It's the economy, stupid.

[Vrede too]

US economy in 'uncharted waters' as inflation falls with low unemployment -study

GO Joltin' Joe GO! At the very least he's not screwing things up. Odd that the article never mentions him once.

[billy.pilgrim]

Interesting take on taxes is new to me

https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartm ... dium=email

“Wait a minute!” I can hear you saying. “Cutting taxes on rich people makes them richer, but cutting taxes on working class people cuts their pay? WTF?!?”


The Hartmann Report

It’s labor day, so let’s look at the radically different ways income tax cuts or increases affect working class people versus the morbidly rich.

Over the past 40 years, Republicans have pulled off an incredible magic trick. They’ve convinced average working people that tax cuts benefit them when in fact the opposite is true.

It all boils down to two simple principles, which are — unfortunately — a mystery to most Americans and ignored in both our political and media discussions of income taxes.

1. Income tax cuts for the morbidly rich raise a nation’s debt but do nothing else. Reagan’s BS “trickle down” claims notwithstanding, tax cuts for the rich don’t even stimulate economic growth: they just fatten billionaires’ money bins and offshore accounts. And because tax cuts on the rich are paid for by increasing the national debt, they’re a drag on the economy. They make rich people richer, but make the nation poorer.

2. Cutting income taxes on working-class people, however, actually cuts their base pay over the long run. And, paradoxically, when income taxes on working people go up, as they did in the 1930s through the 1960s, it generally leads to pay increases! This shocking and counterintuitive reality is something no politician since FDR has had the courage to explain.

“Wait a minute!” I can hear you saying. “Cutting taxes on rich people makes them richer, but cutting taxes on working class people cuts their pay? WTF?!?”

Here’s how it works with a short story thrown in.

Some years ago I did my radio program for a week from the studios of Danish Radio in Copenhagen.

Speaking with one of the more conservative members of Parliament, I asked why the Danish people didn’t revolt over an average 52% income tax rate on working people, with an even higher rate on really high earners?

He pointed out to me that the average Dane was doing just fine, with a minimum wage that averaged about $18 an hour, free college and free healthcare, not to mention four weeks of paid vacation every year and notoriety as the happiest nation on earth, according to a study done by the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom.

'“You Americans are such suckers,” he told me and I reported some years ago. “You think the rules for taxes that apply to rich people also apply to working people, but they don’t.

“When working people’s taxes go up,” he said, “their pay also goes up over time. When their taxes go down, their pay goes down. It may take a year or two or three to all even out, but it always works that way — look at any country in Europe. And that rule on taxes is the exact opposite of how it works for rich people!”

Economist David Ricardo explained this in 1817 with his “Iron Law of Wages,” laid out in his book On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation.

Ricardo pointed out that in the working class “labor marketplace,” before-tax income is pretty much irrelevant. The money people live on, the money that defines the “marketplace for labor,” is take-home pay.

After-tax income.

But the rules for how taxes work are completely different for rich people.

When taxes go down on rich people, they simply keep the money that they saved with the tax cut. They use it to stuff larger wads of cash into their money bins."

[Vrede too]

Interesting take on taxes is new to me

https://open.substack.com/pub/thomhartm ... dium=email

“Wait a minute!” I can hear you saying. “Cutting taxes on rich people makes them richer, but cutting taxes on working class people cuts their pay? WTF?!?”


The Hartmann Report

Thom Hartmann nails it again. Thanks.


Might be a good conversation starter on LNF or CPF :

Another 150K Jobs Added In October; 34th Consecutive Month of Job Growth
Unemployment still at historic lows as fears of a recession disappear

Another historic job report was released Friday showing 150,000 jobs were added in October, the 34th consecutive month of job growth, with unemployment at 3.9%.

Unemployment is under 4% for the 21st consecutive month. This is the longest period with unemployment under 4% in over 50 years. The average monthly job gain over the past three months is 204,000 jobs; steady growth indicative of a healthy economy. This report comes after the stunning news that U.S. GDP grew by 4.9% in the third quarter of this year, ahead of the 4.7% estimate....

