Connect with us

Women More Likely to Face Housing Insecurity in Pandemic-Led Recession

Women More Likely to Face Housing Insecurity in Pandemic-Led Recession

Published

3 years ago

on

  • Unemployment claims for women were up 1,368%  year-over-year at the height of the recession in May, 10 times higher than what men experienced in the 2008 financial crisis. 
  • Women are more likely to be renters, the group hit hardest by this recession. Almost half (45%) of female renter households are cost-burdened.
  • With schools going virtual and child care centers closed, working mothers were three times more likely than working fathers to cite child care as the main reason they were out of work.

2020 had the makings of a promising year for women — until COVID-19 broke it. Today, women are more likely than men to be unemployed, renters and caregivers as the pandemic grinds on,  increasing their risk of becoming severely cost-burdened by housing.

The year began with more women in the workforce than ever before, women's incomes rising and the home values of women-headed households on the upswing. But the pandemic swiftly and thoroughly interrupted this period of growth — 865,000 women left the workforce in September alone, fully 80% of all workers that left the workforce last month. The hard-won housing and employment progress of the past few years has definitively stalled, and in some respects is at great risk of rapidly reversing, according to a Zillow analysis of employment, housing and social data.

Our analysis found that more women than men say they are housing insecure, that women are sacrificing work hours in order to shoulder more of the burden at home and that year-over-year growth in unemployment claims among those still in the workforce is up to 10 times higher than what it was for men during the worst of the Great Recession. It will be a long road back to where women started the year. 

Good News, With a Catch

First, the good news: The homes owned by female-headed households, while still below the value of those owned by male-headed households and of median home values overall, crept closer to parity over the past decade. In August 2010, the typical home of a female-headed, homeowning household was worth 91.9% of the typical U.S. home overall, about $160,558 compared to $174,640. Today, that gap is much narrower, at 95.9% ($246,222 vs $256,663). A growing share of the workforce being made up of women, and a rise in women's incomes over the same period, are likely contributing to this progress.

Even so, the flip side of this equation says that homes owned by women-headed households are still worth 4.1% less than the typical home overall — to say nothing of homes owned by male-headed households. The typical home owned by a male-headed household in August 2020 was worth $266,716, compared to $246,222 for women-headed households. Put another way, the typical female-headed household owns a home worth just 92.3% that of their male peers.

"He-Cession," "She-Cession"

The 2008 Great Recession has sometimes been dubbed the "he-cession" for its deep impacts on traditionally male-dominant industries including finance and construction. At its worst in 2009, the year-over year change in unemployment claims for men peaked at 137%. But as bad as that was, the nation has experienced extreme levels of unemployment since the U.S. COVID outbreak began in earnest in early spring, and workers in the most affected industries have suffered serious blows to their income and job security that make the Great Recession look minor in comparison. The peak year-over-year change in unemployment claims for men during this recession is 983%. 

But because women are more likely than men to work in the industries hardest-hit by the pandemic, the unprecedented surge in unemployment is impacting them far more severely. In May 2020, arguably the peak of pandemic-related job losses and business activity freezes thus far, the year-over-year change in unemployment claims for women was 1,368% — ten times higher than the worst increase experienced by men more than a decade ago. 

Women in general make up a smaller share of the labor force (47.3% in 2018) than men — but they accounted for the majority of unemployment claims in July. Because of cyclical and seasonal employment trends, this pattern of outsized unemployment claims for the female workforce was already in play pre-COVID, and can be explained in part by differences between men and women in the industries in which they work. In 2018, more than 22.5% of women but only 5.7% of men were employed in healthcare, a field in which unemployment tends to spike every July. The data show that more women have been joining the workforce each year, which is undeniably a good thing. But clearly there's a lot of work left to be done to ensure women are more equally represented across all industries, not relatively concentrated in those that tend to experience more-volatile and disproportionate unemployment claims, even in more "normal" times.

Based on these data alone, the current crisis has seemingly more than earned a "she-cession" moniker (a term reportedly coined by labor economist Armine Yalnizyan). Sadly, there are still more unequal repercussions for women in this moment.

Unequal Rent Burdens

Previous Zillow research showed that renters have been disproportionately impacted by the recession — and the share of female-headed households that are renters (37.3%) is higher than male-headed renter households (31.2%), according to an analysis of data from the American Community Survey. And female renters must devote a larger share of their monthly budget to rent than their male peers. The typical female-headed renter household spends 27.5% of its income on rent, compared to 23.3% for similar male-headed households. 

