Tag Archives: #Economics

Posted on by

Gentrification is a good thing!

On its website main page Thursday morning, The Philadelphia Inquirer, in plugging a new story, Philadelphia’s gun violence crisis through the eyes of those experiencing it, there was a link to an older story, Philly blocks besieged by shootings have long endured poverty, blight, and systemic racism. Dated September 16, 2021, I had seen it before. The story documents some of the blocks with the highest number of shootings, and tells us what we already knew:

But in Philadelphia, the epidemic of gun violence has been intensely concentrated in just a handful of neighborhoods and several dozen blocks — like the one where Johnson was killed, according to an Inquirer analysis. These shootings have left behind a breathtaking level of fear and trauma among a fraction of the city’s residents, nearly all of whom are Black and brown.

I admit to being wryly amused by the Inquirer’s stylebook, seemingly copied from the Associated Press, which decided that, in reference to race, “black” should be capitalized, but “white” should not. The stylebook led to “black” being capitalized and “brown” being left in lower case. Social justice, racial justice, and just generally being #woke[1]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading leads to some real stupidity.

As unchecked gun violence has reached unprecedented heights this year, it has continued to disproportionately batter these same communities, where residents also endure higher poverty levels, lower life expectancy, and more blighted housing, the analysis shows.

Naturally, the “anti-racist” Inquirer wants to blame everything but race, unless it’s the racism of white people!

After several paragraphs noting violent areas, including the blocks around the intersection of Kensington and Allegheny Avenues, about which we have written previously, and around which the Philadelphia Police Department has mostly ignored the open-air drug markets, I came to these two paragraphs, two I found very important:

The vast majority of the city’s developed[2]By “developed,” article authors Chris Palmer, Dylan Purcell, Anna Orso, John Duchneskie, and Jessica Griffin meant blocks not devastated by crime and neglect, blocks in which the … Continue reading blocks with housing — more than three-quarters of them — haven’t experienced a single shooting since 2015. Entire swaths of Center City, Northeast Philadelphia, Chestnut Hill and Roxborough, far whiter and wealthier than the rest of the city, have not seen a shooting for years.

Neighborhoods like Graduate Hospital, Fishtown, and University City — where years of reinvestment have ushered in more wealth and opportunity — are just a few minutes’ drive from shooting hot spots. But they rarely experience gun violence.

“(Y)ears of reinvestment have ushered in more wealth and opportunity”, huh? Let’s not beat around the bush here: the writers managed to avoid the word itself in their long article, but the word is gentrification.

Gentrification is the process of changing the character of a neighborhood through the influx of more affluent residents and businesses.[3]“Gentrification”. Dictionary.com.Lees, Slater & Wyly 2010[page needed] define gentrification as “the transformation of a working-class or vacant area of the central city to a … Continue reading It is a common and controversial topic in urban politics and planning. Gentrification often increases the economic value of a neighborhood, but the resulting demographic displacement may itself become a major social issue. Gentrification often shifts a neighborhood’s racial or ethnic composition and average household income by developing new, more expensive housing and businesses in a gentrified architectural style and extending and improving resources that had not been previously accessible.[4]West, Allyn (5 March 2020). “Baffled City: Exploring the architecture of gentrification”. Texas Observer. Archived from the original on 22 June 2020. Retrieved 21 June 2020., [3][5]Harrison, Sally; Jacobs, Andrew (2016). “Gentrification and the Heterogeneous City: Finding a Role for Design”. The Plan. 1 (2). doi:10.15274/tpj.2016.01.02.03.

The gentrification process is typically the result of increasing attraction to an area by people with higher incomes spilling over from neighboring cities, towns, or neighborhoods. Further steps are increased investments in a community and the related infrastructure by real estate development businesses, local government, or community activists and resulting economic development, increased attraction of business, and lower crime rates. In addition to these potential benefits, gentrification can lead to population migration and displacement. However, some view the fear of displacement, which dominates the debate about gentrification, as hindering discussion about genuine progressive approaches to distribute the benefits of urban redevelopment strategies.

But it appears that the residents of these poorer neighborhoods don’t want wealthier, and let’s be honest here, whiter people moving in:

In a plan for a safer, vibrant 52nd Street, worried West Philly neighbors see gentrification looming

Angst is roiling minority neighborhoods as they struggle to balance the opportunities and the threats created by gentrification. “West Philly is the new Africa,” one resident warned at a community meeting. “Everyone wants the property that’s in West Philadelphia.”

by Jason Laughlin | February 21, 2020

The topic of the community meeting — a plan to beautify 52nd Street, to make it safe, welcoming, and prosperous once again — was, on its face, nothing but good news for West Philadelphia’s long-declining business corridor.

