State of the Union 2024

[MrSquished]

But the data disagrees with you. You can say it isn't enough or as much as you want. But real wages are up. Yes, not for everyone, but in aggregate.

If you want to cherrypick things go ahead. If you want to run an out of touch campaign by saying we are better off than ever, you go lose the presidency and the house and senate for us.

Housing prices is a big deal.

Home prices are rising 2x faster than income

Low interest rates and limited housing stock helped fuel the market’s recovery and pushed home prices higher, but wages failed to keep pace.

lbmjournal.com

"
To afford the median-priced home of $433,100, Americans need an annual income of roughly $166,600. But the median household earns just $74,580 — only 45% of the recommended amount.



To discover how these factors affect potential home buyers, we analyzed publicly available data from the Federal Reserve, the National Association of Realtors, and the U.S. Census.

We found that the divide between home prices and income has caused the house-price-to-income ratio to greatly exceed what many financial experts consider healthy.

The average house-price-to-income ratio has climbed to 5.8 nationwide — more than double the recommended ratio of 2.6....

....
That last line has been true for many years, but the ratio is getting way more crazy (my emphasis)

"However, the national house-price-to-income ratio has been higher than the recommended 2.6 every year since 1985.

Entire generations have struggled to afford homes, but supercharged home prices in recent years have become a much bigger problem for young buyers.

When the average boomer bought a home in 1985, the house-price-to-income ratio was 3.5. The ratio increased slightly to 3.9 in 2000, when many Gen X buyers purchased homes.

Millennials, however, must surmount a much higher hurdle to achieve homeownership. Not only is the current house-price-to-income ratio of 5.8 double the recommended ratio of 2.6, it’s 66% higher than it was in 1985 and 49% higher than it was in 2000."




---that is twice as much as it was just over twenty years ago!!!! but things are the best now. sorry I forgot.


If you want to ignore the reality on the ground, that's on you. I think the Dems would be stupid to run on that nonsense that some here preach. It's cultism. Wealth inequality and housing are surpassing levels not seen since probably the roaring twenties or quite a ways back.

But sure, let's run on, hey this number says this, so we are doing greater than ever!



It's a bunch of out of touch nonsense cherrypicking. Maybe check medical bankruptcy trends over the last few decades too. There are metrics to support the issues we face as a society.

 

[Muse]

Nonsense. It's largely corporate profits increasing while having the media push BS about supply chains nonstop to manufacture consent for the increased prices.

Cynical any. It's not what I perceived was happening. Prices went up because supply chain issues. Supply/Demand, it rules economics. Supply got torpedoed, your prices skyrocketed, especially for inelastic commodities, those are the ones you figure you need, not just kinda want.

 

[MrSquished]

Not what I perceived was happening. Prices went up because supply chain issues. Supply/Demand, it rules economics. Supply got torpedoed, your prices skyrocketed.

You are correct in that did happen, but a lot of it since has been greedflation - corporate profit driven rather than anything supply-chain driven. There was a handoff period.

 

[Zorba]

I don't disagree. We can handle day-to-day (as most people can I imagine, by restricting wants in favor of needs) but sometimes shit happens, and you get a dick-slapping $1600 bill for some septic repair, or a $1k vehicle repair, or another thing, or another thing, on and on.

Christ my sister-in-law just forked over $9k they couldn't really afford for a vet bill. I guess the alternative is to just kill your pet but it's okey dokey because the economy is roaring right?

Not to be insensitive, but in the 50-90s when the economy was mythically "better," no one would've spent 9K on a pet. Standard of living in the US has gone way up, people spend what the make, pushing up the standard of living but then get upset that they don't have a nest egg or more than their neighbors and long for the past when they could've had those things on their current salary. But in 1970 the average house was half the size as today, the have house had less cars, way less TVs, no cell phones, internet, or computers, way less clothing, less kitchen gadgets, much less eating out, much less alcohol, much less/cheaper travel, etc.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Not what I perceived was happening. Prices went up because supply chain issues. Supply/Demand, it rules economics. Supply got torpedoed, your prices skyrocketed.

Supply chain issues were the spark that started it, and then were used as an excuse to pad profits.

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/19/1177180972/economists-are-reconsidering-how-much-corporate-profits-drive-inflation

It's like blaming relaxed lending standards for the 2008 crash instead of blaming the banks for the derivatives created from those trash loans that actually crashed the economy.

 

[Muse]

Uh, Joe was pretty good! Fuck Trump. Better yet, drag him back to court and lead him out in handcuffs.

 

[Maxima1]

But the data disagrees with you. You can say it isn't enough or as much as you want. But real wages are up. Yes, not for everyone, but in aggregate.