Rent is also more of a burden for female-headed renter households. A household is considered housing burdened when it spends more than 30% of its income on housing costs. Almost half (45.4%) of renter households headed by a female spend enough to exceed this threshold and are housing burdened, compared to roughly a third (36.1%) of male-headed renter households. The threshold for "severely" housing burdened is met when a household spends more than half of its income on housing — almost a quarter (24%) of female-headed renter households fit this definition, versus just 17% of similar male-headed households.

The impact is even more stark across races: Women of color are even more likely to be cost-burdened by housing. More than half (51%) of Latinx female renter households and 49 percent of Black female renter households are cost-burdened.  More than a quarter (27%) of both Latinx and Black female renter households are severely cost-burdened. Any loss of income, even temporarily, puts these cost-burdened renter households at greater risk of housing insecurity.

A Childcare Challenge

The burden of childcare also weighs more heavily on women than men, perhaps in part because of social and cultural pressures traditionally placed more on women's shoulders to be the primary caretakers in their households. In a recent Census Bureau survey, working mothers were three times more likely than working fathers to cite childcare as the main reason they were out of work (22.1% versus 7.7%, respectively). There is also the fact that significantly more female-headed households in general are led by single-parents — a whopping 70.7% of mothers who are household heads are single-parents, compared to 32.3% of fathers — and more than twice the number of single-parent rental households are headed by single mothers. 

Short-Term & Long-Term Solutions

Clearly, this triple threat of women being disproportionately employed in industries more likely to experience pandemic-related layoffs, facing higher rent burdens and of being the main family caregiver has set working women back — an understatement, to be sure. The challenges to even get back to pre-pandemic par levels, let alone to resume forward progress, are immense. But there are some broad steps that could be taken to help start the process.

Bolstering existing unemployment assistance, especially in the wake of the expiration of enhanced but temporary federal benefits earlier this summer, would go a long way towards keeping all temporarily unemployed workers — male and female — afloat until more work opportunities come along. The boost could be bigger for women, though, given the facts that more women than men are receiving unemployment benefits and more women are out of work to care for their families. Still, because hundreds of thousands of women have left the workforce, enhanced unemployment aid likely won't reach them, and more steps will need to be taken. 

Because a disproportionate share of rental households are headed by women, and many of those households are rent burdened, rental assistance is another way to help women rebound from this recession. Short-term rental payment assistance may be necessary to help keep a roof over these women's heads for the time being. But longer-term solutions including increased voucher availability and the creation of more housing at more-affordable price points will also be vital to ensuring gender equity in housing and allowing more women — and men — to stay in their homes.

 

Methodology

Zillow analyzed 1-year American Community Survey (ACS) data  from 2012 – 2018 to get demographic data about households and individual householders by tenure type and sex. 

Additionally, US Department of Labor data on unemployment claims from August 2020 was used to get number of unemployment claims and share of unemployment claims by sex. The data for share of claims was used both seasonally adjusted and non-seasonally adjusted (raw) to show both the cyclical nature of unemployment claims as well as the seasonal adjustment that still shows more women than men claiming unemployment during the she-cession. 

Zillow also utilized the weekly U.S. Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey data from April 23rd – July 21st to find the share of working parents out of work due to childcare responsibilities. 

The Zillow Home Value Index by Sex was calculated using county level ratios of home values by sex of householder from 1-year ACS data from 2005-2018. The ratios were constructed using population weighted geometric means and interpolated to get a monthly metric. This was then extrapolated to August 2020. The ratio of home values was then applied to monthly ZHVI at the county level. Aggregated national and metro values were obtained by taking a population weighted mean of county month-over-month changes by sex. The historical values were chained back from the latest home value ratios using the aggregated month-over-month values and then adjusted for county missingness to be directly comparable to overall ZHVI.

The post Women More Likely to Face Housing Insecurity in Pandemic-Led Recession appeared first on Zillow Research.

Read More

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Correcting the Washington Post’s 11 Charts That Are Supposed to Tell Us How the Economy Changed Since Covid

The Washington Post made some serious errors or omissions in its 11 charts that are supposed to tell us how Covid changed the economy. Wages Starting with…

Published

30 mins ago

on

March 16, 2024

By

The Washington Post made some serious errors or omissions in its 11 charts that are supposed to tell us how Covid changed the economy.

Wages

Starting with its second chart, the article gives us an index of average weekly wages since 2019. The index shows a big jump in 2020, which then falls off in 2021 and 2022, before rising again in 2023.