Yet the audience of about 50 residents and retailers, mostly African American, grew increasingly agitated as urban designer Jonas Maciunas flipped through a PowerPoint presentation of proposed improvements. Many weren’t seeing a vision of a neighborhood revitalized from Market to Pine Streets. Instead, in the talk of redesigned intersections, leafy thoroughfares, and better bus shelters, they heard the ominous whisper of gentrification.

“It just seems that when white people decide to come back to a certain neighborhood, they want it a certain way,” said Carol Morris, 68, a retired elementary school teacher.

Morris’ declaration opened the floodgates of fear and anger that recent night at the Lucien E. Blackwell West Philadelphia Regional Library. Maciunas and Jesse Blitzstein, director of community and economic development for the nonprofit Enterprise Center, which is spearheading the project, were peppered with skeptical questions ranging from the validity of surveys showing community support for the improvements to the maintenance of trees that would be planted.

There’s more at the original.

As we have previously noted, the Editorial Board of the Inquirer have told us that racial segregation is very much part of the problem in city residents feeling unsafe, and Philadelphia is one of the United States’ most internally segregated big cities. But that very same Editorial Board, less than two years ago, were very wary about gentrification. To be fair — and I so rarely am when it comes to the Inquirer — the Board have at least mixed feelings when it comes to gentrification.

While Philadelphia and the Inquirer haven’t been so blatant as to say so directly, the liberal city of Lexington[6]Fayette County was one of only two counties, out of 120 total in the Bluegrass State, to be carried by Joe Biden in the 2020 election. has. As we have previously noted, Lexington said, directly, that it was concerned about gentrification, and, “Most new owners being more affluent and differing from the traditional residents in terms of race or ethnicity.” The city was concerned about white people moving into heavily black neighborhoods.[7]Lexington’s Hispanic population are not large enough to really dominate larger neighborhoods.

Philadelphia is not concerned about black residents moving in and integrating nearly all-white neighborhoods, and that is what the Inquirer’s Editorial Board said ought to happen. But somehow, liberal cities don’t seem to want that to happen in reverse, don’t seem to want white people moving into majority black neighborhoods.  Yet, as the Inquirer noted:

Neighborhoods like Graduate Hospital, Fishtown, and University City — where years of reinvestment have ushered in more wealth and opportunity — are just a few minutes’ drive from shooting hot spots. But they rarely experience gun violence.

Gentrification seems to reduce violence!

Gentrification ought to be something every city wants. Not only do revitalized properties raise property values around them, but when white ‘gentrifiers’ move into a majority black neighborhood, they are clearly white people who have no racist attitudes toward blacks, people perfectly willing to have black neighbors. Is that not a good thing?

References

References
↑1 From Wikipedia:

Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke“, whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.
By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term broadly associated with left-wing politics and cultural issues (with the terms woke culture and woke politics also being used). It has been the subject of memes and ironic usage. Its widespread use since 2014 is a result of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I shall confess to sometimes “ironic usage” of the term. To put it bluntly, I think that the ‘woke’ are just boneheadedly stupid.

↑2 By “developed,” article authors Chris Palmer, Dylan Purcell, Anna Orso, John Duchneskie, and Jessica Griffin meant blocks not devastated by crime and neglect, blocks in which the housing was not dilapidated, but they couldn’t quite bring themselves to say that.
↑3 “Gentrification”. Dictionary.com.Lees, Slater & Wyly 2010[page needed] define gentrification as “the transformation of a working-class or vacant area of the central city to a middle class residential and/or commercial use”.
↑4 West, Allyn (5 March 2020). “Baffled City: Exploring the architecture of gentrification”. Texas Observer. Archived from the original on 22 June 2020. Retrieved 21 June 2020.
↑5 Harrison, Sally; Jacobs, Andrew (2016). “Gentrification and the Heterogeneous City: Finding a Role for Design”. The Plan. 1 (2). doi:10.15274/tpj.2016.01.02.03.
↑6 Fayette County was one of only two counties, out of 120 total in the Bluegrass State, to be carried by Joe Biden in the 2020 election.
↑7 Lexington’s Hispanic population are not large enough to really dominate larger neighborhoods.
Posted on by

Bidenflation: We’re lucky we bought when we did!

As I have previously noted, we bought a house for my sister-in-law in December. Because we were not going to live in the house ourselves, the interest rate, 3.75%, was 1.00% higher than if we had lied about it and said that we would reside there. Technically, it’s rental property for us, though we do not expect to make a profit on it. When we go to our eternal rewards, the ownership will pass to our children and our nephew.

We negotiated the interest rate in November, and closed in early December.

Today, in reading an article, Report: Majority of renters can’t afford to buy in their city, in The Washington Post, I saw referenced one I had missed last week:

Mortgage rates hit 5 percent, ushering in new economic uncertainty

Rates have risen faster than many economists had expected, and they are starting to temper the housing boom

By Kathy Orton and Rachel Siegel | April 14, 2022 | Updated April 14, 2022 at 2:41 p.m. EDT

Mortgage rates swelled above 5 percent for the first time in more than a decade — an unexpectedly rapid ascent that has begun to temper the U.S. housing boom and could usher new uncertainty into an economy dogged by soaring inflation.

