck.

It’s hard to overstate the importance of viewing the Biden economic performance like Bonddad does above. Much of the blame for these specific price increases belongs to corporations who took advantage of the breakdown in the global supply chain to raise their prices. Some belongs to the Biden administration’s pumping money into the economy.

Bonddad provides a ton of perspective regarding how the Democrats shouldn’t be talking to voters about how fantastic the economy has become under Biden. Dems can’t simply talk about the aggregate economic numbers, since many will not fully believe them.

At the risk of piling on, Wrongo recently saw this October Experian survey which asked:

“I suffer or have suffered from financial trauma”

A staggering 68% of US adults replied that they had. You can view the survey here. The stress was felt more strongly by younger generations, namely Gen Z adults and millennials, with 73% of Gen Z’ers and 77% of millennials experiencing negative thoughts and/or anxiety about money.

The idea of “financial trauma” goes beyond mere stress. America’s seeing multiple social crises afflict it. Friendships are cratering, loneliness is soaring, deaths of despair are skyrocketing. Half of American young people say they feel “persistently hopeless.”

Now tie this to how the majority of voters are saying that America is on the wrong track. The prevailing attitude in America is that our systems are rigged against working people. If you work hard, play by the rules, try to be an honest, decent and productive person, but the reward is that you get financially, socially, emotionally traumatized, well, maybe you’d be pessimistic, too.

The result is that most Americans feel they are living precarious lives. When asked, they say they need north of $230K to feel “comfortable” while the average yearly income for a full-time worker is about $75,000 today. That means feeling stable and secure is completely out of reach for the vast majority of Americans.

Most of this happened over time and surely wasn’t caused by Biden, or the Democrats. And little of it can be fixed by him.

There’s some good news in the fact that history shows us that voters generally focus on how the economy has performed during the last 6 to 9 months before the election. In 2012, the economy improved a lot, and when the unemployment rate finally fell below 8% one month before the election, it helped Obama to get reelected.

On the flip side, the economy was weakening as we closed in on the presidential election in 2016. GDP growth and wage and job gains were weak. Strong stock market gains were a positive. Adding the pluses and minuses suggested that the economy was weak, and the insurgent Trump won the election.

Better news on inflation in 2024, particularly for groceries and gas, will mean Biden’s polling on the economy will be much better.

When Perception Isn’t Fact

The Daily Escape:

View of fall colors and Linn Cove Viaduct, Banner Elk, NC – October 2023 photo by David Peak

Polls continue to show that people think the economy is terrible and that it’s Biden’s fault. Biden supporters chalk it up to the general unreliability of surveys: Asking people questions and then assuming their answers are accurate or honest. But often, they are not because people find it difficult to say, “I don’t know.”

A second issue is the astounding changes in polling data over the past decade: People’s self-reported emotional state in 2022 was worse than the very worst events of the past few decades. But are things as bad as people seem to think? From Barry Ritholtz:

“From an economic standpoint, things are much better than people seem to be willing to admit: The rate of inflation has plummeted by two-thirds from 9% to a little over 3%, but 60% of respondents believe inflation is “continuing to increase.” The economy is not on the right track, even as Americans’ Net Worth Surged by Most in Decades During Pandemic.”

And the political fallout may be worse than you think. Bloomberg’s recent poll reveals some significant danger for Biden:

“Donald Trump is leading President Joe Biden in several key swing states as voters reject the economic message that is central to Biden’s reelection bid….Trump…leads Biden 47% to 43% among voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The results across those seven states had a margin of error of 1 percentage point.”

Thirteen months before the election, Biden lags Trump in head-to-head matchups in five of the seven swing states. These states will be particularly important in delivering the electoral votes that decide who will be the next president. More from Bloomberg:

“A 51% majority of swing-state voters said the national economy was better off during the Trump administration, and similar numbers said they would trust Trump over Biden on the economy going forward, 49% to 35%. Among independent voters, the chasm on trust to handle the economy is even wider, with a 22-point advantage for Trump.”

