US economy

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      If the US is heading for a soft landing, why do people feel so hard up?

      by

      The last few months have been filled with great news, according to US economists. Inflation is a hair’s breadth from pre-pandemic levels, unemployment is close to a 50-year low. The stock market keeps hitting record highs. The Federal Reserve cut interest rates last month, the first time since 2020. Some economists have gone so far as to say that the economy we’re living in is one of the best seen in decades.And yet, as the US heads to the polls, many Americans believe the economy stinks. It’s a disconnect that could ultimately decide who takes the White House.Paul Spehar, 62, a maintenance technician based in Daytona Beach, Florida, has seen reports that the economy is doing well but has only seen his savings chip away. His car insurance tripled over the last three years, and he had to take on $2,000 in debt to pay for the copay of a recent surgery. When Spehar retires, he will have to rely solely on Social Security.“The system doesn’t work for people like me,” Spehar said.It’s a common sentiment. In a Harris Poll conducted exclusively for the Guardian in September, nearly 50% of Americans believed that the country is experiencing a recession. Over 60% believed that inflation is increasing, and 50% believed that unemployment is increasing too. Even those who may know what the economists are saying don’t feel great: 73% said it’s hard to feel good about any positive economic news when they feel financially squeezed each month.As election day draws closer, and voters consistently say that the economy is their number one issue, the stakes of understanding why voters feel so blue has never been higher. So why do economists and everyday Americans seem to live in two different realities? The answer may come down to how they view inflation.For economists, inflation is a “nominal thing”, said Stefanie Stantcheva, an economist at Harvard. In other words, for economists, inflation is a measure – an important measure, especially for the Federal Reserve, which is tasked with adjusting monetary to control inflation. But for everyday Americans, inflation is a lived experience.“[Lived experiences] teach us a lot, and they show us that people are suffering a lot from inflation, perhaps more than the baseline numbers say,” Stantcheva said. “I think it’s very important to not just look at that number and say ‘Oh, but this is what CPI [the consumer price index, a broad measure of inflation] says.’… People have a different experience from that, and those experiences should be taken seriously.”That “nominal” number elicits feelings of anger, fear, anxiety and stress – along with a sense of inequality and injustice, when people are asked open-ended questions about how inflation makes them feel, said Stantcheva.People “think that wages are not keeping pace with prices at all, and so their standards of living are eroding,” Stantcheva said. “Inflation affects us as consumers, as workers, as asset holders, and also emotionally. And we see that lots of people, especially lower-income ones.”Inflation peaked in the summer of 2022 at 9.1% – the highest it had been since the early ’80s. It would take over two years for inflation to get back to levels under 3%. The Federal Reserve started ratcheting up interest rates, making the cost of borrowing money more expensive, to tackle rising prices. It has worked, but for many, the economic data and the reality of lived experiences have diverged.For economists, it seems likely that the Federal Reserve pulled off what they call a “soft-landing” – a rare feat where inflation goes down, but the unemployment rate remains relatively low. The opposite, a “hard-landing” – which many economists had forecast – would have meant that unemployment would go up as inflation goes down, triggering a recession.But for many Americans, this is anything but a soft-landing.Inflation coming down doesn’t mean prices have come down, which would be deflation, something economic theory says would actually be a bad sign for the economy. So prices have and will remain elevated. Food prices, for example, went up 25% between 2019 and 2023, according to the US Department of Agriculture.The impact of higher interest rates has also taken time to ripple through the economy, so in addition to inflation, Americans are also still getting hit with high interest rates. As prices increased, so did the cost of buying a home, getting a loan for a car and the rates on credit card bills.What economists call a soft-landing “is diametrically opposed to ordinary Americans, who see themselves in the middle of turbulence”, said John Gerzema, CEO of Harris Poll.While economists – and the Biden administration – celebrate low unemployment, it’s harder for everyday Americans to appreciate the good news even if they still have their jobs.“Unemployment is highly personal when it happens to you,” Gerzema said. But for most people, unemployment is not a big factor in their lives. “But inflation is personal and persistent. Every week it’s changing your benchmark.”MaryKate, 25, who requested she be identified by only her first name for fear of professional repercussions, said that she is still living at home with her parents because rent has been too expensive. When she graduated from college in 2021, it took her a year to find a full-time job with benefits, and saving up to move out has been hard. She recently got financing for a new car, which she uses to commute to work.“I didn’t intend to be at home for this long,” MaryKate said. “It’s hindering my personal growth.”MaryKate said she thinks about how her parents were able to move up from the lower middle-class to a middle-class during their life, and doesn’t feel like the mobility they experienced is possible for her.“At least in my family, that was kind of always the thought, that the next generation does better than the previous one,” she said. “I don’t know if that’s necessarily going to be the case for me.”It’s a sentiment that many Americans share. In the September Harris/Guardian poll, 42% of Americans said they are not financially better off today than their parents were at their age.The one thing that Donald Trump and Kamala Harris seem to agree on is that inflation has hurt Americans, and they are acting accordingly. It’s why Trump proposed ending taxes on tips at a rally in Las Vegas and Harris has shifted her emphasis away from Bidenomics – investing in infrastructure, boosting the US chip industry – to putting housing costs and crackdowns on price gouging at the center of her economic proposals.Gerzema says these kinds of policies are “personally relevant appeals” that focus on the granular “pixels” of the economy, not the overall picture. Purchasing power, personal sentiment on job security, student loans, the price of gas – are all pixels that make up the picture of a person’s individual economy.“I think the pixels just become so incredibly important because when you look at those, you really start to understand a different picture,” Gerzema said.Both presidential candidates seem to understand that much of the election hinges on these emotions. This week, voters will choose who they think has understood them best. More