The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, the most popular home loan product, hit the threshold just five weeks after surpassing 4 percent, according to Freddie Mac data released Thursday. The average has not been this high since February 2011.

The run-up comes as the Federal Reserve has launched a major initiative to rein in the highest inflation in 40 years. Fed officials are betting that higher interest rates will slash inflation and recalibrate the job market. But their plan also rests on the assumption that higher rates will cool demand for housing, especially while homes themselves are in such short supply.

There’s more at the original.

From the first article cited:

  • The average home in the U.S. costs seven times the average national household income.
  • Homeownership is unaffordable for the majority of renters in 71 percent of metro areas.
  • In 13 metro areas, 10 of which are in California, at least 90 percent of renters are priced out of owning a home. The three metro areas outside of California are in Cape Cod, Hawaii and Boulder, Colo.
  • In the D.C. metro area, 70 percent of renters can’t afford to buy a home, according to Porch’s analysis. Their calculations found that the average home is priced at $526,296 and that 30 percent of households rent in metro areas. Those renter households have a median income of $56,400, while the median income needed to buy the average house in the area is $64,055.

There’s one obvious flaw here: the paper is comparing income to the “average” home, but may homeowners, including yours truly, first bought what would be considered a ‘starter’ home, which will cost well under the average home price. People buying more house than they could afford, along with the sub-prime lenders encouraged by the government, triggered the crisis in 2007-2008.

The key is to not enable people to buy more house than they can afford.

Posted on by

Bidenomics! Americans are 2.5% poorer than they were 12 months ago.

The inflation numbers are out, and they’re ugly!

We have previously noted the January, 7.5%, and February, 7.9%, year-over-year inflation rates, and the March figure was released this morning.

8.5%.

From The Wall Street Journal:

    U.S. Inflation Hit Four-Decade High in March

    Consumer-price index rose 8.5% from year earlier, driven by skyrocketing energy and food costs

    by Gwynn Guilford | Tuesday, April 12, 2022 | 8:45 AM EDT

    U.S. inflation rose to a new four-decade peak of 8.5% in March from the same month a year ago, driven by skyrocketing energy and food costs, supply constraints and strong consumer demand.

    The Labor Department on Tuesday said the consumer-price index—which measures what consumers pay for goods and services—in March rose at its fastest annual pace since December 1981, when it was on a recession-induced downswing after the Federal Reserve aggressively tightened monetary policy. That marks the sixth straight month for inflation above 6% and put it above February’s 7.9% annual rate–well above the Federal Reserve’s target.

    The so-called core price index, which excludes the often-volatile categories of food and energy, increased 6.5% in March from a year earlier—up from February’s 6.4% rise, and sharpest 12-month rise since August 1982.

    On a monthly basis, the CPI accelerated at a seasonally adjusted 1.2% last month, from 0.8% in February, and the fastest one-month increase since 2005.

I understand that government bureaucrats don’t like dealing with “often-volatile” data, but I have yet to understand why “the often-volatile categories of food and energy” are excluded from the core CPI; it’s not as though consumers don’t have to pay for food and energy, every single month.

How often do you buy a refrigerator or a washing machine? How often do you buy even small appliances like toasters or kitchen blenders? Not often, I’d guess, but we’ve been to Kroger a few times already this month.

After several paragraphs telling us why prices are increasing so fast, we get to this:

    “There’s an element of sticker shock when people go to fill up their tank or go to the grocery store. Lower- and middle-income households are already having to make choices about what to buy because they’re having to pay so much more for food and energy,” (Richard F. Moody, chief economist at Regions Financial Corp) said.

Which led to this:

    Solid demand for labor has shifted bargaining power toward workers, putting upward pressure on wages, which could feed into broader price gains. Annual wage growth was 6% in March, the fastest pace since records began in 1997, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s wage tracker.

    Still, wages for most are growing too slowly to offset inflation. This could push workers to demand higher wages, creating a feedback loop that puts upward pressure on inflation.

When inflation is at 8.5%, while annual wage growth was 6.0%, consumers have become automatically poorer in real terms, 2.5% poorer. But hey, this is for what 81,268,924 Americans voted!

Posted on by

2222 Wallace Street

We noted, on April 5th, a rowhome for sale at 4931 Hoopes Street, in West Philadelphia. The purpose was simple: to demonstrate how bad the neighborhood in which a 13-year-old was shot happened to be. We included four pictures of this disaster listing, for documentation, because photos disappear from zillow.com once a home is sold.

