A Tale Of Two Economies?

“Strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.  Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.” – Monty Python and the Holy Grail

I guess, for her, these are dark times.

I saw a graph last week from the New York Times®.  The graph showed the views of the economy based on political party – people of the GloboLeft thought that the economy during Trump’s years in office wasn’t great and got worse every year until it fell off the COVID cliff.  Their view of the economy changed as soon as Mumbly Joe got into office.  Things were aLL bEtTeR NoW!  Oh, sure, not as good as they were when Obama was in office, but better than the average of the Trump years.

When looking at the Trump supporter numbers, it was the exact opposite, the economy had gotten better during Trump’s time in the chair, until the COVID cliff, but bounced back but had dropped off of that same COVID cliff.

When Biden got into office, if not a little earlier, the economy cratered for people on the TradRight, and has been in the gutter since then.

The takeaway from the Times™ is:  “Republicans react much more strongly to a president from the opposite party than Democrats do. That disproportionately affects the national mood during this Democratic administration.”

Probably the most important part of this graph is the why axis.

I’ll admit there is certainly bound to be component of that, but by any reasonable stretch of the imagination, the economy was much better under Trump than under Brandon.  I think the analysis by the Times© is myopic and doo-doo headed (that’s a technical term).

The Times© is missing the point that Biden voters are not at all the same as Trump voters.  Biden voters (the actual living ones), by far, make more use of public assistance than Trump voters.  Any move or perception of a move that the gravy train of cash and prizes for just breathing and eating Hot Pockets™ is going away is going to cause unease.

Since they are the consumers of things that illegals create more than Trump voters, any tightening of the border lowers the number of people to be Squatamalan nannies or gardeners and makes the “raise the minimum wage” crowd have to pay more.

The horror!

You might not think it’s a lie that there is worse than Biden.  The Canadians know it’s True-deau.

Lastly, a Trump administration will slow the growth of federal and state local jobs, as the gravy train is slowed, and as the regulations that spawn new regulatory jobs are strangled.

But what bout the Trump voters, are they delusional?

No, they own small businesses, and when profits are up, they’re happy.  And they don’t have bright green hair.  They’re homeowners instead of renters, so when interest rates are low, they can afford more house.  They don’t live in the urban hellholes so gasoline prices are much more important to them than they would be to the average Biden voter who lives in the core urban Bluetopia of some place like Detroit or Atlanta or Baltimore.

Things were better in the burbs, and better for families, and better for people who had to get up in the morning to make the doughnuts and keep civilization moving.  Oh, and the shutdown of the illegal pipeline raised their wages – lower labor availability raises wages.

Give a man a pizza and he will eat for a day.  Teach a man to make a pizza and he will work for minimum wage.

Who doesn’t like increasing wages?  The GloboLeftElite, that’s who.  They don’t like higher wages because higher wages mean decreased profit.  It’s odd that they end up having more money that they could ever spend, so it’s not the cash.  Again, it’s the concentrated power that money brings.

And concentrated power is equivalent to the ability to reward.  Or punish.

So, no, New York Times, Republicans are actually hurt by the economy.  And it’s likely on purpose.

And, since actual intact nuclear families are overwhelmingly for Trump, this leads to the next problem – if the conditions are bad for a family, imagine the problems that causes for the most important segment of our population:

Young men who want nothing more than a traditional, Norman Rockwell marriage with a wife, a car, 2 or 3 kids, and a home that they own.  That’s the desire.

The Hapsburgs had faces only a cousin could love.

The reality is that this dream is slipping away.  I think kids are losing ground every year.  Houses are more expensive, cars are more expensive to own and insure, and marriage costs more.  The situation is horrible compared to the early 1970s, when a manufacturing job could support a Norman Rockwell family.  Pay has stayed down due to the massive influx of cheap immigrant labor, whether that immigrant labor is here or in Vietnam.

Free trade means that we can be miserable on a race to the bottom for labor costs.  And mom and pop stores, as inefficient as they may have been, mainly kept the profits of their stores in town.  As the Walmartization™ of the rural economy continues, the guy who used to own the butcher store is now the guy at the meat counter, and the real butcher is hundreds of miles away in a meatpacking house, and is probably an illegal alien.