Seems like a problem. This is despite the fact that, since 2019, households invested more, home values have jumped, and savings levels have risen. Here’s more from Bloomberg’s polling partner Morning Consult’s Caroline Bye:

“Right now, Biden is not getting any credit for work he’s done on the economy….Almost twice as many voters in the swing states are saying that Bidenomics is bad for the economy, as opposed to good for the economy, which is a really startling fact if you’re the Biden campaign.”

Why is it that people’s perception doesn’t match the data? Back to Ritholtz, who thinks the fault may lie with the media:

“…the 2010s seems to be when they shifted their online presence to a much more aggressive stance. Perhaps most significant is in the way coverage became increasingly “click-bait” oriented via headlines filled with emotionally loaded language….Words that conveyed “Disgust” rose 29% and “Sadness” was 54% higher; words that reflected “Anger” were up 104%. The biggest gain was from perhaps the most emotionally loaded word: “Fear” skyrocketed by a huge 150%. And the words expressing “Joy” or “Neutral?” Down 14% and 30% respectively.”

But it isn’t just the media’s headlines that are hurting people’s perceptions; it’s also the choice of what the media covers that can lead us astray. Ritholtz provides us with a fantastic chart about the causes of death in the US from Our World in Data comparing actual causes of death with what was reported in the NYT:

This shows that the way the media covers deaths this is totally inverted: The things least likely to kill you get the most coverage: The bar chart on the right shows Terrorism, Homicide, and Suicide capture about 70% of the column inches. This is despite the odds that you are most likely to die from heart disease (30.2%), cancer (29.5%), or a car accident or fall (7.6%). The very bottom of the list are suicide at 1.8%, homicide at 0.9%, and terrorism at 0.01%.

So do negatively-laden headlines matched with wildly disproportionate coverage combine to send sentiment readings to places that do not match the reality of the economy or more broadly, the real world around us?

We’ve always had sensationalist journalism. The media’s response to social media is to approach news coverage in a similar manner to social media. Apparently the business plan is: If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. It’s important to remember that we are what we eat, including our media diet. It’s making us unhappy, and increasingly detached from reality.

There are a few economic realities that may help explain where the public is right now:

Gas prices are both very volatile, and something that annoys an enormous percentage of Americans, because of the need to spend large amounts of money on a weekly basis to fuel their gas guzzling vehicles.
The housing market is a mess. The median sale price of a house in the USA went from $313,000 in 2019 to $480,000 in 2022. Since then the massive spike in interest rates has reduced median price to $416,000, but coupled with high mortgage rates, this is bad news for people wanting to buy homes in this market.

From a behavioral economics viewpoint, the extent of peoples’ reaction to price inflation may reflect the concept that people are loss averse: that is, they dislike what they perceive as losses more than they like what they perceive as gains.

This means if prices and wages were to increase at the same rate, politicians might assume that people would be indifferent to the nominal changes in prices, since they would be offset by wage increases. But if Americans are loss averse, when prices and wages both go up by a significant amount, (as they have over the past three years), people feel worse, because the “loss” incurred through higher prices feels worse than the “gain” of higher wages.

Time to wake up America! Perception isn’t fact until it is. How Dems fight this will determine the outcome of the 2024 election. To help you wake up, watch and listen to Bruce Springsteen perform “How Can a Poor Man Stand Such Times and Live”, live at the New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival in 2006. This is one year after Katrina, which Bruce focuses on at the start of the song:

Sample Lyrics:

Well, the doctor comes ’round here with his face all bright
And he says, “In a little while you’ll be all right”
All he gives is a humbug pill, a dose of dope and a great big bill
Tell me, how can a poor man stand such times and live?