The house is completely unlivable, save as a squatter could make his home there. More importantly, while a house flipper might be interested in the property, he’d quickly forget the notion, because he could never recoup the money that he’d have to spend on the place to get it up to snuff because the property values in the rest of that dilapidated neighborhood are so low. Even if a flipper could buy the place for $1.00, there’s a possibility that he couldn’t make money fixing it up and selling it.

According to the zillow listing, property taxes on this place are $875 a year. If someone fixed it up and resold it, it would be reassessed, and the taxes increase.

2222 Wallace Street; the unit for sale is on the left. Photo from listing on zillow.com. Click to enlarge.

Now, why did I bring this up? There was a story in The Philadelphia Inquirer highlighting another row home for sale, in Fairmont, at 2222 Wallace Street . . . . for $875,000.

There is already a pending offer on this home.

The photos make it look well done, and it’s a beautiful home, though I will confess that were I to have redone this home, I would not have selected the styles that the remodeler chose. Nothing personal; it’s simply not my style.

Taxes? According to the zillow.com listing,[1]I tend to use zillow.com for my real estate searches, and photos of properties for sale normally disappear from the zillow listing. However, realtor.com listings tend to hold on to the photos longer, … Continue reading property taxes on this unit were $10,881 in 2021. That works out to $906.75 a month, which is higher than any mortgage payment I’ve ever had to make on any of the houses I’ve owned. Yet, as we previously noted, the Editorial Board of the Inquirer are aghast that how safe people are in the city depends upon their skin color. While I have no idea what race the family who put in the pending offer on the Wallace Street house are, generally speaking most black and Hispanic Philadelphians can only dream of owning a home in that neighborhood.

I was wryly amused that the Inquirer ran this story, given how the Editorial Board were lamenting that the city is very racially segregated, and that an $875,000 listing is not exactly one which will draw many black or Hispanic prospective buyers. Still, article author Paul Jablow has such stories about once a week.

References

References
↑1 I tend to use zillow.com for my real estate searches, and photos of properties for sale normally disappear from the zillow listing. However, realtor.com listings tend to hold on to the photos longer, and here is the listing on that site.
Posted on by

Another problem for Joe Biden’s plan to eliminate all emissions from American electricity production in 13 years.

President Joe Biden and the Democrats, greatly concerned about global warming climate change, have urged an all-electric future for the United States, phasing out fossil fuel usage in transportation by requiring all new vehicles sold by the year 2035 to be zero-emissions, and that electric power generation be zero-emission by the same year. In The Long-Term Strategy of the United States: Pathways to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050, John Kerry, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, and Gina McCarthy, National Climate Advisor, said[1]The Long-Term Strategy of the United States: Pathways to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050, page 5 of .pdf file.:

    Electricity delivers diverse services to all sectors of the American economy. The transition to a clean electricity system has been accelerating in recent years — driven by plummeting costs for solar and wind technologies, federal and subnational policies, and consumer demand. Building on this success, the United States has set a goal of 100% clean electricity by 2035, a crucial foundation for net-zero emissions no later than 2050.

    We can affordably and efficiently electrify most of the economy, from cars to buildings and industrial processes. In areas where electrification presents technology challenges — for instance aviation, shipping, and some industrial processes — we can prioritize clean fuels like carbon-free hydrogen and sustainable biofuels.

About those “plummeting costs for solar and wind technologies”? From The Wall Street Journal:

    Ukraine War Drives Up Cost of Wind, Solar Power

    ‘Greenflation’ problems are particularly acute in U.S., where tariffs targeting China helped increase project costs, led to delays before Russian attack

    By Jennifer Hiller and Katherine Blunt | Sunday, March 27, 2022 | 5:30 AM EDT

    Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is further driving up the price of renewable-energy projects, which were already facing supply-chain strains and raw-materials increases before the war.

    The new pressures, which are hitting two years after the pandemic created bottlenecks for wind and solar developers, are adding to delays for completing many projects.

    The Biden administration and other governments around the world have called for speeding the transition to renewable-energy sources to avoid reliance on Russia for oil and gas. But project developers say it might be nearly impossible to move faster in the near term.

    Wind and solar development has boomed world-wide in the past decade as a result of rapidly falling costs that made the projects more competitive with traditional sources of power generation such as natural gas and nuclear, as well as growing government pressure to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions to combat climate change.

    Globally, wind and solar accounted for about 6.4% and 4% of power generation last year, respectively, up from 3.8% and 1.4% five years prior, with further sharp growth projected, according to S&P Global Commodity Insights. The cost of solar generation fell to $45 for a megawatt-hour last year, down from $381 in 2010, S&P estimated. The cost of onshore wind generation, meanwhile, fell to $48 for a megawatt-hour, down from $89 in 2010.

Sounds good so far, but trouble comes with the next paragraph:

    But like many other businesses, renewable-energy projects are now being hit by soaring post-invasion prices for key materials such as aluminum and steel, as well as higher transportation costs stemming from higher oil prices, which have surged by more than 50% this year.