It tells readers:

“Many Americans got large pay increases after the pandemic, when employers were having to one-up each other to find and keep workers. For a while, those wage gains were wiped out by decade-high inflation: Workers were getting larger paychecks, but it wasn’t enough to keep up with rising prices.”

That actually is not what its chart shows. The big rise in average weekly wages at the start of the pandemic was not the result of workers getting pay increases, it was the result of low-paid workers in sectors like hotels and restaurants losing their jobs.

The number of people employed in the low-paying leisure and hospitality sector fell by more than 8 million at the start of the pandemic. Even at the start of 2021 it was still down by over 4 million.

Laying off low-paid workers raises average wages in the same way that getting the short people to leave raises the average height of the people in the room. The Washington Post might try to tell us that the remaining people grew taller, but that is not what happened.

The other problem with this chart is that it is giving us weekly wages. The length of the average workweek jumped at the start of the pandemic as employers decided to work the workers they had longer hours rather than hire more workers. In January of 2021 the average workweek was 34.9 hours, compared to 34.4 hours in 2019 and 34.3 hours in February.

This increase in hours, by itself, would raise weekly pay by 2.0 percent. As hours returned to normal in 2022, this measure would misleadingly imply that wages were falling.

It is also worth noting that the fastest wage gains since the pandemic have been at the bottom end of the wage distribution and the Black/white wage gap has fallen to its lowest level on record.

Saving Rates

The third chart shows the saving rate since 2019. It shows a big spike at the start of the pandemic, as people stopped spending on things like restaurants and travel and they got pandemic checks from the government. It then falls sharply in 2022 and is lower in the most recent quarters than in 2019.

The piece tells readers:

“But as the world reopened — and people resumed spending on dining out, travel, concerts and other things that were previously off-limits — savings rates have leveled off. Americans are also increasingly dip into rainy-day funds to pay more for necessities, including groceries, housing, education and health care. In fact, Americans are now generally saving less of their incomes than they were before the pandemic.

This is an incomplete picture due to a somewhat technical issue. As I explained in a blogpost a few months ago, there is an unusually large gap between GDP as measured on the output side and GDP measured on the income side. In principle, these two numbers should be the same, but they never come out exactly equal.

In recent quarters, the gap has been 2.5 percent of GDP. This is extraordinarily large, but it also is unusual in that the output side is higher than the income side, the opposite of the standard pattern over the last quarter century.

It is standard for economists to assume that the true number for GDP is somewhere between the two measures. If we make that assumption about the data for 2023, it would imply that income is somewhat higher than the data now show and consumption somewhat lower.

In that story, as I showed in the blogpost, the saving rate for 2023 would be 6.8 percent of disposable income, roughly the same as the average for the three years before the pandemic. This would mean that people are not dipping into their rainy-day funds as the Post tells us. They are spending pretty much as they did before the pandemic.

 

Credit Card Debt

The next graph shows that credit card debt is rising again, after sinking in the pandemic. The piece tells readers:

“But now, debt loads are swinging higher again as families try to keep up with rising prices. Total household debt reached a record $17.5 trillion at the end of 2023, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. And, in a worrisome sign for the economy, delinquency rates on mortgages, car loans and credit cards are all rising, too.”

There are several points worth noting here. Credit card debt is rising, but measured relative to income it is still below where it was before the pandemic. It was 6.7 percent of disposable income at the end of 2019, compared to 6.5 percent at the end of last year.

The second point is that a major reason for the recent surge in credit card debt is that people are no longer refinancing mortgages. There was a massive surge in mortgage refinancing with the low interest rates in 2020-2021.

Many of the people who refinanced took additional money out, taking advantage of the increased equity in their home. This channel of credit was cut off when mortgage rates jumped in 2022 and virtually ended mortgage refinancing. This means that to a large extent the surge in credit card borrowing is simply a shift from mortgage debt to credit card debt.

The point about total household debt hitting a record can be said in most months. Except in the period immediately following the collapse of the housing bubble, total debt is almost always rising.

And the rise in delinquencies simply reflects the fact that they had been at very low levels in 2021 and 2022. For the most part, delinquency rates are just getting back to their pre-pandemic levels, which were historically low.  

 

Grocery Prices and Gas Prices

The next two charts show the patterns in grocery prices and gas prices since the pandemic. It would have been worth mentioning that every major economy in the world saw similar run-ups in prices in these two areas. In other words, there was nothing specific to U.S. policy that led to a surge in inflation here.