    • 188 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘No social life, no plans, no savings’: Americans aren’t reaping benefits of booming US economy

      by

      Experts seem to agree the US economy has been on the upswing in 2024. A wave of new jobs, robust consumer spending, lower interest rates, falling inflation, impressive levels of business investment and record Wall Street highs has made the US economy “the envy of the world”.But many Americans appear to feel very little of that.Jim White, 62, an aquaculture specialist from North Carolina, said he has “given up [on] going out”.“I’ll never own a home. A new car is unthinkable,” he said. “The economy is slowly making the rich richer. Everyone else is sinking.”White is among dozens of people from all over the US who shared with the Guardian how they feel about the economy.While some expressed general optimism about stabilizing levels of inflation and reported doing well economically, scores said inflation continued to be financially crippling, with their incomes not even remotely keeping up with soaring costs for housing, food, childcare, insurance, healthcare, fuel, subscriptions and entertainment.Few seemed impressed by months of positive headlines about slowing inflation: “It’s not as if prices have come down, they’ve just stopped rising as obscenely as before,” as one woman in her 70s from Arizona, who still works part-time, put it. “Am I supposed to be happy about that?”“It’s more manageable, but prices are still too high for our wages compared to pre-pandemic,” said a 36-year-old woman from Salt Lake City who works as a research associate.Even those who felt the economy was doing very well complained of the exorbitantly high cost of living.The economy, 40-year-old Roxanne Oesch from Missouri said, felt “remarkably strong”.“Good jobs are available, interest rates are down and will come down further, and inflation has flattened out. It seems like there is a lot of good news.”But simultaneously, she added, “most people still cannot enjoy the same level of financial security they had pre-pandemic”.Alongside various young people who expressed dismay about their economic outlook were dozens of pensioners and people surviving on social security, for whom the new lower interest rates are bad news. “Interest on savings is dropping, [which is] challenging for retirees on fixed incomes,” said retired 71-year-old Paul Ames from Bellport, New York.“The US is doing a lot better than other developed economies. Gas is still way cheaper than Europe,” said Toni, a retired woman from North Florida, who was among various respondents who felt very positive about the economy because they held stock market investments that had been making healthy gains in recent months.“Things are good. The stock market has done well this year. Inflation isn’t having much impact.”“It’s great,” said 69-year-old Timothy Crowley, from Honolulu. “Investment income rising. This is the best economy on earth.”Respondents from places including New York City, Miami and Milwaukee pointed to rising levels of homelessness in their communities and felt that the US economic trickle-down model was broken.Views on who was responsible for America’s economic shortcomings were split: while some blamed the Biden administration for triggering soaring levels of inflation and rising asset prices through unprecedented interventions to keep the economy afloat during the pandemic, others blamed the previous Trump administration and the larger structural economic system propped up by Wall Street and the Republicans.Alex, a married father of two in his mid-30s from rural North Carolina, said he retrained as a welder during the pandemic, thanks to financial government assistance, but he quickly felt exploited in his new line of work.“I welded in two factories, each making millions in profits every year, and never made it off of government assistance, including food stamps and Medicaid. I’m back in school now and succumbing to the student loan vampires, to try and make it work,” he said.Alex said he has turned his back on Republicans, partly because of his economic concerns.Recent eye-wateringly high levels of inflation “were 25-percent caused by circa 15 years of quantitative easing, and 75-percent [caused] by corporate greed. I have completely abandoned the Republican party because they just refuse to rein in these economic monsters”.White, the aquaculture specialist from North Carolina, also said that he became a swing voter because of the economy.He will “vote a straight blue ticket until they turn their backs on Trump and the religious authoritarians”, White said. “I’m retiring this year and believe Trump’s tax breaks for the rich have already endangered my social security. He’s also a threat to my healthcare.”Among the respondents who expressed high levels of hopelessness were various college-educated people with established professional careers, such as architects, lawyers, engineers and medics, who said they were worried about financial insecurity, had recently been priced out of their longstanding communities or had been unable to save for retirement.“It’s horrific,” said 34-year-old Julia, a marketing professional from Washington. “It shouldn’t cost this much for basic necessities. I can’t do anything but work and go to the gym now,” she said, a remark that was echoed by many. “No social life, no plans, no savings.”“‘The US economy’ is not a meaningful or useful concept for most Americans,” said Karena Youtz, 54, a bookkeeper from Idaho. “Inflation is horrible. Around 40% of people in Idaho were fully employed and still unable to afford the cost of living here in 2019. I have no idea what that figure is now, but it’s probably much higher.”Melissa, retired, from northern California, who is disabled, reported struggling to get by on her social security payments.“Everything is too expensive, my rent keeps rising faster than my social security benefits and food prices are too high. Medical services in my rural area are far too few and far too substandard,” Melissa said.“The economy is doing fine and dandy. It’s the citizens of this country that are suffering.” More

    • 263 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Yes, Bidenomics is working here in Pennsylvania. But it might not be enough to win the White House | JoJo Burgess

      by

      Where I come from, “the economy” isn’t just about lines on a graph or numbers on a screen. It’s about how much money people have in their pockets and how much their groceries cost. It’s about how many shops are shuttered on their high street and whether they can afford to make the rent.In Pennsylvania, when voters go to the polls next week, the economy will be weighing very heavily on their minds. Our state will probably decide who becomes the next president of the US, and how we vote will also be a test of Joe Biden’s policies. The economy is one of the top issues for voters in our state. Many of them will be asking: am I in a better place now, compared with where I was four years ago?I come from a family of steelworkers near Pittsburgh. My father was a steelworker in the city, and so is my son. I’m also a rep for United Steelworkers, one of the largest unions in our country. As you can imagine, the most important issue in town right now is the steel deal. The Japanese steelmaker Nippon has been trying to buy US Steel for the past year, and though the company has promised to honour US Steel’s agreement with our union, we have many reasons to be doubtful.Not only is steel integral to our national security, raising questions about foreign takeovers, but there’s nothing to stop the company from cutting union jobs a few years down the line. The CEO of US Steel stands to walk away with $70m (£54m) if the deal completes. It’s the same pattern that repeats again and again: the money stays at the top, while people at the bottom are forgotten about.I’m glad that Kamala Harris has committed to blocking the sale. And I’m glad that the Biden administration has questioned the value of takeovers like these. Look at the Chips Act, or the Inflation Reduction Act: both were about spurring investment in our economy and building up productive capacity in the US.For too long, globalisation has meant a race to the bottom, with firms outsourcing labour and offshoring production to the places where it’s cheapest. Most employees have been working harder but getting paid less: from 1973 to 2013, the hourly wage for a typical worker rose just 9%, while productivity increased by 74%. No wonder so many people are exhausted and struggling to keep their heads above water.Here’s the thing: Donald Trump says he gets it, but he doesn’t. He talks about inflation killing our country under Biden, but he never says that record corporate profits are one of the drivers of inflation. He talks about the housing crisis, but then he blames the lack of affordable housing on immigrants. He is a master at spinning simple answers to complex problems, but he has no real solutions.I think most people are smarter than Trump gives them credit for. Most people have a sense that the reason daily life has become so expensive isn’t just because of the war in Ukraine or supply-chain bottlenecks. It’s because corporations got greedy, and started using inflation as cover to raise prices. If I can sell you a cup of water for $10, why would I drop the price to $7? The Democrat Pennsylvania senator Bob Casey has been campaigning explicitly on “greedflation”.It feels as though the message is cutting through, but I know plenty of steelworkers will still vote Trump, though almost all the unions have backed Harris. Where I live is rust belt territory. It’s a place that once boomed on coal, steel and cars. It’s a place that struggled to reinvent itself after the decline of the manufacturing industries, and lost a lot of jobs.View image in fullscreenSince the pandemic, we’ve been suffering. I live in Washington, a town south of Pittsburgh, where I’m also the local mayor. I’ve seen how the shift towards working from home has damaged some of our small businesses, and how our healthcare workers suffered from Covid-19.But I can also see the positives that “Bidenomics” has brought to our community, and I’m hoping these will cut through. One of the biggest complaints I hear now from residents is: “Why is there so much construction? We can’t cross the road!” Thanks to a huge boost in federal spending, with the Inflation Reduction Act earmarking billions of dollars to support infrastructure projects, there are many more cranes than there used to be.I always say, that’s infrastructure money working for us. When the Fern Hollow bridge collapsed in Pittsburgh, it was rebuilt in record time. Pennsylvania is particularly well placed to benefit from federal investment because it’s the second largest producer of energy in the US after Texas, and we need that climate spending if we’re going to transition to a clean energy economy. I’m just hoping that other voters feel the same way.