What was once a great middle-class life is now replaced as the GloboLeftElite search for yet more power.

The kicker is that the big key to a young man having a family, women, are more elusive every year having been propagandized into a dozen or more years of increasingly desperate and meaningless sex followed by desperation to find a “worthy” man as they enter their 30s and decide they want a kid.

Is that meme thot provoking?

So, guys check out.  They’ve got weed, booze, and video games.  When there aren’t women worth having, there won’t be men working to make themselves worthwhile.  Why are there no good young men?  There aren’t any good women worth chasing.

This leads to unrest in young men, and a misery in the population of people that are the real spark plugs of an economy, destruction of the middle class?

As usual, the New York Times® misses the big picture – the misery is real.  And they don’t care.

Author: John

Nobel-Prize Winning, MacArthur Genius Grant Near Recipient writing to you regularly about Fitness, Wealth, and Wisdom - How to be happy and how to be healthy. Oh, and rich.

37 thoughts on “A Tale Of Two Economies?”

  1. Not a tale of two Economies it seems but of propaganda driven Leftist delusion ALSO Known as Trump Disorder Syndrome (MEAN TWEETS but, but, but 1.99 a gallon gasoline..) vs the CLOWN WORLD of let’s get into war everywhere so the BIG Guy gets his 10% and grabbing credit for lowering the nearly 6 dollars a gallon gasoline in California by eliminating the taxes on it (until the election is over, suckers).

    Since at least in my area the gasoline taxes fund road repairs, robbing the state’s road money seems foolish.

    BUT, BUT, BUT the FED can just Print MORE Money…

    Well, then STOP TAXING ME If you can just PRINT MONEY….

    Reality of “When Money Dies” and Weimar Germany 2.0 American style is almost here.

    1. Closer every day. How much more can they spend? It’s so big, the fall will be the biggest the world has ever seen.

  2. Democrat policies, in my observation, tend to benefit the welfare state (not the same as the working poor) and the very wealthy, while hollowing out the middle class. Republican policies, at least some of the time, are intended to try to help the middle classes.

    I’ve seen hypotheses suggesting that long term, a large and prosperous middle class is not a sustainable state of affairs, as it historically has been somewhat rare. So perhaps we are living at the end of an anomaly.

  3. There needs to be a graph that overlays how the economy actually performed compared to the red and blue feelings. That will likely show one is closer to reality.

      1. It has been done. Numerous times. It is almost always memory holed because reality doesn’t fit the narrative.

    1. Sooo many variables. Reality for a guy in an apartment that gets a check from the government is vastly different than the reality for a guy working at WalMart.

  4. ” … the early 1970s, when a manufacturing job could support a Norman Rockwell family.”
    The thing that has always puzzled me was the behavior of the unions. They were supposed to protect American jobs, but instead they let them go overseas by demanding more and more from manufacturers until it became impossible to stay in business in America. I grew up in a steel mill community near Pittsburgh. We lived that Norman Rockwell life. When I got out of the Army in 1979, it was all but gone.

    1. The unions are managed to the benefit of the union bosses and their Democrat masters, not the members.

      What’s the difference between a union and the mafia? The union is immune to racketeering laws.

  5. I’m using personal experience here. My accounts took a nosedive when COVID became the cause of the year. In March of 2020 I received a settlement check and decided to open a brokerage account. By the time the election came around I had made 63% on that money. A year after the Jell-O brain pedophile came into office, half of that gain was gone. It has taken until now to make that back up. So in effect, I;m more than 2 years behind in my investment progress due to the Cadaver-in-Chief.

  6. The Times does care and they do enjoy the plight of normies…it could be orgasmic.

  7. My wife watches porn. Specifically, endless feel-good porn showing people trying to choose between this beautiful house or that beautiful house on Home and Garden Television (HGTV). She would rather feast her eyes on a beautiful master bedroom that actually watch people do anything in it – sigh, we’re getting old…

    Anyway, I watch this stuff with her and it’s really pretty interesting – especially the ones highlighting overseas real estate. What British people pay per square foot for what we would call “tiny houses” is totally insane even by admittedly crazy American standards – see My Lottery Dream Home International.