The Auto Strike

The Daily Escape:

Trail Ridge Road, Rocky Mountain NP, CO – September 2023 photo by Rick Priebe

On Friday, The UAW union expanded its strike against GM and Stellantis, two of the Big Three automakers, ramping up pressure on the companies to reach deals on new contracts. The union walked off the job at parts distribution centers of both manufacturers but spared Ford, saying the company had done more to meet its demands. From the NYT:

“Our pressure on Ford is starting to pay off,”

But there was no indication a deal with Ford was imminent. More:

“Stellantis workers walked out at 20 of the company’s parts distribution centers Friday, while G.M. workers went on strike at 18 centers.”

Ford Canada reached a deal last week with the union that represents its Canadian workers. It may offer a clue to the US outcome: The deal provides for pay increases worth up to 25% over three years, as well as bonuses, improved retirement benefits and measures to protect employees as Ford retools factories for electric vehicles. The union, Unifor, is negotiating separately with GM and Stellantis in Canada.

The UAW is asking for a 37% wage increase over four years, improved retiree benefits and shorter work hours. They also want an end to a tiered wage system that starts new hires at much lower wages than the top UAW pay of $32 an hour. Importantly, more than 18,000 UAW members are now on strike.

Some context: UAW workers made significant sacrifices to help keep the big three afloat, amidst the financial crisis in 2009. They made those sacrifices based in part on the promise that the Big Three would eventually renew their compensation and benefits, which the Big Three never did. There were no cost of living adjustments, despite the Big Three going from losing money to record profitability (and tens of $ billions in stock buybacks).

And this week, Biden will join the strike in an extraordinary move of support. From CNN:

“Biden will travel to Michigan on Tuesday and walk the picket line with members of the United Auto Workers union, he announced Friday…”

Biden said in a post on Xitter:

“Tuesday, I’ll go to Michigan to join the picket line and stand in solidarity with the men and women of UAW as they fight for a fair share of the value they helped create. It’s time for a win-win agreement that keeps American auto manufacturing thriving with well-paid UAW jobs,”,

This presidential appearance on a picket line is a historic first. It is also an opportunity to score political points, since it comes one day before Trump is scheduled to deliver a speech to an audience of current and former union members in Detroit. In July, Trump asked the UAW to endorse him, so both politicians are working hard to gain traction with the union.

The UAW was angered by Biden’s pumping tax money into nonunion electric vehicle suppliers, and has withheld its endorsement, even as most other labor unions have rushed to back Mr. Biden’s re-election.

Back to some context for the UAW strike: The WSJ reports that:

“The Detroit companies’ labor costs, including wages and benefits, are estimated at an average of $66 an hour…”

That compares with $45 at Tesla, which isn’t unionized.

Hopefully, the UAW strike will yield fair results for the workers, given the enormous profits the companies are making, the generous salaries the industry’s execs are reaping, and the sacrifices labor made to keep the lights on when the industry was on life support in 2008.

This may well be the union’s last big strike when you consider that nearly half of all the cars built in the US are manufactured in 31 foreign-owned plants. None of these facilities are unionized, and their workers are generally paid less than those at union plants.

The move to EVs will be also be a sea-change reality for auto labor. There is likely to be a 40% reduction in the labor required to build the new engineless cars. Electric motors are much simpler than internal combustion engines. It is estimated that in less than 10 years, two-thirds of all new cars will be electric.

While the impact on labor throughout the supply chain will be dramatic, plenty of internal combustion engines will remain in use, even if not in production. That will provide stability for auto maintenance and repair workers for decades to come.

Nonetheless, the writing is on the wall. Workers with computer skills and AI capability will replace many traditional lunch-pail workers at plants assembling automobiles.

Time to wake up America! Not so long ago, the thought of a UAW strike was traumatizing because of the enormous workforce the union represented. A half-century ago, the UAW represented 1.5 million auto workers (1.5%) out of a total American workforce of just under 100 million workers. Today, UAW membership at GM, Ford, and Stellantis is about 150,000 employees (less than one percent) out of a total American workforce of 160 million workers.

Imagine if today’s number is reduced by 40%, or 60,000 workers! This means that the UAW loses its ability to represent its workers effectively by 2033!