A lot of people responding are in top quartile/top decile in one of the richest countries.... Of course the US is good for upper class because of high income inequality/high Gini coefficient. But people also compare relative to others and as pointed out, if you can't buy a house easily or rent takes up a large chunk, there's a problem. While supply is part of the problem, high income inequality obviously exacerbates it. I mean, there's cops and firefighters here making 400-700K in one year, and you don't have to do that. It's just shitty policy choices.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[Zorba]

Yes but we are still behind but that’s mostly because we weren’t building during Covid.

Yeah, I'm all for building more. I just thought that was a good sign. Same video was showing rents are starting to come down in a handful of bigger cities too.

 

[MrSquished]

Let's see how the shitty NYTimes spins this to make it negative.

 

[Muse]

Supply chain issues were the spark that started it, and then were used as an excuse to pad profits.

https://www.npr.org/2023/05/19/1177180972/economists-are-reconsidering-how-much-corporate-profits-drive-inflation

It's like blaming relaxed lending standards for the 2008 crash instead of blaming the banks for the derivatives created from those trash loans that actually crashed the economy.

Your last paragraph is redundant. The derivatives were relaxed lending standards.

We're in a capitalist system. Competition should prevent corporate rape of the public. If it doesn't there are anti-competitive forces in place, which should not be legal. Believe what you want. You blame who for the inflation? Surely not the Democrats. It didn't do anything to help them.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Not to be insensitive, but in the 50-90s when the economy was mythically "better," no one would've spent 9K on a pet. Standard of living in the US has gone way up, people spend what the make, pushing up the standard of living but then get upset that they don't have a nest egg or more than their neighbors and long for the past when they could've had those things on their current salary. But in 1970 the average house was half the size as today, the have house had less cars, way less TVs, no cell phones, internet, or computers, way less clothing, less kitchen gadgets, much less eating out, much less alcohol, much less/cheaper travel, etc.

Meh technological innovation drives a lot of that and you could argue families have more cars because they're more of a necessity today with single income families pretty much impossible now.

 

[Zorba]

A lot of people responding are in top quartile/top decile in one of the richest countries.... Of course the US is good for upper class because of high income inequality/high Gini coefficient. But people also compare relative to others and as pointed out, if you can't buy a house easily or rent takes up a large chunk, there's a problem. While supply is part of the problem, high income inequality obviously exacerbates it. I mean, there's cops and firefighters here making 400-700K in one year, and you don't have to do that. It's just shitty policy choices.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Not sure what that has to do with my post. The data says the economy is strong and getting stronger. That doesn't mean everyone is doing great and it never has.

 

[BoyMom]

The State of the Union was good and inspiring. Biden was energetic. Biden is for the working class and the unions. My father is a union worker and his job is now secure for him. Yes, we have a problem with the Southern border. The border has been an issue for years, but there is a bipartisan bill that Biden is ready to sign, but Trump told the Republicans not to pass it. How can Republicans complain about an issue and when there is a resolution for that issue they turn it down. Ridiculous.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Your last paragraph is redundant. The derivatives were relaxed lending standards.

We're in a capitalist system. Competition should prevent corporate rape of the public. If it doesn't there are anti-competitive forces in place, which should not be legal. Believe what you want. You blame who for the inflation? Surely not the Democrats. It didn't do anything to help them.

No the derivatives were the banks securitizing each bad loan and betting against each one many times over. And I just gave you a link showing the KC Fed determined 60% of inflation in 2021 was due to corporate profits. Don't know how you can buy into this freshman microecon view of our economy with perfect competition when for instance almost all our meat is controlled by four companies which is why you have grocery store shoppers and cattle ranchers both getting fucked on beef prices at opposite ends. American grocery stores you have the illusion of choice but virtually all your cereal is Kellogg's, General Mills, or Post, virtually all your beer is Inbev or Miller-Coors, virtually all your soda is Coke or Pepsi, etc.

 

[Zorba]

Meh technological innovation drives a lot of that and you could argue families have more cars because they're more of a necessity today with single income families pretty much impossible now.

It's still a higher standard of living. My family bought a TV in 1987, my mom had that TV and only that TV until 2009, and that was pretty normal in the 80s and 90s. I don't think many people struggling in this horrible economy can say that they've had one TV in the house and kept it for 15+ years.

 

[Muse]

And Rogan is a dishonest shill carrying all the maga water, if Biden were to appear on Rogan he would be disintegrated on the following 100 episodes.

I have watched only one Joe Rogan interview. I stopped it 1/2 way, couldn't stand him. I'll never give him another chance. He was obviously irredeemable.

 

[Muse]

American grocery stores you have the illusion of choice but virtually all your cereal is Kellogg's, General Mills, or Post, virtually all your beer is Inbev or Miller-Coors, virtually all your soda is Coke or Pepsi, etc.

I don't buy any of that, except regular Cheerios, when on sale at Costco.