    The rising costs are particularly acute in the U.S., where many projects were already facing increases in part because of trade tariffs targeting China, a dominant producer of solar cells and other renewable-energy components. A third of U.S. utility-scale solar capacity scheduled for completion in the fourth quarter of 2021 was delayed by at least a quarter and 13% of the projects planned to complete this year have been delayed for a year or canceled, according to a new report from Wood Mackenzie and the Solar Energy Industries Association.

Infographic: China Dominates All Steps of Solar Panel Production | Statista Currently, the People’s Republic of China completely dominates all phases of solar panel production, producing 66% of polysilicon, 78% of all solar cells, and 72% of solar modules. More, 4% of solar cells and 1% of solar modules are produced in the Republic of China, Taiwan, which could be taken over by the People’s Republic any day.

Foreign Policy magazine noted that forced labor is used in much of China’s polysilicon production.

Back to the Journal:

    U.S. projects have also faced long wait times to receive necessary approvals to connect new projects to the electric grid, as developers rush to bring wind and solar farms online to capitalize on aggressive state mandates to reduce emissions, overwhelming grid operators. Those delays are adding to uncertainty for project investors.

Since Mr Biden took office, inflation has soared; the February year-over-year inflation rate was 7.9%, while real average hourly earnings decreased by 1.9%. Americans have been getting relatively poorer, and the data for the statistics were gathered before the invasion of Ukraine.

How, exactly, are we going to pay for this huge power generation transformation, all within 13 years? We’re going to be borrowing money, from Americans, from foreigners, and from China, to send to China, and having to pay back to investors, including Chinese investors.

We could, of course, do something really radical like build solar panel and module plants in the United States, but that will take years and, let’s tell the truth here, it will mean paying American wages, probably American union wages, to American workers, rather than the much lower Chinese wages, to build the solar collection systems, making them more expensive.

References

Posted on by

Ford’s plug-in electric F-150 Lightning can cost more than houses! When a car costs more than some houses, something is very, very wrong!

Sometimes I feel like I’m stepping on William Teach’s toes when I write about plug-in electric vehicles, but I’m sure that he’ll get over it. Ford Motor Company F: (%) has noted that the Environmental Protection Agency has confirmed its range miles for the 2022 F-150 Lightning plug-in electric truck:

300-320 miles for the Extended Range battery and 230 miles for the Standard Range battery.

Ford has officially confirmed the recently emerged EPA range numbers for the upcoming all-electric Ford F-150 Lightning pickup.

The manufacturer announced EPA Combined range values for all trim levels and both battery versions (Standard Range and Extended Range), emphasizing that in the case of ER battery, the range is actually 20 miles higher than the target.

In short, customers should expect:

  • Standard Range: 230 miles (370 km)
  • Extended Range (all trims, except of Platinum*): 320 miles (515 km) Platinum trim: 300 miles (483 km)

I used a screen capture of the article header as my headline because it showed an F-150 Lightning hooked up to a home charging station at a definitely expensive home. The link to the original is embedded in that header.

Why? Because at the bottom of the article was this chart.

The most basic electric F-150 is over $40,000, at $41,669.00. That tax credit? That isn’t what you pay pulling away from the dealer, but what you can get credited to your tax bill when you file your taxes, which could be the better part of a year after you but the vehicle. You’re going to have to pay the dealer $41,669, and, for most people, that means financing most of that amount, paying interest on most of that amount. Start adding options, and the price goes higher.

But what got to me was the costs of the F-150 with bigger wheels. An F-150 Lightning XLT ER with 20″ tires is going to cost you $74,169. Other versions can cost $69,169, $79,169 and $92,569.

As it happens, my wife and I bought a home in Estill County for her sister, 1,344 ft², with two bedrooms, one bathroom, and a detached one car garage. While my nephew and I did some plumbing work on it, and remodeled the bathroom, it was perfectly livable, and not a fixer upper. We paid $69,999 for the house.

In other words, we bought a perfectly livable house, built in 1920, just last December, for less than several versions of a Ford F-150 plug-in electric truck!

Ignore the furniture in the pictures; those are from the sales advertisement for the place.

Of course, that’s not the only house we’ve bought recently. In September of 2014, we bought our current house, a livable but nevertheless fixer-upper house, built in 1927, two bedrooms, one bathroom, with 7.92 acres of land and 500 feet of frontage on the Kentucky River, for a whopping $75,000.

No, that’s not a typo; I didn’t omit a trailing zero, or leading number to make it six digits.

Regular readers of this site — both of them — have seen photos of our kitchen before, but they were taken after we remodeled. 🙂

I bring this up because some of the liberal commenters on Mr Teach’s website keep telling us how wonderful plug-in electric vehicles are, and who knows, maybe they’re really great, but when your car costs more than a house, something is very, very wrong.