To help you wake up, watch and listen to Green Day perform their hit “Wake Me Up When September Ends” from their 2004 album “American Idiot” at England’s Reading Festival in 2013. Frontman Billie Joe Armstrong wrote the song about the death of his father when he was 10 years old. But it has come to express loss of all kinds. Gotta love those English crowds:

You realize that the country is growing older, that Biden is growing older, the song is growing older, Green Day is growing older, and the union movement in the US is growing older too.

Regardless of how much time has passed, this song hits just as hard as it did when it was introduced 19 years ago.

Sample lyric:

Summer has come and passed
The innocent can never last
Wake me up when September ends

Cartoon Of The Week

The Daily Escape:

Cascade River Valley, North Cascades, WA – September 2023 photo via WanderWashington

Given how often the Republicans in the House shoot themselves in the foot, Santa better bring them Kevlar shoes. This cartoon expresses the problem perfectly:

The room where it never happens:

Can Biden’s Union Roots Help Him In 2024?

The Daily Escape:

Red Mountain, San Juan Mountains, CO – September 2023 photo by Daniel Forster Photography

The “the biggest auto strike in generations” got under way last week, with 150,000 US autoworkers, including employees at Ford, Stellantis and General Motors walking off the job after contract negotiations failed to reach a deal. This strike, coupled with the likely government shutdown at the end of the month, will precipitate a very dangerous moment for the Biden administration.

From The Guardian:

“The United Auto Workers (UAW) union says workers have never been fully compensated for the sacrifices they made after the 2008-09 financial crisis, when they agreed to a raft of cuts to save the industry. The carmakers received huge bailouts and soon returned to record profits.”

The WaPo had a good article asking workers why they are striking. Most cited inflation and fairness:

“We’re not making enough money” said Petrun Williams, a 58 year-old Ford repairman. “People should be able to buy their own houses, but right now it’s not possible.”

This is going to be a difficult problem to tackle, because GM, Ford, and Stellantis are wildly inefficient giant bureaucracies with cost structures optimized to make $75,000 trucks, and their move into Electric Vehicles will take a lot of money and time before it pays off.

But the Biden administration isn’t necessarily helping: (Brackets by Wrongo)

“…Biden…is in a tough spot with the United Auto Workers….Through its industrial policies,…[Biden]…is giving away billions to automakers through production tax credits and loans, while supporting the transition to electric vehicles through consumer rebates and funds for charging infrastructure. Biden has promised that those incentives will lead not only to carbon emissions reductions but also good-paying union jobs.”

But the UAW leadership isn’t buying it. As the UAW goes on strike, their members don’t necessarily support Biden, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they support Trump either. Politico asked striking members if Biden had done enough to prevent the strike. They talked to Garry Quirk, the president of the local UAW union in Kokomo, IA:

“I don’t know what he’s done…Ask him. I don’t think he knows what he’s done. Seriously. I’m not trying to be mean.”

Quirk wasn’t freelancing: Fain and the union haven’t yet endorsed Biden’s reelection, throwing into doubt Biden’s standing in autoworker-heavy communities. But Politico reported that Biden had spoken that day with UAW president Shawn Fain and auto company CEOs. The chair of Biden’s Council of Economic Advisers said this week that Biden had been very much engaged.

But his efforts didn’t resonate with union member Denny Butler:

“Historically, man, if you didn’t vote Democrat years ago, and you were in the union, sometimes you got your ass kicked…I’m telling you what, the Democratic Party is not what it was 20, 30 years ago.”

So this is another Politico story about Obama voters becoming Trump voters and not looking back.

What Biden is fighting is the sense that the Democratic Party has not been truly on the side of union workers for a long time. It is true that today the Democrats are more on the side of unions. Neoliberalism is not nearly as powerful in the Democratic Party as it was during Obama’s time, or earlier.