 

The Missing Charts

There are several areas where it would have been interesting to see charts which the Post did not include. It would have been useful to have a chart on job quitters, the number of people who voluntarily quit their jobs during the pandemic. In the tight labor markets of 2021 and 2022 the number of workers who left jobs they didn’t like soared to record levels, as shown below.

 

The vast majority of these workers took other jobs that they liked better. This likely explains another item that could appear as a graph, the record level of job satisfaction.

In a similar vein there has been an explosion in the number of people who work from home at least part-time. This has increased by more than 17 million during the pandemic. These workers are saving themselves thousands of dollars a year on commuting costs and related expenses, as well as hundreds of hours spent commuting.

Finally, there has been an explosion in the use of telemedicine since the pandemic. At the peak, nearly one in four visits with a health care professional was a remote consultation. This saved many people with serious health issues the time and inconvenience associated with a trip to a hospital or doctor’s office. The increased use of telemedicine is likely to be a lasting gain from the pandemic.

 

The World Has Changed

The pandemic will likely have a lasting impact on the economy and society. The Washington Post’s charts captured part of this story, but in some cases misrepr

The post Correcting the Washington Post’s 11 Charts That Are Supposed to Tell Us How the Economy Changed Since Covid appeared first on Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

“Extreme Events”: US Cancer Deaths Spiked In 2021 And 2022 In “Large Excess Over Trend”

"Extreme Events": US Cancer Deaths Spiked In 2021 And 2022 In "Large Excess Over Trend"

Cancer deaths in the United States spiked in 2021…

Published

4 hours ago

on

March 16, 2024

By

"Extreme Events": US Cancer Deaths Spiked In 2021 And 2022 In "Large Excess Over Trend"

Cancer deaths in the United States spiked in 2021 and 2022 among 15-44 year-olds "in large excess over trend," marking jumps of 5.6% and 7.9% respectively vs. a rise of 1.7% in 2020, according to a new preprint study from deep-dive research firm, Phinance Technologies.

Algeria, Carlos et. al "US -Death Trends for Neoplasms ICD codes: C00-D48, Ages 15-44", ResearchGate, March. 2024 P. 7

Extreme Events

The report, which relies on data from the CDC, paints a troubling picture.

"We show a rise in excess mortality from neoplasms reported as underlying cause of death, which started in 2020 (1.7%) and accelerated substantially in 2021 (5.6%) and 2022 (7.9%). The increase in excess mortality in both 2021 (Z-score of 11.8) and 2022 (Z-score of 16.5) are highly statistically significant (extreme events)," according to the authors.

That said, co-author, David Wiseman, PhD (who has 86 publications to his name), leaves the cause an open question - suggesting it could either be a "novel phenomenon," Covid-19, or the Covid-19 vaccine.

"The results indicate that from 2021 a novel phenomenon leading to increased neoplasm deaths appears to be present in individuals aged 15 to 44 in the US," reads the report.

The authors suggest that the cause may be the result of "an unexpected rise in the incidence of rapidly growing fatal cancers," and/or "a reduction in survival in existing cancer cases."

They also address the possibility that "access to utilization of cancer screening and treatment" may be a factor - the notion that pandemic-era lockdowns resulted in fewer visits to the doctor. Also noted is that "Cancers tend to be slowly-developing diseases with remarkably stable death rates and only small variations over time," which makes "any temporal association between a possible explanatory factor (such as COVID-19, the novel COVID-19 vaccines, or other factor(s)) difficult to establish."

That said, a ZeroHedge review of the CDC data reveals that it does not provide information on duration of illness prior to death - so while it's not mentioned in the preprint, it can't rule out so-called 'turbo cancers' - reportedly rapidly developing cancers, the existence of which has been largely anecdotal (and widely refuted by the usual suspects).

While the Phinance report is extremely careful not to draw conclusions, researcher "Ethical Skeptic" kicked the barn door open in a Thursday post on X - showing a strong correlation between "cancer incidence & mortality" coinciding with the rollout of the Covid mRNA vaccine.

Phinance principal Ed Dowd commented on the post, noting that "Cancer is suddenly an accelerating growth industry!"

Continued:

Bottom line - hard data is showing alarming trends, which the CDC and other agencies have a requirement to explore and answer truthfully - and people are asking #WhereIsTheCDC.

We aren't holding our breath.

Wiseman, meanwhile, points out that Pfizer and several other companies are making "significant investments in cancer drugs, post COVID."