Yes, we live in east central Kentucky; the next county over, Lee, is the home of Beattyville, a place called the “poorest white town in America” from 2008 to 2012, so yes, housing prices around here are well below the national average. That doesn’t mean that houses here are undervalued; it means that houses elsewhere are over-inflated!

Posted on by

Fear is the career killer

A libertarian styling herself Freckled Liberty on Twitter has been adamantly opposed to taking the COVID-19 vaccine, and mocking, daily, Joe Biden’s statement, “We are looking at a winter of severe illness and death for the unvaccinated — for themselves, their families and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm.” She has been counting down, every day, ‘day 88 of unmasked and unvaxxed “winter of severe illness and death’: still not vaxxed, still not masked, still not ill, still not dead. 💃🏼”

Now it seems that her friends and family won’t attend her wedding ceremony, because they’re just too scared. If her friends and family are vaccinated, and can obviously choose to wear N95 masks if they feel the need, there’s just no need to be fearful, but after almost two years of fear messaging, it seems that a lot of people have internalized it. From The New York Times:

    As Offices Open and Mask Mandates Drop, Some Anxieties Set In

    Using local guidelines, many companies are loosening Covid safety rules, leaving workers to navigate masking and social distancing on their own.

    By Emma Goldberg and Lananh Nguyen | Friday, March 18, 2022

    Employers are embracing a workplace atmosphere reminiscent of prepandemic times — elevators jammed, snack tables brimming, face coverings optional — even as a new subvariant of the Omicron coronavirus spurs concerns about health and safety. Across the country, office occupancy has hit a pandemic high, 40 percent, reached just once before in early December, at the same time that indoor mask mandates drop.

    Also see: William Teach: NY Times Is Super Excited By Things We’ll Keep In Post Pandemic Life

    After several false starts in calling workers back, company leaders now seem eager to press forward. A flurry of return-to-office plans have rolled out in recent weeks, with businesses including American Express, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Microsoft calling some workers back to their desks. Many of those companies followed state and local governments in easing Covid-19 restrictions, arguing that ending mask mandates could make workplaces more pleasant. But some workers, especially those with compromised immunity or unvaccinated children, feel uncomfortable with the rush back to open floor plans.

    “Masks have created a real psychological barrier to getting back to office culture,” said Kathryn Wylde, head of the Partnership for New York City, a business group. “As long as things are going in a positive direction with Covid, I think the relaxation of mandates will work for the vast majority of people. As soon as we see a reversal, I think we’ve got trouble.”

    The Partnership’s January survey of New York City employers found that 38 percent expected to have more than half of their workers back in the office on an average weekday by late March. As employees come back, they’re facing a patchwork of Covid safety protocols. Just one-quarter of U.S. workers are covered by vaccine mandates in the workplace, according to Gallup data from last month.

    This has left many workers to navigate masking on their own, making Covid safety measures a matter of office etiquette rather than protocol. Some have negotiated new remote work arrangements with their bosses as rules have eased, or even left their companies in search of jobs at workplaces that made them feel safer.

It would seem obvious: if a worker is afraid that he will contract the virus, he can voluntarily get vaccinated, as most people are, for free, and he can continue to wear a face mask, even an N-95 mask.

That palpable fear seems almost measurable, given that 38% of NYC employers anticipate having more than half of their office workers at heir desks by the end of March, when that number should be 100% anticipate having 100% of their workers back. If, as the Times stated, just a quarter of workers were covered by vaccine mandates on their jobs, such still doesn’t mean that most workers aren’t vaccinated. From USA Facts:

  • In New York (state), 17,370,136 people or 89% of the state has received at least one dose.
  • Overall, 14,759,477 people or 76% of New York’s population are considered fully vaccinated.
  • Additionally, 6,556,874 people or 34% of New York’s population have received a booster dose.

From the more sensible New York Post:

    When it comes to masking, New Yorkers still choose fear over facts

    By Heather Mac Donald | Saturday, March 19, 2022 | 8:08 AM EDT | Updated: Sunday, March 20, 2022 | 2:45 AM EDT

    Just when you thought the abyss between red-state and blue-state sensibilities could not grow wider comes post-pandemic America to reveal further cleavage.

    Residents of my 34-story Manhattan apartment building are still wearing masks in the elevators, halls and lobby, even though the building’s internally imposed mask mandate has been lifted. At least half of my neighbors in Yorkville wear masks outdoors, even though Gov. Hochul suspended the indoor mask mandate for New York City weeks ago.

    It has always been the case, no matter the rate of indoor transmission, that inhaling a large enough viral dose outdoors to become infected is almost impossible. One might have imagined that even progressives would be ready to say: “Enough of this! We’ll take our chances. Let’s get back to normal life!” But it turns out that many people have a seemingly inexhaustible appetite for fear and risk aversion, especially when linked to control.