      JoJo Burgess is a steelworker in Pennsylvania and a member of the United Steelworkers union. He is also the mayor of Washington, Pennsylvania

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Were you better off four years ago? Seven US voters weigh their options

      by

      This story is co-published with and supported by the journalism non-profit the Economic Hardship Reporting ProjectThis election may well come down to one critical question: whether voters feel like they are better off now than they were four years ago. Although experts say important economic metrics are doing well or trending in a positive direction, some Americans may not feel it when they stress about their tight budget.Like many Americans, I’ve experienced my share of financial challenges. At the end of last year, a contract gig I’d had for five years – one that represented more than half my income – suddenly ended due to lack of funding. During the past year, other members of my household experienced a job loss or significant reduction in their work hours.Our household income is now roughly 25% of what it was two years ago. We survive on much less, with each dollar stretched thin as we’re feeling the impact of rising interest rates and the rapidly increasing cost of essentials like groceries.Much of this can be linked to the pandemic. Almost everything we buy is more expensive – in large part due to corporate greed. Businesses, including grocery stores, that hiked their prices during the pandemic kept them high. Layoffs are happening everywhere as companies that received pandemic-related assistance like Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans – which in some cases required them to maintain staffing levels – seem to have reached a point where they feel comfortable reducing their workforce.With the aftermath of economic uncertainty still hanging over the country, I reached out to voters to see how their financial situations will influence their decision this election.Sa’iyda Shabazz, 38View image in fullscreenLocation: Los Angeles, CaliforniaOccupation: digital media editor/creatorHousehold: lives with wife, 44, and son, 11Shabazz has become adept at financial juggling. Her total annual household income is less than $70,000 – which doesn’t go far in an area with a high cost of living. “Rent is almost $4,000 a month not counting utilities,” she says. Groceries are the family’s other biggest expense. “We spend easily $300-$400 a month for a family of three that includes a growing boy who likes fruit. Everything has gotten more expensive. Groceries, gas, rents.”Shabazz works in digital media, and says: “My opportunities to work have slowed considerably, which has majorly impacted my ability to make money and stay above water when it comes to affording life. We try to tighten the purse strings, but there aren’t any to tighten.”Shabazz plans to vote for Kamala Harris, saying: “As a low-income person, I can’t fathom voting for Trump, whose solution to current economic issues is to make other countries pay for our problems. I’m definitely paying attention to the Harris campaign’s stances on inflation, price gouging, and how she plans to handle things like grocery prices and gas prices …“I really hope that they look into the astronomical rise in housing costs. Housing eats up so much of our monthly finances, and there’s no reason for it.”Melanie Sparks, 49Location: Lexington, KentuckyOccupation: small-business ownerHousehold: lives with husband, 56, and daughter, 13.View image in fullscreenSparks, who describes her income as lower-middle to middle class, says her mortgage is her largest expense – currently almost $1,800 including the loan, home insurance and property taxes: “The payment has steadily increased every year since we bought it in 2020.” The family’s second-largest expense is food, including groceries and restaurants, which in total costs $1,200-$1,500 in a typical month.Then there are unpredictable expenses, like needing new tires or her dogs getting sick. Sparks says her business isn’t doing as well as it was a few years ago, and revenue has dropped by 20-30%: “Just about every expense has gone up, from the mortgage increasing $90 a month this summer, to the propane budget plan going up $50 a month. Car insurance is up; food costs are up; interest rates on my credit card debt went up. …“It feels like I’m drowning … We are one crisis away from going broke.”Sparks’ biggest concern this election is the economy, but she isn’t excited about the choices. “Frankly, I’m sick of the arguing and pettiness from both parties and wish we had a viable third party. I’m not confident in either candidate at this point. And I’m anxious about what will happen after the election, regardless of who wins,” she says.Anne MarshLocation: North CarolinaOccupation: nannyAnne Marsh recently moved from Texas to North Carolina with the family she nannies for, receiving a 20% raise from last year. “In 2020, when Biden/Harris were elected, I was ‘temporarily retired’ (read: unemployed), but I had a healthy inheritance to live on, thanks to my aunt and uncle,” she said. Since then, she said, prices have increased around her but she’s been using loyalty cards and other discounts to make do.There’s no doubt in Marsh’s mind about whom to support in this election. “I’m a die-hard Harris voter,” Marsh says, noting she would have voted for Biden if he had stayed in the race. “I think the president has done an incredible job of pulling us out of some of the debt that [Trump] incurred, as well as ensuring that unemployment and job growth have gone in the right directions and getting us through most of Covid without requiring us to drink bleach or use lights on our insides.”Marsh is also basing her vote on the reproductive health issues, saying: “Most of all, I’m voting for Harris and Walz because they’re actual human beings with sympathy and empathy and consideration for others, unlike their opposition.”Leigh Shulman, 52Location: Argentina, but votes as a Georgia overseas voterOccupation: author and writing mentorHousehold: lives with husband, 52, and son, 10. Also has a daughter, 20, who is away at collegeView image in fullscreenShulman, who describes her household income as upper middle-class, says her family is doing better financially than during the last year of the Trump administration: “My financial situation is better now than it was four years ago. Our investments have gone up quite a bit. I live in Argentina, where the dollar goes farther, and while inflation here has been awful, the dollar rate to peso rate means we don’t pay more for things than we did four years ago.”How does their financial situation affect her vote? “Not at all,” she says. “I’d vote for Kamala over Trump any day. To be honest, the idea of having Trump back in the White House is horrifying. He was so much worse than I thought he’d be the first time around. I can’t imagine what he’ll do this time. But this isn’t a hold-your-nose-and-vote situation for me, though. I’m actually happy to vote for Kamala. The main issues for me are women’s rights and education. Healthcare comes a close second, too. As an educator, I believe a leader who doesn’t support education wants an uneducated populace who won’t push back.”Deseri Eaton, 35Location: Marin county, CaliforniaHousehold: single mother to a 10-year-old sonOccupation: sporadic gig work; currently looking for a jobView image in fullscreenDeseri Eaton and her son are surviving on $1,000–$1,300 per month, mostly income she earns from house-sitting and pet-sitting. Her largest expense is her car payment of nearly $600 (car insurance is about another $200), and her son’s school tuition, along with utility expenses, credit cards and essentials like her son’s braces.“The thing that had the biggest impact was not getting into my master’s program. Leaving me jobless and relying on a stipend I didn’t receive. Also, not getting the free [guaranteed income] pilot money any more,” she says. Eaton had been participating in Marin county’s guaranteed income pilot program, which ended this spring: “I’m trying to get a job. Working my business as much as I can. And might surrender my vehicle, which is the biggest bill right now.”Eaton says she is currently unsure who she will vote for – with so much of her time and energy focused on basic survival, she hasn’t watched any of the debates.Jaclyn Cirinna, 26Location: FloridaOccupation: youth and juvenile justice advocateHousehold: lives aloneView image in fullscreen“The past four years have been a roller coaster, professionally and personally,” Cirinna says. She has worked most recently for a non-profit focused on justice and is pursuing full-time entrepreneurship.“Being my boss allows me to have more flexibility and control over my job security and accommodates my current health needs due to a car accident,” she says. “I moved from Massachusetts to Florida to try and reduce my cost of living, but Florida feels just as expensive.”She says many issues matter to her in this election, saying: “As a woman in her peak childbearing years, I like that Kamala Harris has made reproductive rights a central part of her campaign.” The economy and cost of living are important to her, too, especially in the wake of her recent layoff and health issues that limit the types of work she can do.“I like that VP Harris supports small businesses. I want to hear more about her strategy. Trump constantly talks about fighting inflation and making America affordable, but at what cost? I do not necessarily have faith in his ability to complete this promise. He wants to fix inflation by reducing the rights of immigrants. I do not support this. In general, I wish that both candidates talked about issues that impact everyone – I want community solutions at the forefront, not just for specific Americans. Such as inflation, gas prices, housing accessibility and affordability, food costs, it’s all connected!”Ned Barnett, 73Location: NevadaOccupation: freelance writer and writing consultantHousehold: lives with wifeNed Barnett says his income would probably be considered middle-class. “My wife and I live on social security, plus any gig work we can do,” he says. “She is a highly skilled book editor, and is currently editing a novel. I am a freelance writer and a consultant to other writers, and the money we bring in covers what social security doesn’t, but our income varies.”Barnett says one core issue is very important to him in this election: “With the economy what it is, including rent, we are definitely planning to vote with our wallets.” He notes that the presidential race “has been back and forth, but I think Trump is moving into the lead – not because he’s tamed his wild-man tweets and comments, but because my memory allows me to remember what the economy (and our lifestyle) was four years ago, versus what it is today.“When Trump was president before, our economy boomed. Now, not so much.”Barnett said he didn’t vote for Trump in 2016. “His bombast outweighed his sensible (to us) policy predictions, his tough stance internationally, and all the rest. But he’s a boor. However, we don’t like Hillary, so we voted independent. We knew it was a wasted vote, but we believe in voting. But in 2020, we’d begun to realize that there was more to Trump than Truth Social – his policies worked, the economy worked, and we got by without me having to work more than part time. Now, four years on, we can’t afford even our reduced lifestyle, and want Trump and his ‘magic wand’ back to turn things around.” More