Is Cheerios the healthiest cereal?

They're not only low in fat and calories but also affordable and packed with essential vitamins and minerals.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I have watched only one Joe Rogan interview. I stopped it 1/2 way, couldn't stand him. I'll never give him another chance. He was obviously irredeemable.

My first Rogan interview I saw was with Michael Osterholm right as the pandemic started raging through Italy and it was really informative and I thought man this guy is a great interviewer. Then I find out he's taking horse pills and is an antivax loon. At least it helped me find Osterholm who was an amazing resource to follow the pandemic with. Osterholm was the first who said washing your hands, don't touch your face was BS, that this was clearly an airborne pathogen based on how it had spread in Seattle in January 2020.

 

[manly]

But the data disagrees with you. You can say it isn't enough or as much as you want. But real wages are up. Yes, not for everyone, but in aggregate.

Unlike almost everyone else in this thread, I believe the truth lies in the middle. Yes the macro data is indisputable, the U.S. economy is "solid," GDP growth over the past few quarters is surprisingly good and real wages are up. But that's not the whole story. Even before mortgage rates spiked, housing costs rose dramatically due to a lack of supply. Housing costs aside, what people tend to miss is that the bottom half of earners spends a lot more of their net income on food and other necessities. Telling someone their 8% YoY raise covered CPI doesn't assuage the pain they feel at the checkout line, or at the restaurant. Granted some of this pain or anxiety is just perception or urban legend (i.e. the $16 Big Mac combo), but telling the electorate* that they are dead wrong about Bidenomics isn't going to change people's messed up opinions.

* the portion of the electorate that understands facts and logic

So just to make it clear, you can't point to any time the economy was better than today, but you are still going to bitch about it.

I will say something Trump did right, the day he was elected he just started talking about the economy and everyone believed. We have a better economy today and everyone thinks it's 2009 again or worse.

Real wages finally growing again after decades of stagnation is a positive sign. But these are really just little green shoots, which is partly why many Americans don't believe the macroeconomic data. There's also a heavy bias at play, whereby voters dumbly think Republicans are better at the economy than the Democrats, when history demonstrates the opposite. Furthermore, much of the structural problems with the U.S. economy are results of conservative trickle-down Reaganomics but voters just can't or won't see it.

I haven't studied it much but I'd assert the Clinton economic boom was better than today, but that was really an Internet boom (that ultimately went bust). That had little to do with public policy or presidential stewardship IMO.

 

[Muse]

It's still a higher standard of living. My family bought a TV in 1987, my mom had that TV and only that TV until 2009, and that was pretty normal in the 80s and 90s. I don't think many people struggling in this horrible economy can say that they've had one TV in the house and kept it for 15+ years.

I bought a 20" CRT TV in 1989. It was my only TV until 2018, at which time I bought three 43" 4K TCL TV's. What a difference!

 

[Muse]

My first Rogan interview I saw was with Michael Osterholm right as the pandemic started raging through Italy and it was really informative and I thought man this guy is a great interviewer. Then I find out he's taking horse pills and is an antivax loon. At least it helped me find Osterholm who was an amazing resource to follow the pandemic with. Osterholm was the first who said washing your hands, don't touch your face was BS, that this was clearly an airborne pathogen based on how it had spread in Seattle in January 2020.

Yes, Osterholm was a revelation and I discovered that in a video, but it couldn't have been Joe Rogan. I was super impressed. He knew his stuff from the SARS epidemic on. At the time I was totally into keeping track of the pandemic as it was unfolding, being locked down. After a while that became impossible, there was too much. I did find some really good online resources, mostly hard working very capable M.D.s.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I don't buy any of that, except regular Cheerios, when on sale at Costco.

Is Cheerios the healthiest cereal?

They're not only low in fat and calories but also affordable and packed with essential vitamins and minerals.

Come on man you don't buy meat? You want to tell me about competition when entire classes of food products are dominated by 2-4 companies? Can't imagine how shitty grocery shopping and working in grocery stores is going to become once Kroger and Albertsons merge. It's already terrible in San Antonio where groceries are dominated by two chains (HEB and Walmart).

 

[HomerJS]

Biden said send me a Congress and I’ll fix reproductive and voting rights. In order to do that Dems must break the filibuster.

I took that as a promise on the table.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

It's still a higher standard of living. My family bought a TV in 1987, my mom had that TV and only that TV until 2009, and that was pretty normal in the 80s and 90s. I don't think many people struggling in this horrible economy can say that they've had one TV in the house and kept it for 15+ years.

Do you think there are many TVs that would last 22 years these days? Clothes are the worst though. God clothing quality has gone to total shit this last ten years.

 

[Zorba]

Let's see how the shitty NYTimes spins this to make it negative.

They could just read your posts and be far on their way.