But perceptions can be sticky. Clinton, Carter, and Obama (especially in the first term) all promoted corporate policies over the unions. Workers got screwed as factories closed, and no one offered much to workers beyond retraining programs that they didn’t want, and for the most part, didn’t lead to better jobs.

If you said that Republicans (including Mitt Romney) were no better, you’re correct. But today’s Republican Party offers a way to channel anger and resentment. Union members can opt for the GOP path even if the GOP doesn’t have the union’s interests in mind.

Despite Obama (and Biden) saving autoworker jobs through the 2009 auto bailout, they did little to hold the auto companies accountable. They allowed the expansion of two-tiered wage rates that the union is still fighting during the current strike.

The perception is that the UAW shrank and sacrificed, while the auto industry leadership got richer. Biden absolutely cares about unions, but he’s fighting against decades of belief that the Democrats aren’t what they used to be.

And no matter what Biden does, it’s going to be hard to get by that perception. There’s a mixture of anger and nostalgia that sticks in the minds of people who don’t really pay attention to the details of politics. Let’s take a look at the price of cars over the last ten years:

The Big Three automakers reported $21 billion in profits in just the first six months of 2023. Despite these enormous gains, the companies have cried poverty in response to union demands for wage increases that would make up for decades of pay stagnation. Worse, during the last year, the Big Three automakers have authorized $5 billion in stock buybacks, effectively giving those dollars to shareholders instead of to autoworkers.

The Economist had an excellent observation (paywalled):

“Late last year I took a trip…in a shiny new vehicle, Ford’s electric F-150. The car is in some ways an avatar for today’s Democratic Party. Joe Biden’s administration likes things that are made in America by union labor. It also wants to speed up the transition away from fossil fuels. The F-150 car ticks both boxes. It is also a high-end item that markets itself as a vehicle for working Americans.”

“That’s a bit like the Democratic Party too…with each passing election Democrats lose votes among actual working-class Americans and gain them with college-educated ones (some of whom can actually afford a $75,000 truck).”

“When we talked to a…UAW…representative near Detroit, it became clear the unionized workers are lukewarm on the green transition. Electric vehicles are less labor-intensive than cars powered by internal combustion, which is bad for the UAW members. In fact that is one reason why the union went on strike today. College-educated liberals, on the other hand, like electric vehicles a lot.”

Apparently union members see the problem much more clearly than the Biden Administration.

There could be a settlement reached between the unions and the companies at any moment, but it feels like this will be a protracted situation: If the UAW workers get the 40% pay increase they are asking for, they probably would learn to accept electric vehicles. Don’t hold your breath.

Biden’s relationship with America’s unions is deep and personal, but the next few months are really about his political strategy. And they’re an example of how the Democrats are always trying to balance competing aims.

Time to wake up America! Will Biden continue pursuing his environmental policies and risk losing even more support among working-class Americans? Or will he pump the brakes on environmentalism and alienate upscale Democrats? Biden won only 33% of white, non-college voters in 2020, so maybe that’s where his opportunity to expand his base in 2024 lies. But does Biden really have a path to take back more non-college voters?

To help you wake up, watch and listen to a recent version of the union anthem “Solidarity Forever”, written by Ralph Chaplin in 1915. Although it was written for the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), the AFL–CIO have adopted the song as their own. Here it is sung in the Wisconsin capitol building in September 2011, by demonstrators who opposed then Governor Scott Walker’s “Wisconsin Budget Repair bill.”

The bill proposed to alleviate the state’s budget shortfall by taking away the ability of public sector unions to bargain collectively over pensions and health care, as well as ending automatic union dues collection by the state. Walker stated that without the cuts, thousands of state workers would have to be laid off. After two days of arrests for “holding signs” on the first floor of the Wisconsin State Capitol, the Solidarity Sing Along took to the rotunda in joyful defiance:

The law passed and remains in effect today.

The Wrongologist

Geopolitics, Power and Political Economy

Category: Economic Policy

Why People Say The Economy Is Terrible When It Isn’t

The Auto Strike

Cartoon Of The Week