    Even more interesting is House Hunters International, and this is where I want to talk about another version of “Tale of Two Economies”. They had an episode that highlighted a couple looking for an apartment in Hanoi, Vietnam. Holy cow. The city was beautiful, endless clusters of futuristic high rise buildings and not a bomb crater in sight. Our charming couple had their pick of huge brand new luxury apartments that were renting for around $1500 per month.

    Apartments like these….

    https://alphahousing.vn/toplist-10-luxury-apartment-buildings-worth-living-in-hanoi/

    And sure, the sky is the limit, but look what you can get in Hanoi for under $1500 per month…

    https://alphahousing.vn/advanced-search/?filter_type=&filter_area=&area_name=&filter_category=&filter_bed=&filter_price=500,1500&filter_balcony=&filter_pool=&filter_lake_view=&filter_title=

    A Hanoi pad seems like a lot better place than what my grandson is paying a lot more for here in the US. I have trouble wrapping my head around what is going on here. The average wage in Vietnam is “only” around 300 US dollars per month. Yet foreigners are apparently flooding into Hanoi and finding incredible deals by their standards.

    I guess the moral of the story here is that it’s a lot better to live in an early-stage-capitalism society than a late-stage capitalism society.

    1. The Mrs. and I actually looked at one we’d seen on TV and were looking to buy – it was in our range, but we didn’t end up moving. I’m thinking . . . the shows are fake.

  8. The NYT does have an agenda. It is best summarized by the old “New Yorker” cover cartoon, showing NYC as the majority of the US and everywhere else is a vast empty space, except for Hollywood/LA way out west.

    Pure myopia, as your average NYT reporter/oped-ster went to Choate, Yale/Hah-vahd and has a Masters in Journo from Columbia. Example? There was an old Garry Shandling episode where his mom’s flight got delayed in Charlotte, and she feared for her life in the “Deep South” until Kurt Rambis showed up, who had just been traded to the Hornets.

  9. It is a vicious circle. There are no good women so why bother being good men, but women look at it and think there are no good men so might as well wh0re around. I still think most men and women still want the stable relationship, they just need to stop letting social media tell them what they want.

  10. Somewhere, there are statistics completely unblemished by corruption and personal beliefs. Of course, we can’t see them because they reflect the fact we’ve been duped since the gold standard was dropped, and the percentage they allow to be changed to reflect the large amounts of intrinsic value stolen doesn’t begin to replace what was lost. That, and how it all indebted the government to foreign powers.

    Jess

  11. To describe the problem, the NY Times would have to begin with feminism. Fifty years of massive, intense feminism that the Regime luurves and strives to expand worldwide.

    The NY Times is called the Grey Lady for a reason. As long as, you know, Lady = Evil Bitch.

    I’m headed now for some soul food, a tall frosty bowl of Cocoa Puffs. Yes you can still buy them in remote third world towns, the originals, packaged in the Sixties.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a2/62/50/a26250d5ed70e3c5258075518dbe993e.jpg

          1. Tater Joe claimed defeat of ONE Corn Pop. But Corn Pops cannot be vanquished. They are forever.

        1. Ma Wilder saw a magazine article about hot Tang, and made it. Honestly, it was not bad on a cold winter day.

  12. One of the huge problems that I don’t see much of a way of dealing with is that for every guy who wants to have a stay-at-home wife and 2.4 kids, there are several people who want to have a double income (or triple or more) bidding up house prices. Whether we are talking a working woman, or a gay couple, or throuple or whatever, it matters not. How can you change things so that housing is only priced on one income?

    1. There will always be disparities in income – nicer houses and less than nicer. A good first step is strict deportation of illegals. A good second step would be giving five years of paid maternity leave to females. Throuple? I think there are still laws on the books against that . . .

Comments are closed.