JoltJoeJolt!

[Vrede too]

In these 22 states, you need a six-figure income to afford a typical home, analysis finds

... That’s a lot more than in January 2020, when Bankrate found buyers needed a six-figure income in just six states and the District of Columbia.

... Bankrate calculated that in the United States – where the overall median home price is $402,343, according to Redfin – “aspiring homebuyers must earn $110,841 annually to afford a median-priced home.” (A median sales price in an area is the price at which half of the homes for sale are priced higher and half are priced lower.)

Where you need the most – and least – income to snag a median-priced home

People buying on the West Coast and in the Northeast need the highest household incomes to afford a typical home, Bankrate found. The top 5 places are: California (where an income of $197,051 is needed); Hawaii ($185,829); District of Columbia ($167,871); Massachusetts ($162,471); and Washington State ($156,814).

Not too surprising, though Washington State is a bummer.

The other states where a six-figure income is needed are: Arizona ($110,271); Colorado ($152,229); Connecticut ($119,614); Florida ($114,771); Idaho ($114,386); Maine ($102,557); Maryland ($108,257); Montana ($131,357);

Nevada ($111,557); New Hampshire ($130,329); New Jersey ($152,186);

Nearly in the top 5.

New York ($148,286); Oregon ($129,129); Rhode Island ($132,343); Texas ($100,629); Utah ($133,886); Vermont ($114,471); and Virginia ($106,971)....

Where income needs have gone up the most (and least) since 2020

Six-figure incomes aside, sometimes the measure of how affordability changes over time can be seen in how much more income you need to buy the average home today than yesterday.

Compared to 2020, income needs jumped the most in Montana (up 77.7%);

Utah (up 70.3%); Tennessee (up 70.1%), South Carolina (up 67.3%) and Arizona (up 65.3%).

... there are still some deals to be had in the Rust Belt and the Midwest. For instance, Bankrate found that the income needed to buy a median-priced home rose the least in North Dakota (up 9.2%); Illinois (up 27.2%); and Kansas (up 29.3%).

The complete Bankrate analysis can be found here.

[O Really]

Washington state is a bit skewed by the greater Seattle area and west of Cascades areas. If you're willing to live somewhere like Yakima, it's a lot less.

[Vrede too]

Washington state is a bit skewed by the greater Seattle area and west of Cascades areas. If you're willing to live somewhere like Yakima, it's a lot less.

I thought of the same thing - Wow, a median that high despite the eastern wastelands. It must be truly nuts in the west.

Similarly, Montana has tons of undesirable land. Trendy spots like Missoula, Kalispell, the Bitterroot Valley, Bozeman, etc must be through the roof.

[Vrede too]

Fox's Maria Bartiromo Seems Really Frustrated By Robust U.S. Economy
The Fox Business host wondered if the economy is "too good" following the release of a Labor Department report.

Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo seemed really frustrated by good news about the U.S. economy Friday.

A new report from the Labor Department showed American employers had hired 303,000 workers in March, causing the unemployment rate to drop from 3.9% to 3.8%.

In addition, the jobless rate has come in under 4% for 26 months in a row, according to The Associated Press.

Sound like good news? Maybe, if you’re an average person who wants the country and its citizens to do well economically regardless of which party holds the White House.

But Bartiromo had a different take, and she spent part of Friday finding ways to poke holes in a report that stunned CNBC’s Rick Santelli and that CNN’s John Berman called “boffo.”

Journalist Aaron Rupar documented the Fox personality going through some things live on air and posted the clips to X, formerly Twitter.

Great US economic news is always a stomach ache for FauxNews. Comical.

... But (Conservative economist Stephen) Moore’s sycophantic suggestion that Trump is the reason for the strong report really inspired mockery.

Right-wing cope: "The economy is so good now because companies are hoping Trump will be president in nine months!"

Quite the mental gymnastics to somehow give Trump credit for this great economy

More scathing tweets at the link.