    • 213 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump wants you to believe that the US economy is doing terribly. It’s untrue | Steven Greenhouse

      by

      If Donald Trump wins next week’s election, it would be the first time in US history that a candidate wins based on such a huge lie – his falsehood that we have “the worst economy ever”. The former president’s big lie has distorted the views of millions of Americans, wrongly convincing many that the US economy is in bad shape.There’s no denying that many Americans are struggling economically and that inflation was painfully high back in 2022, but inflation is far lower now, and most economists agree that our economy is strong. The unemployment rate is low, inflation is way down, economic growth is solid, and job growth has been remarkably strong. Indeed, the country has added nearly 18m jobs – a record – under the Biden-Harris administration. Not only that, median household income has climbed to $80,610, higher than it was in Trump’s last year in office.“In the 35 years I’ve been an economist, I’ve rarely seen an economy performing as well as it is,” Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, said recently. “I’d give it an A+.” But the US public, still upset about the surge in inflation several years ago, sees things very differently: 62% say the economy is in bad shape, while just 38% say it’s in good shape, according to an October AP-NORC poll.The public holds this negative view even though there’s been very good news for blue-collar workers: the US has added more than 700,000 factory jobs under the Biden-Harris administration, far more than during Trump’s presidency, indeed more than under any president since the 1970s. There’s also been good news for small businesses – a record 19m new business applications have been filed under Biden. There’s also good news for the wealthy – the stock market has climbed to record levels, which is Wall Street’s way of saying the economy is in excellent shape. Let’s not forget that Trump warned that if Biden was elected president, the stock market would crash. Wrong again, Donald. Under Biden, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is 36% higher than when Trump left office, and the S&P 500 is 53% higher.Trump’s repeated claim that today’s economy is the worst ever shows either an appalling ignorance of history or an appalling contempt for the truth. The truth is that the economy was in far worse shape during Trump’s last year in office, when the unemployment rate soared to 14.8% during the pandemic, compared with 4.1% now. Moreover, there were many other times when the economy was in worse shape – it was worse during the 2008 recession under George W Bush, far worse during the 1980-81 and 1974-75 recessions, and catastrophically worse during the Great Depression of the 1930s. When Trump tells his Maga crowds that today’s economy is the worst ever, he’s taking everyone for an idiot.The US economy has grown the fastest among major industrial nations since the pandemic began. Our economy has grown twice as fast as Canada’s, three times as fast as France’s and Japan’s, and four times as fast as Britain’s. Under Biden, the average unemployment rate has been lower than under any president since Lyndon Johnson.If Harris loses to Trump, historians and economists will long debate why she lost while Ronald Reagan was re-elected in a landslide in 1984 even though unemployment was far higher back then (7.2% versus 4.1% today), inflation was higher (4% versus 2.4% today), and the Federal Reserve’s interest rates were far higher (10% versus 5% today). One thing working for Reagan was that GDP growth was strong in 1984.Don’t get me wrong, today’s economy has serious problems. Millions of Americans are struggling, but it’s wrong to blame Biden and Harris for that. I’ve been writing about America’s workers and economy for more than 40 years – from Reagan to Clinton to Trump to Biden – and under every president, millions of American have struggled economically. Trump makes believe that far more Americans are struggling now than ever before, but that’s just not true. Take this important statistic: 11.1% of Americans currently fall below the poverty line. That’s essentially the same percentage as under Trump and is only slightly above its lowest point in half a century.Many Americans say the economy is in poor shape mainly because of their lingering dismay about the high inflation from mid-2021 to mid-2023. But they may not know that wages have risen faster than inflation over the past two years and that real wages are higher than before the pandemic. Trump blames Biden and Harris for causing inflation, but they weren’t the cause. The two main causes were the pandemic’s closing factories and disrupting supply chains worldwide and Russia’s war against Ukraine, which increased energy and food prices. Americans complain that gas prices are higher, but that’s Vladimir Putin’s and Opec’s fault, not Biden’s or Harris’s. US oil production has hit record levels.Housing affordability remains a big problem. Not only have housing prices soared, but high interest rates – which are finally coming down – have made it far too difficult for many Americans to buy a house. Again, the housing squeeze is not Biden’s or Harris’s fault; it was caused by a huge slowdown in housing production that began during the 2008 recession.It’s unfortunate that Trump’s dishonesty and deceit too often make us focus on his lies rather on something far more important: the future, and what a second Trump term would mean for the country. Many economists warn of disaster if Trump wins. They warn that his plan to impose tariffs or taxes on all imported goods will send inflation soaring and ignite a dangerous trade war that could cause a recession and throw millions out of work. Economists also warn that Trump’s plans, including his plan to slash taxes on the wealthy and corporations, not only will increase the federal debt by a colossal $7.8tn, but could bankrupt the social security system and lead to a 33% across-the-board cut in social security benefits.No wonder 23 Nobel Prize-winning economists signed a recent letter calling Trump’s economic agenda “counterproductive” and warning that it “will lead to higher prices, larger deficits, and greater inequality”.In contrast to Trump, Kamala Harris has specific plans to improve the economy and help Americans cope with high prices. She has pledged to build 3m new housing units to help bring down housing prices. She also plans to give $25,000 in down payment assistance to first-time homebuyers. To help with the high cost of raising a family, she has called for creating a $3,600 tax credit per child and $6,000 for newborns. Recognizing how expensive caregiving needs can be, she wants to create a trailblazing Medicare at Home program to help pay for care for ageing parents.Nobel-winning economists said Harris’s economic agenda is “vastly superior” to Trump’s and “will improve our nation’s” employment opportunities, health, investment and fairness.American voters have a clear choice. They can choose Harris’s agenda, which promises a stronger, fairer economy, or Trump’s agenda, which will bring a worse, less stable economy with higher prices and less fairness.Unlike Trump, I’ll be honest and won’t claim that his economic agenda will bring the worst economy ever, even though his agenda looks plenty dangerous.

      Steven Greenhouse is a journalist and author, focusing on labour and the workplace More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      To defeat Trump, Harris must talk more about the economy | Robert Reich

      by

      I don’t know about you, but I’m feeling more anxious about the outcome of the upcoming election. I’m still nauseously optimistic, but the nausea is growing.I’m as skeptical of polls as any of you, but when all of them show the same thing – that Kamala Harris’s campaign stalled several weeks ago, yet Donald Trump’s continues to surge – it’s important to take the polls seriously.The US vice-president will give her closing message to the American people on Tuesday at a rally on the Ellipse on the Washington mall.Over the last several weeks she’s focused on a woman’s right over her body and the rights of all Americans to a democracy. Obviously, Trump threatens both.Tuesday night, though, she needs to respond forcefully to the one issue that continues to be highest on the minds of most Americans – the economy.She must tell Americans simply and clearly why they continue to have such a hard time despite all the economic indicators to the contrary. It’s because of the power of large corporations and a handful of wealthy individuals to siphon off most economic gains for themselves.Most Americans are outraged that they continue to struggle economically at the same time as billionaires are pulling in ever more wealth. Most know they’re paying too much for housing, gas, groceries and the medicines they need. They also know that a major cause is the market power of big corporations.They want someone who’ll stand up to big corporations and the politicians in Washington who serve them.They want a president who’ll be on their side. A president who will crack down on price-gouging, who will bust up the monopolies and restore competition, who will fight to cap prescription drug costs, who will get big money out of politics and stop the legalized bribery that rigs the market for the rich and who will make sure corporations pay their fair share and end tax breaks for billionaire crooks.A president who will put working families first – before big corporations and the wealthy.Harris needs to say she will be this president.Her policy proposals suggest this. She’s committed to strong antitrust enforcement – cracking down on mergers and acquisitions that give big food corporations the power to jack up food and grocery prices, prosecuting price-fixing and banning price gouging. She needs to remind voters of this.She also says she’ll raise taxes on the rich, provide $25,000 in down-payment assistance to help Americans buy their first home, restore the expanded child tax credit to $3,600 to help more than 100 million working Americans, and implement a new $6,000 tax cut to help families pay for the high costs of a child’s first year of life.All should be parts of her speech this Tuesday about why she will be the champion of working people.She wants to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, make stock buybacks more expensive and expand Medicare to cover home healthcare – paid for with savings from the expansion of Medicare price negotiations with drug manufacturers.She needs to frame all of this as a response to the power of big corporations and the wealthy – and say in no uncertain terms that she’s on the side of the people, not the powerful.If she fails to do this in her closing argument, Trump’s demagogic response will be the only one the public hears – that average working people are struggling because of undocumented workers and the “enemy within”, including Democrats, socialists, Marxists and the “deep state”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHarris should fit her message about democracy inside this economic message. If our democracy weren’t dominated by the rich and big corporations, fewer of the economy’s gains would be siphoned off to them. Average working people would have better pay, more secure jobs, and be able to afford homes, food, fuel, medicine, childcare and eldercare.A large portion of the public no longer thinks American democracy is working. According to a new New York Times/Siena College poll, only 45% believe our democracy does a good job representing ordinary people. An astounding 62% say the government is mostly working to benefit itself and elites rather than the common good.In her closing argument, Harris should commit herself to reversing this, so the government works for the common good.Harris started her campaign in July and early August by emphasizing these themes about the economy and democracy. But in more recent weeks, she’s focused on Trump’s threat to democracy. Her campaign seems to have decided that she can draw additional voters from moderate Republican suburban women upset by Trump’s role in fomenting the attack on the US Capitol.That’s why she’s been campaigning with Liz Cheney, and gathering Republican officials as supporters. And why she has chosen to give her closing message on the Ellipse – where Trump summoned his followers to march on the Capitol on 6 January 2021.But when she shifted gears to Trump’s attacks on democracy, Harris’s campaign stalled. I think that’s because Americans continue to focus on the economy and want an answer to why they continue to struggle economically.If Trump gives them an answer – although baseless and demagogic – but Harris does not, he may sail to victory on 5 November.Hence, in her closing message she must talk clearly and frankly about the misallocation of economic power in America – lodged with big corporations and the wealthy instead of average Americans – and her commitment to rectify this.

      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His newest book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Zombie-like’: the US trade agreement that still haunts Democrats

      by

      More than 30 years have passed since President Bill Clinton persuaded Congress to ratify the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) and yet the trade agreement still infuriates many voters and hangs over Kamala Harris’s – and the Democrats’ – chances in this year’s elections.Zombie-like, Nafta just keeps coming back, decades after many Democrats believe it should have died. At the Republican convention, Donald Trump attacked Nafta, calling it “the worst trade agreement ever”. In speech after speech, Nafta is a topic Trump turns to as he seeks to woo the voters in the pivotal blue-collar communities of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin – many of whom remain angry about the job losses it caused.There were early warning signs. “A lot of people were saying Nafta was going to be a disaster economically,” said David Bonior, a former Democratic congressman from Michigan who led the congressional fight to defeat Clinton’s push for Nafta. “I could see it was going to be a disaster politically, too.”Nafta acted like a slow-motion poison for Democrats. After Congress ratified it in 1993, year by year more factories closed and more jobs disappeared as manufacturers moved operations to Mexico to take advantage of that country’s lower wages. The Economic Policy Institute, a progressive thinktank, estimates that the US lost 682,000 jobs due to Nafta, which largely eliminated tariffs between the US, Mexico and Canada.“It’s a lingering issue in Michigan,” said Ron Bieber, president of the Michigan AFL-CIO, the US’s largest federation of unions. “Everyone knows someone here in Michigan who lost their job due to Nafta. The door was cracked open to outsourcing before Nafta, but Nafta threw the door open after it was passed.”JJ Jewell, who works at a Ford axle plant in Sterling Heights, Michigan, was born two years before Nafta was ratified. The trade pact has been part of the background of his life, he says. Jewell said he often discussed trade problems with other auto workers, even when they didn’t directly discuss Nafta. “It’s an issue,” he said. “Nafta helped expedite the loss of jobs from our country to a country where wages are cheaper. I have friends, family members, neighbors who lost their jobs as a direct result of Nafta. It still affects things decades later.”While Trump talks tough on trade and protecting factory jobs, Jewell said that Trump, while president, fell badly short in his vows to bring back manufacturing jobs. “It’s empty promises,” he said.Liz Shuler, the president of the AFL-CIO, the country’s main labor federation, agreed, saying that Trump’s tough words on trade have done little for workers. “This is an example of Trump’s rhetoric not matching reality,” Shuler said. “He talks a good game, but there’s no action to back it up. When he had the ability to make a difference, when he was president, he went to different places and pretended to be a savior, and you followed up and you saw that those plants closed and jobs were moved to Mexico. He did nothing to fix it.”Seeing all the lingering discontent about Nafta, many Democrats say it’s unfair for Trump and others to blame their party for the agreement. The idea for Nafta arose under Ronald Reagan, they say, and George HW Bush negotiated the deal, both Republicans. More Republicans in Congress voted to ratify Nafta than Democrats. The vast majority of Senate Republicans also voted for it, while most Democratic senators voted against ratification.Still, Bonior said that Clinton and his administration “get the blame because their top guy was for it”, he said. “Clinton was instrumental in making it happen.”Many workers who lost jobs due to Nafta were able to find other jobs, said Bonior, but their pay was 20% less on average. “Lifestyles were enormously downgraded in my district,” said Bonior, who served as House majority whip. “Clinton bought into Nafta, but a lot of working-class people saw that as a betrayal.”On Nafta, Clinton won strong backing from economists and corporate America. Brushing aside labor’s warnings that Nafta would speed the loss of jobs to Mexico, nearly 300 economists on the right and the left, including several Nobel Prize winners, signed a pro-Nafta letter, saying: “The assertions that Nafta will spur an exodus of US jobs to Mexico are without basis.”Many economists argued that Nafta would increase the number of manufacturing jobs in the US because the nation had a higher-skilled, more productive workforce than Mexico and would thus, in theory, gain factory jobs in an expanded free-trade zone. Pro-Nafta forces also argued that the closer economic integration of the US, Mexico and Canada would create a North American powerhouse to counter China’s fast-growing economic power.Jeff Faux, a former president of the Economic Policy Institute, said many economists failed to realize something important that was happening when Nafta was negotiated: “The US was losing its manufacturing base. It was deindustrializing.”Faux, one of the most outspoken economists against Nafta, said Clinton embraced Nafta because he was eager to present himself as a different type of Democrat and “was trying to ingratiate himself with the business community”. “Clinton saw Nafta as an opportunity to present himself as not just another liberal Democrat,” Faux said. “It was the beginning of the notion that came to dominate the Democratic party that its future is not in working people, that it’s in professionals, in women, in minorities and various ethnic groups. They wanted to put together a new coalition, and labor would be a thing of the past.”Michael Podhorzer, a former AFL-CIO political director, said many blue-collar workers remain angry about Nafta because it was such a departure from President Franklin Roosevelt’s emphatically pro-worker Democratic party. Podhorzer said: “Nafta is the catchall for a series of things that Democrats did that showed they had a greater concern for business interests and a kind of insensitivity to the consequences that accelerating deindustrialization would have on people’s lives.”Trump was shrewd to seize on Nafta, he said: “It’s a way for him to sort of wave a flag, but it doesn’t actually mean he’s on the workers’ side. It channels pretty effectively the frustration that many Americans feel in seeing their jobs go offshore or to Mexico or seeing their communities hollowed out or seeing fewer economics prospects for their kids.”In the view of many labor leaders and workers, the Democrats doubled down on misguided trade policy when Clinton successfully pushed Congress in 2000 to approve normal trade relations with China. That move encouraged many US corporations to outsource operations to lower-wage China, with one study finding that the country lost 2m jobs, including 985,000 factory jobs, because of the normalized trade relations with China. The number of factories in the US also declined by 45,000 from 1997 to 2008, with many workers blaming Nafta and the China trade deal.What’s more, many unions faulted Barack Obama for pushing for another free trade agreement: the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a pact with 12 Pacific Rim countries. TPP’s supporters said the deal would increase US exports and build a powerful economic bloc to counter China. TPP was signed in 2016 under Obama’s presidency, but soon after Trump became president, he withdrew the US from TPP, preventing it from taking force.“Obama wasn’t great shakes on trade either,” Bonior said. “A lot of working people said they had enough. They decided we’re not going to be with the Democrats any more, and Trump came along and filled the void. That was very smart for Trump to do.”In a 2016 campaign appearance in Pittsburgh, Trump made a major speech on trade that denounced Nafta and cited several Economic Policy Institute studies that criticized the trade pact. Lawrence Mishel, who was the institute’s president at the time, said: “Trump never really explained what he would do about Nafta or trade. He ended his speech with a call for deregulation and tax cuts for the rich, which was far more pro-Chamber of Commerce than pro-worker.”While Joe Biden voted to ratify Nafta when he was a senator, labor leaders say the president’s current pro-worker stance on trade shows that he recognizes his Nafta vote was a mistake. For Bonior, it might be too little too late.“Biden has been very good on working-class issues. Biden is trying to make up for his vote on Nafta,” Bonior said. “But a lot of working-class people are turned off so much to the Democrats that they’re not hearing of the things Biden and Harris have done for them. They’re not listening. They’re gone. I don’t know if we’ll ever get them back.“They’re to some degree mesmerized by Trump even though Trump has never been for working people,” Bonior continued. “Those plants he said he would restore – he never did any of that.”Many union leaders slam Trump for a speech he gave in Youngstown in which he told thousands of workers that he would bring back all the factory jobs that Ohio had lost. “They’re all coming back,” he said. They didn’t. And when General Motors closed its huge assembly plant in nearby Lordstown, Ohio, in 2019, Trump did little to stop the plant closing or bring back the lost jobs.“He said all those jobs would be coming back, and then he did nothing,” said Shawn Fain, president of the United Auto Workers (UAW). “The auto industry abandoned Lordstown, and Trump did nothing.”When Trump was running for president in 2016, he vowed to renegotiate Nafta, and he followed through, reaching a new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in 2018. Labor leaders had attacked Nafta not only for encouraging companies to move factory jobs to Mexico and but also for failing to effectively protect Mexican workers whose employers had violated their right to unionize or other rights.Union leaders agree that USMCA created a stronger mechanism to crack down on labor violations by Mexican companies, although the Trump administration negotiated that improved enforcement mechanism only after the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and House Democrats demanded that Trump go further in the negotiations. But under USMCA, often called “Nafta 2.0”, US companies have continued moving manufacturing operations to Mexico.Even though USMCA made only minor changes to Nafta, Trump called it, “the best trade deal ever made”. For her part, Harris was one of 10 senators to vote against USMCA, saying it didn’t improve Nafta sufficiently.Faux said many workers applaud Trump on trade because “he did something” about it by renegotiating Nafta, while “the Democrats did nothing”.Labor leaders have differing views of USMCA. David McCall, president of the Pittsburgh-based United Steelworkers, said: “I think Nafta 2.0 was helpful. It’s gotten some better labor protections.”But the UAW’s Fain was merciless in attacking USMCA. “I like to call it Trump’s Nafta,” Fain said. “Trump’s Nafta only made problems worse. Trump’s Nafta only gave the billionaires more profits. Trump’s Nafta only killed more American jobs. Trump’s Nafta only shipped more work to Mexico.”Both Harris and Trump say they will renegotiate USMCA if elected. Trump also says he will protect factory jobs by imposing a 20% tariff on all imports, but the Steelworkers’ McCall says that’s a terrible idea. “I don’t think the solution to the problem is to have tariffs for the sake of having tariffs,” McCall said. “That’s protection. I think trade is a good thing. It’s an economic stimulator.” He said the US should use tariffs not in a blunderbuss way, but to “punish cheaters or countries that dump their various products”.McCall said the Biden-Harris administration had had a far better strategy for protecting factory jobs. “It’s the first time in generations that we’ve had an industrial policy in this country,” he said, praising three important laws passed under Biden: the infrastructure law, the green energy law and the Chips Act to encourage semiconductor production. McCall said those laws, along with Biden’s targeted tariffs “against countries that cheat”, give the US “an opportunity to be the most productive producers of many products”.While many blue-collar workers like Trump’s views on trade, McCall said: “He’s not a friend of unions or labor. For Trump it’s all about him, not about the person that’s working on the job: the steelworker, the electrical worker, the teamster or the UAW member.” More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s economic legacy could decide the presidential race in Scranton

      by

      From the north, motorists pull into Scranton via the Joseph R Biden Jr Expressway. Cutting through the scenic Pocono Mountains, now at the start of autumn color season, they are greeted with a towering, electric billboard, blaring an encapsulating – if divisive – message to this working-class town: “Democrats for Trump,” it reads. “Economy,” it continues, with a green checked box next to the word.The sign in Biden’s hometown is the perfect fall 2024 welcome mat in this crucial swing state filled with voters whose economic anxiety or satisfaction will decide next month’s election.The US has staged a remarkable recovery since the pandemic and Biden has successfully pursued an economic agenda, Bidenomics, that should benefit Scranton and the state – $13bn has been earmarked from his infrastructure bill for repairing highways and bridges alone. But poll after poll shows deep-seated worries about the economy – worries that could sink Democrats’ chances of keeping the White House come November.Like many mid-sized upper midwest cities that have faced post-industrial decline, Scranton, a longtime Democratic stronghold, has grown more conservative in recent elections. With the city’s native son leaving office, and pocketbook issues top of mind, some believe Trump could finally take Scranton – a more-than-symbolic win.But with Kamala Harris, Biden’s successor, and Donald Trump tied in the polls, guessing who will take Scranton, Pennsylvania, and the White House is a fool’s errand. And this politically split town shows why the race is so close. On the street, one person’s economic reality may be entirely different to the next.The complicated political mix of fears about the local economy, faith and mistrust in both Harris and Trump and shifting political allegiance was evident at the Marketplace at Steamtown, a downtown mall filled with local mom-and-pop shops.Pete, 78, a swing voter who declined to provide his last name, said inflation had been a problem over the last four years, but added prices were coming down, the stock market was high, and said he didn’t blame Biden for the economic challenges.“Every president is stuck with what happened before, and the pandemic happened, so Biden was in a hole to begin with,” Pete said. But the veteran added the main issue driving him to Harris was Trump disrespecting veterans: “He called us suckers and losers.”The argument for Trump’s economics is ironclad, said Lori Higgins with a scoff: “Look at the last four years – everyone is paying more for everything. What more do you need to know to make a decision?” Now 52, she voted for Democrats until Trump convinced her to switch sides in 2016.Even on the most basic details, there is disagreement: Pete said he had just paid $2.99 for gas, citing it as evidence that inflation was coming under control. Two Trump supporters said they paid as much as $3.50 for gas, evidence, they said, that inflation is still squeezing Scranton.Trump and Harris have made close to 50 visits to Pennsylvania so far this election cycle and poured nearly $1bn into ads – a record spend that reflects how crucial its 19 electoral votes, the biggest prize of any battleground, make the keystone state. Trump made his second visit to Scranton in as many months last week. “Go get everyone you know and vote immediately,” he urged rallygoers.But persuading any part of the deeply divided electorate to swap their vote looks difficult.View image in fullscreenHarris may yet hold Scranton, said Berwood Yost, a Pennsylvania pollster, but that is “surprising” given the level of economic discontent in the city and the county. “The dissatisfaction with Biden is really high and views on personal finances are very negative, so Trump should be clearly ahead,” Yost said. And yet polling averages show Harris ahead by a point in Pennsylvania, (firmly within the margin of error) which “speaks in part to some voters’ concerns about Trump and his personal character”.Since 2000, Democrats have won the county with as much as 63% support, but Hillary Clinton narrowly won with less than 50% of the 2016 vote. Biden’s home-field advantage may have buoyed Dems in 2020 – he was born and raised in Scranton until the age of 10, when his family moved to Delaware, and he has name-checked the city throughout his long career and is still nicknamed “Pennsylvania’s third senator”. Biden beat Trump in the county by 53.7% to 45.3%.Still, Scranton has become “ground zero for demonstrating the appeal of Trump and the Maga movement, and places that traditionally voted Democrat and ended up changing their stripes in a significant way”, Yost said.‘Way more optimistic’Once a powerhouse city in the nation’s coal capital, Scranton’s economy is now driven by small business, retail, healthcare, education and the service sector, said Satyajit Ghosh, a University of Scranton economist. Though there is no shortage of empty storefronts downtown, it is noticeably livelier than many similar Rust belt urban cores.University of Scranton’s surveys of downtown businesses found owners in April had concerns about the current economic climate but were decidedly more optimistic about the next six months: “Way more optimistic than they were a year ago,” Ghosh said.View image in fullscreenYost’s most recent polling put Harris up three points statewide and found the economy to be the top issue for 34% of residents. Other recent polling found 60% of Pennsylvanians said their economic situation was worse compared with 40% who say it was better or no different.James Simrell is part of the latter group. As he closed up his boxing gym in Steamtown, the lifelong Democrat was upbeat about Scranton’s economy. His gym is just one of his three businesses, and all stay busy – he also designs jewelry and runs a small farm that produces butternut squash and pumpkins. He sells pumpkins to Blackwatch Cafe, and squash to Abe’s Delicatessen, which uses it in their soup. “Everyone is doing well,” Simrell said.In contrast, the Trump economy was “falling apart” as the former president left office amid a poorly managed pandemic, Simrell said. He has other reasons for not voting for Trump. His two adopted children are Black and Trump is “a little bit prejudiced – it drives my wife crazy”.Echoing longtime Democratic voters’ sentiment, he added: “My mom and dad were Democrats and I follow what they believe, and Kamala’s the best person to be president – she’s not crazy.”But lingering inflation is still a drag for Eric Flesher, who runs a collectibles and vintage store, Rock-N-Models. He likened the economy to a “tightening sphincter”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHe declined to talk about politics, but said everything remained expensive: “I’m in a business that sells stuff that nobody needs unless they have disposable income, so it gets much more difficult” when there is inflation, Flesher said.Flesher added that he disagreed with the “mindset here that I should vote for someone because that’s how my mom and dad voted – then you’re just voting for a party and not a person”, he added.‘She’s not the kind you can trust’The economic indicators in Scranton track those of the wider US. Inflation, which peaked at an annual rate of 9.1% in mid-2022, has eased to 2.4%. Prices are similarly down in Scranton, the economist Ghosh said. Unemployment in the region was 4.8% in August, above the 4.1% national average but down from 9.2% when Biden took office in January 2021.“In this area, which I’ve covered for many years, I really haven’t ever seen this strong of a performance in terms of employment,” said Ghosh. Still, there’s an after-effect of inflation that consumers feel, Ghosh added, and some high prices, like those for rent or food, are still hurting.Outside a Walmart in Dickson City, a retail hub just north of Scranton, husband and wife John and Carol Gardner still feel the pinch. The Mount Cobb residents used to pay $150-$200 a month on groceries, and now they pay twice that. Carol is out of a job on disability, while John assembles buffet trays for $12 an hour to make ends meet, even though he said he should be retired.View image in fullscreen“Trump at least made sure we could go shopping, and Biden is making sure we can’t,” Carol said. “I hope the lady doesn’t get in because we’re going to go straight downhill – she’s not the kind you can trust.”The view is different at Bethel AME, a 153-year old Black church on downtown’s west side. Pastor Mark Alexander sees an improving economy, and blames inflation on Trump.“Inflation was more so because of Covid, and how the former president handled that situation, because when you have supply chain interruptions and poor leadership guiding the nation, it exacerbates things,” he said.The Federal Reserve, not the president, decides rates, Alexander noted, and he pointed to low unemployment, the Chips Act – which is pouring billions into domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors – and Biden’s infrastructure bill as evidence of the president’s economic success.Moreover, at Bethel AME, there is “excitement for someone who looks like us and has experienced some of things we have gone through and comes from a middle-class upbringing”, Alexander added. “As opposed to a billionaire who has no clue what it is like day to day for middle-class people,” he said. That’s especially true with younger people because Harris “speaks their language”, Alexander added.For others, neither candidate is appealing. Mike Gilson owns a flooring business, a maintenance company, and manages artists and chefs. He said the economy was strong locally because its economic backbone was made up of longtime small businesses, and it fared better during the last session than most other areas because of that composition.View image in fullscreenBut the city’s relatively strong economic standing is not persuading Gilson to vote for Harris. He said the president was a “ceremonial position” and big corporations run the nation. “If the president actually wielded the power that people think they do then voting would make a lot more sense to me,” Gilson said.History will decide which of Scranton’s many voices will decide this election. Right now it is unclear whether the legacy of the city’s most famous son will be enough to carry Harris over the line or finally hand Scranton and the state to Trump.With the race essentially a toss-up at this point, the key for either party is going to be turnout, Yost said. But in that battle, Trump may have an advantage – people who are less likely to vote have in recent elections voted for Trump.“Democrats have to counter that by getting their voters to the polls,” Yost said. “Think about the election as a mosaic – there are many pieces and some are bigger than others, but they’re all going to matter.” More