    COVID metrics are, from a blue-state perspective, depressingly low when even the New York Times has given up on frontpage crisis-mongering. For weeks, the Times has buried its COVID stories deep in the paper, if it prints them at all, because there is only good news to report. Currently, an average of five people per day are hospitalized with or from COVID in New York City, out of a pre-pandemic population of 8.5 million. That is essentially zero risk. Deaths with or from COVID are too negligible to mention.

We already know that:

  • Vaccination does not prevent a person from contracting or spreading the virus;
  • Vaccination does seem to lessen the severity of the disease if one does contract the virus; and
  • The cloth masks that most people wear do not prevent the transmission of the virus.

It would appear that New Yorkers have learned the first lesson, but not the second or third.

But at some point there will be some obvious results: workers who cower in fear, whether in a masked-up cubicle in the office, or working remotely over Zoom and the internet, are going to get left behind. They will miss out on ‘networking,’ they will miss out on sales and new clients, and they will miss out on promotions. What office business would promote a worker who won’t come in to the office? What business would promote a masked-up employee over one who isn’t hiding his face? What office business can return to normal if its employees refuse to return to normalcy?

Fear, Frank Herbert wrote, is the mind killer, but in business, fear is the career killer.

Posted on by

#Bidenomics! Inflation has tripled under Joe Biden Remember: the data used were prior to the latest surge in fuel prices

From Trading Economics:

Annual inflation rate in the US accelerated to 7.9% in February of 2022, the highest since January of 1982, matching market expectations. Energy remained the biggest contributor (25.6% vs 27% in January), with gasoline prices surging 38% (40% in January). Inflation accelerated for shelter (4.7% vs 4.4%); food (7.9% vs 7%, the largest since July of 1981), namely food at home (8.6% vs 7.4%); new vehicles (12.4% vs 12.2%); and used cars and trucks (41.2% vs 40.5%). Excluding volatile energy and food categories, the CPI rose 6.4%, the most in 40 years. Still, the biggest effects of the war in Ukraine and the consequent surge in energy costs are still to come and will worsen with the US ban on oil imports from Russia. The inflation was seen peaking in March but the recent developments in Europe coupled with the ongoing supply constraints, strong demand and labour shortages will likely maintain inflation elevated for longer. source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

It’s the “excluding volatile energy and food categories, the CPI rose 6.4%” part that gets me: it’s still winter — and my area is forecast to get 3 to 6 inches of snow on Saturday — so energy, volatile or otherwise, is a major concern for everybody, and we can’t live very long without food.


Chart source: tradingeconomics.com

You know what I note: the year-over-year inflation rate was 2.6% in February of 2021, Joe Biden’s first full month in office, and then BAM! up it jumps, more than doubling by June, and now it’s tripled.

Then there’s this, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Real average hourly earnings for all employees decreased 0.8 percent from January to February, seasonally adjusted, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. This result stems from essentially no change in average hourly earnings combined with an increase of 0.8 percent in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U).

Real average weekly earnings decreased 0.5 percent over the month due to the change in real average hourly earnings combined with an increase of 0.3 percent in the average workweek.

Real average hourly earnings decreased 2.6 percent, seasonally adjusted, from February 2021 to February 2022. The change in real average hourly earnings combined with an increase of 0.3 percent in the average workweek resulted in a 2.3-percent decrease in real average weekly earnings over this period.

Production and nonsupervisory employees means the working class:

Production and nonsupervisory employees

Real average hourly earnings for production and nonsupervisory employees decreased 0.6 percent from January to February, seasonally adjusted. This result stems from a 0.3-percent increase in average hourly earnings combined with an increase of 0.9 percent in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W).

Real average weekly earnings decreased 0.3 percent over the month due to the change in real average hourly earnings being combined with an increase of 0.3 percent in average weekly hours.

From February 2021 to February 2022, real average hourly earnings decreased 1.9 percent, seasonally adjusted. The change in real average hourly earnings combined with no change in the average workweek resulted in a 1.9-percent decrease in real average weekly earnings over this period.

Remember: this inflation has been going on since long before Vladimir Vladimirovich sent the tanks rolling into Ukraine! It has been going on since the dummkopf from Delaware took office. Here’s the five-year chart, also from Trading Economics:

Note that the year-over-year monthly inflation rate never reached even 3% during Donald Trump’s entire presidency, but reached 4.2% in April of 2021, and has been elevated ever since. It cratered during the COVID-19 lockouts, recovered several months later, but was still below 2.0% on Election Day, and below 2.0% when Mr Biden took office.

Then it skyrocketed!

What did we have? We had an economy which had made a significant recovery in the latter half of 2020, after the stupid lockdowns were (mostly) lifted, but before any of the COVID-19 vaccines were available to the general public. The vaccines became available to health care workers in December, and then in January and February were made available in the ‘tiers’ structure. By March, the vaccines became much more widely available, and COVID-19 cases were dropping. Everything good that could have helped President Biden — and I still shudder when I type that! — happened, yet people started to become poorer in real terms due to inflation.