Phinance

We've featured several of Phinance's self-funded deep dives into pandemic data that nobody else is doing. If you'd like to support them, click here.

 

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/16/2024 - 16:55

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Gen Z, The Most Pessimistic Generation In History, May Decide The Election

Gen Z, The Most Pessimistic Generation In History, May Decide The Election

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Young adults are more…

Published

9 hours ago

on

March 16, 2024

By

Gen Z, The Most Pessimistic Generation In History, May Decide The Election

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Young adults are more skeptical of government and pessimistic about the future than any living generation before them.

This is with reason, and it’s likely to decide the election.

Rough Years and the Most Pessimism Ever

The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article on The Rough Years That Turned Gen Z Into America’s Most Disillusioned Voters.

Young adults in Generation Z—those born in 1997 or after—have emerged from the pandemic feeling more disillusioned than any living generation before them, according to long-running surveys and interviews with dozens of young people around the country. They worry they’ll never make enough money to attain the security previous generations have achieved, citing their delayed launch into adulthood, an impenetrable housing market and loads of student debt.

And they’re fed up with policymakers from both parties.

Washington is moving closer to passing legislation that would ban or force the sale of TikTok, a platform beloved by millions of young people in the U.S. Several young people interviewed by The Wall Street Journal said they spend hours each day on the app and use it as their main source of news.

“It’s funny how they quickly pass this bill about this TikTok situation. What about schools that are getting shot up? We’re not going to pass a bill about that?” Gaddie asked. “No, we’re going to worry about TikTok and that just shows you where their head is…. I feel like they don’t really care about what’s going on with humanity.”

Gen Z’s widespread gloominess is manifesting in unparalleled skepticism of Washington and a feeling of despair that leaders of either party can help. Young Americans’ entire political memories are subsumed by intense partisanship and warnings about the looming end of everything from U.S. democracy to the planet. When the darkest days of the pandemic started to end, inflation reached 40-year highs. The right to an abortion was overturned. Wars in Ukraine and the Middle East raged.

Dissatisfaction is pushing some young voters to third-party candidates in this year’s presidential race and causing others to consider staying home on Election Day or leaving the top of the ticket blank. While young people typically vote at lower rates, a small number of Gen Z voters could make the difference in the election, which four years ago was decided by tens of thousands of votes in several swing states.

Roughly 41 million Gen Z Americans—ages 18 to 27—will be eligible to vote this year, according to Tufts University.

Gen Z is among the most liberal segments of the electorate, according to surveys, but recent polling shows them favoring Biden by only a slim margin. Some are unmoved by those who warn that a vote against Biden is effectively a vote for Trump, arguing that isn’t enough to earn their support.

Confidence

When asked if they had confidence in a range of public institutions, Gen Z’s faith in them was generally below that of the older cohorts at the same point in their lives. 

One-third of Gen Z Americans described themselves as conservative, according to NORC’s 2022 General Social Survey. That is a larger share identifying as conservative than when millennials, Gen X and baby boomers took the survey when they were the same age, though some of the differences were small and within the survey’s margin of error.

More young people now say they find it hard to have hope for the world than at any time since at least 1976, according to a University of Michigan survey that has tracked public sentiment among 12th-graders for nearly five decades. Young people today are less optimistic than any generation in decades that they’ll get a professional job or surpass the success of their parents, the long-running survey has found. They increasingly believe the system is stacked against them and support major changes to the way the country operates.

Gen Z future Outcome

“It’s the starkest difference I’ve documented in 20 years of doing this research,” said Twenge, the author of the book “Generations.” The pandemic, she said, amplified trends among Gen Z that have existed for years: chronic isolation, a lack of social interaction and a propensity to spend large amounts of time online.

A 2020 study found past epidemics have left a lasting impression on young people around the world, creating a lack of confidence in political institutions and their leaders. The study, which analyzed decades of Gallup World polling from dozens of countries, found the decline in trust among young people typically persists for two decades.

Young people are more likely than older voters to have a pessimistic view of the economy and disapprove of Biden’s handling of inflation, according to the recent Journal poll. Among people under 30, Biden leads Trump by 3 percentage points, 35% to 32%, with 14% undecided and the remaining shares going to third-party candidates, including 10% to independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Economic Reality

Gen Z may be the first generation in US history that is not better off than their parents.

Many have given up on the idea they will ever be able to afford a home.

The economy is allegedly booming (I disagree). Regardless, stress over debt is high with younger millennials and zoomers.