Not everything economic is under the government’s control, but it certainly is interesting how real earnings have decreased under Mr Biden, and inflation skyrocketed almost immediately after he came into office. But it’s true: we aren’t suffering through any more of those mean tweets!

Posted on by

The Patricians just don’t understand how the plebeians live! The elites push policies that will affect the working class in ways the policymakers just can't comprehend

As the patricians try to force the plebeians into plug-in electric vehicles, another thought came to me as I got our electric bills: it isn’t just gasoline prices which have increased, but electricity costs as well. From The Philadelphia Inquirer, not exactly an evil reich-wing propaganda site:

    Pa. electricity prices will be rising by as much as 50% this week. Here’s how you can save.

    Energy charges are set to increase on Dec. 1, reflecting the higher cost to produce electricity. There are ways to save. But beware the risks.

    by Andrew Maykuth | November 28, 2021

    Energy costs for electric customers are going up by as much as 50% across Pennsylvania next week, the latest manifestation of across-the-board energy price increases impacting gasoline, heating oil, propane, and natural gas.

    Eight Pennsylvania electric utilities are set to increase their energy prices on Dec. 1, reflecting the higher cost to produce electricity. Peco Energy, which serves Philadelphia and its suburbs, will boost its energy charge by 6.4% on Dec. 1, from 6.6 cents per kilowatt hour to about 7 cents per kWh. Energy charges account for about half of a residential bill.

    PPL Electric Utilities, the Allentown company that serves a large swath of Pennsylvania including parts of Bucks, Montgomery, and Chester Counties, will impose a 26% increase on residential energy costs on Dec. 1, from about 7.5 cents per kWh to 9.5 cents per kWh. That’s an increase of $40 a month for an electric heating customer who uses 2,000 kWh a month.

    Pike County Light & Power, which serves about 4,800 customers in Northeast Pennsylvania, will increase energy charges by 50%, according to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission.

    “All electric distribution companies face the same market forces as PPL Electric Utilities,” PPL said in a statement. Each Pennsylvania utility follows a different PUC-regulated plan for procuring energy from power generators, which explains why some customers are absorbing the hit sooner rather than later, it said.

There’s more at the original.

2022 F-150 charging in a lot nicer garage than I have. It shows you just how much money you have to have to buy one of the fool things. Photo from a Ford sales site. Click to enlarge.

I just got my sparktricity bill, and with most, though not all, of our heating on it, it’s $325.73 for the house and $30.11 for the shop[1]The garage/shop is not heated.. Now, imagine if we were driving plug-in Chevy Dolts, or, for me, a plug-in Ford F-150 Lightning[2]My current vehicle is a 2010 Ford F-150, and it’s an actual work truck; I need a work truck around the farm.: all of the electric charging for the month would be coming in one monthly bill! It will be argued that that might still be a bit less than gasoline, but when a month’s worth of your driving costs comes all at once, that can be quite the shock. Yes, we have the money, and the discipline, to handle that, but when I see these ‘payday loan’ places — and they certainly seem to have metastasized in poor eastern Kentucky — you know that there are a whole lot of people who are not living just paycheck to paycheck, but from paycheck to not quite the next paycheck. Do these people have the money and discipline to save up for that next big electric bill?

We bought a house for my sister-in-law, and got her electric bill — from a different provider — which was $462.80. The house we bought for her is total electric, so that includes the range and water heater, which our bill does not.

Those bills were for February, a cold winter month, so they’ll decrease as spring springs, but I can imagine what it would be like if there were a couple hundred more bucks tacked on to charge electric vehicles. This is something the left, which tell us how wonderful it would be to go all-electric, never consider: Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg have plenty of money, and a big electric bill would, to them, be certainly manageable, but the Patricians just don’t understand the lives, the economics, and the struggles of the working class.

More, it is well known that cold weather decreases both range and charging speed in plug-in electric vehicles. You’ll have to leave your Tesla plugged in longer, and you won’t get as many miles out of it, meaning that it will cost you more in your electric bill to charge your EV in winter, the same time as your heating costs are high.

In 2019, before the panicdemic, the Federal Reserve reported that “Nearly 40 percent of Americans would struggle to cover an unexpected $400 expense, according to a new report by the Federal Reserve — a stark reminder of many people’s financial insecurity even amid solid economic growth.” Yet the people who could handle such an expense are trying to proscribe a ‘solution’ to global warming climate change that would drastically change how the working class would have to handle things . . . if they could at all.

How many Kentuckians, how many working class people, are going to get their electricity shut off because they don’t have the money, or money-management skills, to pay for the plug-in electric vehiclesinto which President Biden and the activists want to force people?

References

References
↑1 The garage/shop is not heated.
↑2 My current vehicle is a 2010 Ford F-150, and it’s an actual work truck; I need a work truck around the farm.