This has been a constant theme of mine for many months.

Credit Card and Auto Delinquencies Soar

Credit card debt surged to a record high in the fourth quarter. Even more troubling is a steep climb in 90 day or longer delinquencies.

Record High Credit Card Debt

Credit card debt rose to a new record high of $1.13 trillion, up $50 billion in the quarter. Even more troubling is the surge in serious delinquencies, defined as 90 days or more past due.

For nearly all age groups, serious delinquencies are the highest since 2011.

Auto Loan Delinquencies

Serious delinquencies on auto loans have jumped from under 3 percent in mid-2021 to to 5 percent at the end of 2023 for age group 18-29.Age group 30-39 is also troubling. Serious delinquencies for age groups 18-29 and 30-39 are at the highest levels since 2010.

For further discussion please see Credit Card and Auto Delinquencies Soar, Especially Age Group 18 to 39

Generational Homeownership Rates

Home ownership rates courtesy of Apartment List

The above chart is from the Apartment List’s 2023 Millennial Homeownership Report

Those struggling with rent are more likely to be Millennials and Zoomers than Generation X, Baby Boomers, or members of the Silent Generation.

The same age groups struggling with credit card and auto delinquencies.

On Average Everything is Great

Average it up, and things look pretty good. This is why we have seen countless stories attempting to explain why people should be happy.

Krugman Blames Partisanship

OK, there is a fair amount of partisanship in the polls.

However, Biden isn’t struggling from partisanship alone. If that was the reason, Biden would not be polling so miserably with Democrats in general, blacks, and younger voters.

OK, there is a fair amount of partisanship in the polls.

However, Biden isn’t struggling from partisanship alone. If that was the reason, Biden would not be polling so miserably with Democrats in general, blacks, and younger voters.

This allegedly booming economy left behind the renters and everyone under the age of 40 struggling to make ends meet.

Many Are Addicted to “Buy Now, Pay Later” Plans

Buy Now Pay Later, BNPL, plans are increasingly popular. It’s another sign of consumer credit stress.

For discussion, please see Many Are Addicted to “Buy Now, Pay Later” Plans, It’s a Big Trap

The study did not break things down by home owners vs renters, but I strongly suspect most of the BNPL use is by renters.

What About Jobs?

Another seemingly strong jobs headline falls apart on closer scrutiny. The massive divergence between jobs and employment continued into February.

Nonfarm payrolls and employment levels from the BLS, chart by Mish.

Payrolls vs Employment Gains Since March 2023

  • Nonfarm Payrolls: 2,602,000

  • Employment Level: +144,000

  • Full Time Employment: -284,000

For more details of the weakening labor markets, please see Jobs Up 275,000 Employment Down 184,000

CPI Hot Again

CPI Data from the BLS, chart by Mish.

For discussion of the CPI inflation data for February, please see CPI Hot Again, Rent Up at Least 0.4 Percent for 30 Straight Months

Also note the Producer Price Index (PPI) Much Hotter Than Expected in February

Major Economic Cracks

There are economic cracks in spending, cracks in employment, and cracks in delinquencies.

But there are no cracks in the CPI. It’s coming down much slower than expected. And the PPI appears to have bottomed.

Add it up: Inflation + Recession = Stagflation.

Election Impact

In 2020, younger voters turned out in the biggest wave in history. And they voted for Biden.

Younger voters are not as likely to vote in 2024, and they are less likely to vote for Biden.

Millions of voters will not vote for either Trump or Biden. Net, this will impact Biden more. The base will not decide the election, but the Trump base is far more energized than the Biden base.

If Biden signs a TikTok ban, that alone could tip the election.

If No Labels ever gets its act together, I suspect it will siphon more votes from Biden than Trump. But many will just sit it out.

“We’re just kind of over it,” Noemi Peña, 20, a Tucson, Ariz., resident who works in a juice bar, said of her generation’s attitude toward politics. “We don’t even want to hear about it anymore.” Peña said she might not vote because she thinks it won’t change anything and “there’s just gonna be more fighting.” Biden won Arizona in 2020 by just over 10,000 votes. 

The Journal noted nearly one-third of voters under 30 have an unfavorable view of both Biden and Trump, a higher number than all older voters. Sixty-three percent of young voters think neither party adequately represents them.

Young voters in 2020 were energized to vote against Trump. Now they have thrown in the towel.

And Biden telling everyone how great the economy is only rubs salt in the wound.

Tyler Durden Sat, 03/16/2024 - 11:40

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending