100 comments

Six Dumb Misconceptions About The Economy (that the Politicians Want You To Believe)

Well, it looks like we’re here in another US election year already. 

As Advanced Mustachians, we already know that the ongoing battle of Harris vs. Trump should not be consuming much of our time.  Sure, we do our research and cast our votes but after that we move right on to focus on other things within our own circle of control.

But out of all the things the politicians like to bicker about, there’s one area where MMM does need to set the record straight, and that area is of course money. Your money, the economy in general, and the overall wealth of the nation. 

Politicians are already not known for being the sharpest tools in the shed when it comes to technical stuff like science, technology, or economics. But this year the discourse has become particularly dumb, as our candidates try to manipulate undecided voters in swing states with ideas that are based on irrational emotions rather than sound economic sense. 

For one particularly funny example, you may have noticed that the competing party (Trump in this case) is attacking the incumbents (Biden/Harris) over the “bad economy.” When in fact the US economy is stronger than it has ever been, with the lowest unemployment we’ve ever seen as well. 

It’s hard to imagine a better situation than we have right now, and in fact the recent bout of higher inflation is a sign that things have been going too well, and we needed to step on the brakes with the help of higher interest rates

But somehow the people still seem to believe that we have a “bad” economy. Take a look at this Gallup poll showing that while most people (85%) are doing really well right now, they assume that it’s just their own good fortune – only 17% believe the economy is doing well. 

This is mathematically impossible, because if most people are doing well, that’s the definition of a good economy! And suspiciously enough, this widespread wrongness correlates quite nicely with the rise of social media misinformation.

So the politicians and the news have been doing the opposite of what they should be doing in an ideal situation (sharing accurate information). And sure, we can always just ignore their speeches and go on with our lives. But when it comes to economics, knowledge is power (and money). The more accurately we understand how things really work, the wealthier we will all become.

So with all that in mind, I hereby present you with my list of the… 

Top Dumb Things Politicians Want You To Believe About The Economy

1: The President Controls the Economy

If there’s a recession, the opposition party likes to blame it on the current president. If the economy is booming, the current president likes to give himself (or possibly soon herself) credit for all of that success. But really, the US economy is way too big – and thankfully way too free – for the president to control or really even influence all that strongly. 

In reality, our economy is a gigantic machine which converts labor and materials into things like iPhones, hospitals and pumpkin pies. And although we’re the biggest economy at 26% of the planet, we are still heavily influenced by that much bigger 74% of economic activity that the other 7.6 billion people on Earth are busy producing everywhere else.

When we have our inevitable little boom and bust cycles, they are mostly caused by the normal cycle of irrational exuberance (and greed) like the 2007 housing boom, followed by brief periods of extreme fear and pessimism like the 2008-2012 financial and housing crash. 

The government does play a role too, by setting tax rates and other rules. But the effects of these policies are usually so delayed and unpredictable, that you can’t draw a straight line between today’s president and today’s economy. In other words, the government does its best to adjust the rudder on our giant ship, but in the short term our economy lurches around on the waves and storms of the ocean.

2: The President Controls Interest Rates

This one is especially funny to me, as our candidates feign sympathy for the hard life of middle class Americans, who now face higher borrowing costs on their credit cards and car loans and mortgages. They claim they will fight to bring the interest rates down. Trump even goes as far as bullying our Federal Reserve board members (who can only do their jobs if we allow them to function as independent experts) and suggesting that he would take over the whole department, if elected.

The real story is that while monetary policy would be a terrible tool to leave in the hands of a sitting president (see Argentina), it does function as an excellent set of gas and brake pedals for the economy if used properly. When things slow down and unemployment gets too high, a cut to the interest rates will produce a boost in everything from new jobs to stock prices. But if things get too hot, you get rapid inflation which can mess up the system.

3: Inflation has Made Life Harder for Americans (and the President Can Magically Reverse it)

This line of reasoning is even dumber than the last one. For a couple of years after the Covid era, we had rapid inflation. It was caused by a rare combination of a goods shortage caused by things like factory closures and remote work, plentiful demand from government stimulus spending and low interest rates. These factors have since ironed themselves out, and inflation is back down to an ultra-low 2.4%.

Steve Ballmer explains the inflation vs wages debate in his useful new video series called USA Facts (see note below)

But most significantly, wages have still risen faster than inflation so we are all better off than before! Since 2019, overall prices are up 19% and our wages are up 21%. So even after all that inflation, we are still doing just fine. But the candidates are still bickering over inflation as if it’s an actual problem, and even worse promising to “bring prices back down”. And they’ve managed to convince the electorate that “higher wages and prices” is the same thing as “a bad economy”. Which is just plain wrong.

Bonus dumbness: politicians also occasionally blame “greedy corporations” for increasing prices to hoard profits. While price increases are totally acceptable in a market system (as a business owner you are free to set prices wherever you like), in reality it doesn’t usually happen because our markets are too competitive. For example, a recent deep analysis from NPR showed that no, grocery stores haven’t made any windfall profit at all off of this recent bout of Covid-fueled inflation.

4: The President Controls Housing Prices

One important thing that has changed over the past ten years is that US house prices and rents have both risen much faster than general inflation and even wages. On the positive side, interest rates have also risen which tends to make houses feel more expensive and is supposed to help bring house prices down. But it hasn’t happened yet which means we have the double whammy of higher prices and higher interest costs for mortgage borrowers. 

The dumb part is that our candidates are proposing things that would make the problem even worse, like subsidies for first-time homebuyers or schemes to reduce the interest rates. When really the solution is to increase the supply of housing, which I personally think will happen if we stop putting up roadblocks for homebuilders (myself included) to build housing. 

Things like faster and cheaper permits, less onerous and expensive building codes, eliminating suburban-style zoning and setback and car parking rules, and changing laws so that NIMBYs no longer get any say over what other people do with their own land could all help reduce the cost of building a house by about 50%, quickly and permanently.

5: The President Controls Gas Prices, and They Are Currently “High” and We Want Them Lower

Ahh, gasoline! The most ridiculous of things to worry about and the fuel for many of MMM’s rants since 2011. 

First of all, on an inflation-adjusted basis, gasoline is still about the same price as it was in 1950: in the $3-4 range per gallon, in today’s dollars. 

Secondly, it is so cheap that even with our huge inefficient American vehicles, the average household is still only spending 2.5% of their disposable income on the stuff! (The funny part is that they spend many times more on the rest of the car ownership experience while thinking gas is the part that is expensive)

Third, gasoline has been obsolete for almost a decade now. You can get a used electric car for less than the price of a comparable used gas car, or if you’re a fancypants money waster like me, new EVs are also cheaper than their gas counterparts. You get a faster, nicer car that almost never needs maintenance OR gasoline, and save money.

So why are we even still talking about this antique fuel of a previous era? Why aren’t the candidates also arguing over the price of Kodak film or typewriters or fax machines?

6: The Economy is Something We Should Even Worry About

The funniest part about all this economic talk is that we’re focusing on the wrong thing. While hard work and business and advancing the frontiers of human knowledge are all fun things, the reality is that we passed the point of having “Enough” decades ago. When the American middle class complains about how hard we have it these days, it’s like a bunch of overfed people at a buffet wishing they could just have one more flavor of donuts stacked onto the table.

Yes, we have income and wealth inequality so that the rich tend to get richer more quickly. And yes, we should keep that in check with a somewhat progressive tax system because a more equal society tends to be a more peaceful and happy one. 

But have you noticed that as the rich people get richer, they don’t get any happier? It’s because after you pass the point of “Enough”, adding more money doesn’t really help much. 

And “Enough” is much more defined by your mindset (and your collection of life skills) than your paycheck. So if the politicians really cared about improving our happiness and wellbeing, they’d be preaching the Principles of Mustachianism rather than pandering to the specific requests of coal miners or billionaires.

But alas, winning an election is a very different thing than proposing stuff that is actually best for the country. And for that reason, we cast our votes for the best party and then tune back out until the next election.

Happy voting!

In the Comments: Has the election season been getting you down, pumping you up, or just giving you a thorough dose of “Meh”?

Further Reading/Watching: 

While researching economic stats for this article, I came across a quirky but informative series of videos called USA Facts by none other than Microsoft co-founder Steve Ballmer. It seems that he had the same frustration as me: Americans are fighting over a bunch of opinions and misinformation without even bothering to look up the actual facts. So he made a well-produced series of videos that just share the facts without the baggage of political hype on top of them. I wish our politicians could do the same thing!

Bonus Podcast based on this article!
Thanks to the magic of AI, you can direct the wizardry within Google to generate a custom-made podcast on almost anything on the Internet. A reader just emailed me this take on this episode – remarkably human-like and even entertaining!
https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/0e1d0af8-8888-466c-abe4-8b1da8986773/audio

  • Joe O. October 13, 2024, 3:30 pm

    I appreciate your overall point but feels like hand waving on the inflation. My family food costs, insurance, and property taxes increases have taken a big bite well beyond the percentages you sight. It’s a real problem.

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 3:46 pm

      Yeah, while inflation has a pretty neutral effect overall, is not always fair or evenly distributed.

      If you feel like sharing more, would you mind doing this analysis on the overall effect for your family?

      – your salary in 2019 vs. today (percentage change)
      – your home value the same time period (% increase)
      – your mortgage balance in 2019 (because overall inflation has effectively shrank your mortgage relative to your wealth)
      – the value of your investment portfolio in 2019 (because every $100,000 you had on Jan 1, 2019 is now worth $215,000 here in October 2024!)
      – your combined annual spending on food + insurance + property taxes in 2019 vs today

      For most of us, when considering these factors we are far ahead today of where were four years ago. Even if certain expenses have risen faster than inflation.

      Reply
      • AlexN October 13, 2024, 6:34 pm

        So true. Definitely way better today than I was 4 years ago and better today than I was 10 years ago and better today than I was 20 years ago. Because of you and others with simple personal finance plans and having the right portfolio to include having emergency funds to prepare for increased inflation during certain periods in the economy, this has no real affect on me currently nor in the future. Just stay on pace and watch my 7 figure portfolio continue to grow and provide the lifestyle I’ve always wanted. So to you MMM I thank you so much.

        Reply
        • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 8:16 pm

          Glad to hear it Alex!

          Even though I’ve never had an emergency fund – if your base spending is low enough relative to your income, any “emergencies” just go onto your credit card which gets paid off automatically the next month with your regular income. (Plus you can always sell a few shares or use your line of credit in the unlikely event that balance is ever too high)

          Reply
          • AlexN October 13, 2024, 10:06 pm

            Yeah when I say emergency fund I technically don’t have money set aside in an account that isn’t invested. So yes if I needed some cash on hand I can dig into my Roth and get some of my principle. And honestly I’ve never really had an emergency that I really needed to cash anything out. So always has stayed untouched only to add to. I’m at a 75% savings rate of my take home pay. Expenses super low. Never carry any debt. No state income tax state. The difference goes right to my 3 accounts. 401k, Roth IRA using backdoor and the rest into the taxable account. Steadily and happily employed for 21 years straight. Just staying focused and keep going.

            Reply
      • kellile October 14, 2024, 8:37 pm

        “every $100,000 you had on Jan 1, 2019 is now worth $215,000 here in October 2024!”

        Can you explain? Is this investment growth assuming a particular asset allocation and withdrawal rate?

        Thank you!

        Reply
        • Mr. Money Mustache October 14, 2024, 9:53 pm

          Absolutely – that’s just the crazy recent run-up of our S&P500 index, which is basically both the easiest and best investment via an exchange traded index fund like Vanguard’s VTI.

          You can calculate your own returns for any time period here: https://ofdollarsanddata.com/sp500-calculator/

          Reply
    • Lynn B. October 13, 2024, 7:13 pm

      I disagree with some of your points.
      Does anyone find it interesting that the interest rates were dropped a few weeks ago? Right before an election? Esp after the feds said numerous times they would lower them anymore? That looked to me as a special favor to the incumbent party.

      Also- I agree with Joe that ALL of my costs have gone up. So the raises that I’ve received are covering the increased costs of daily living. Therefore, I do not have “more” discretionary income. I’m essentially stagnant bc my dollar doesn’t go as far.
      Fortunately, I make a good salary and can handle the increased costs but that doesn’t mean I’m better off. I’m saving the same amount of money I always have – not more bc the extra money is going to towards all of the increased costs.
      Yes my home value is up but it doesn’t matter bc I live in it. The value of my house only matters when I sell. It doesn’t change my everyday. Of course my mortgage loan is down- bc I have to pay it every month no matter what. I do have to fork out a lot more money for property taxes, escrow, home insurance – etc. so my monthly cost for the mortgage is up. That does not make me happy bc that means I can’t save more.
      And yes my retirement amount is up due to the stock market – fortunately- but again – I’m not using it right now. What happens to folks Who do need to retire? Aren’t the tax cuts in place about to expire? Aren’t retirees going to pay higher taxes?
      I feel like yes I’m fortunate I can weather the storm now – but what about those families that make less? How are they making ends meet? Is their paycheck going further? This country isn’t just about high earners. The economy in general and high cost of living is affecting lower wage earners and possibly retirees.
      We need to think about how everyone is affecting not just savers. I also find it interesting how you are posting this right before an election.
      I normally enjoy your posts but this one is a bit biased

      Reply
      • Larry Beagle October 14, 2024, 4:06 am

        As much as we’d love to avoid politics, elections Matter.
        One candidate offers a $6,000 child tax credit which will help all families with children.
        One candidate promises to eliminate the Affordable Care Act subsidies with a “concept of a plan”, which will raise health insurance costs for pre-Medicare retirees, like myself by thousands of dollars. One candidate promises to roll back the insulin price cap and the senior price cap on prescription medications negotiated by Medicare. One candidate promises huge tariffs, which do not need approval from congress, which will raise prices across the board. The companies that do manufacture domestically, will unilaterally raise prices to be in parity with the companies affected, leading to higher inflation overall. Plus expect a retaliatory trade war from other countries, making it harder to export products – lower sales, smaller corporate profits, layoffs, shrinking economy.

        All of these will have an immediate impact soon after the election.

        Reply
        • Luke October 14, 2024, 12:56 pm

          The fact that tariffs weren’t discussed in the original article is an unfortunate oversight. It’s astounding to me that so many people are basing their voting decision on this vague discontent over the cost of goods, and yet haven’t even taken the steps to understand what blanket tariffs will do to those costs.

          Reply
      • Marcia October 14, 2024, 10:58 am

        The plans to roll back some tax cuts – back to 39.6% top tax rates – certainly will affect me, but not the poor. The point is for people like me to pay more so that others don’t have to.

        Reply
      • Rounding the bend October 14, 2024, 6:33 pm

        Tax rates are set the the legislature, not the president.

        Reply
    • Robert October 13, 2024, 7:22 pm

      I agree that the inflation bit felt hand-wavy. It is true that the aggregate effect is pretty close to neutral. However, the unevenness of the distribution is understated. Inflation (especially on the goods in the CPI basket) disproportionately affect lower wage earners. Additionally, lower wage earners are often in unskilled jobs (which means theoretically infinite competition for limited jobs) and things like cost-of-living wage increases frequently lag many months or even more than a year when compared to the inflation effect.

      The typical Mustachian probably hasn’t even really noticed inflation, except maybe in some of the bigger ticket items that are difficult to control like home and auto insurance. (That’s about how it has been for me.) But sadly, most people aren’t Mustachians and the current economic gyrations are at a greater amplitude than they have been in the past. When someone doesn’t have adequate financial cushioning, the bumpier economic ride can be noticeably more painful.

      Reply
    • B. Clark October 14, 2024, 8:18 pm

      Food costs for me are higher than they were but my insurances have remained unchanged in 6 years and my property taxes went down $30.00. I am in New York state.

      Reply
  • Tim October 13, 2024, 3:37 pm

    Always enjoy your articles. Have you ever read the writings of John Tamny @ realclearmarkets.com? He, I believe, is kind of a libertarian thinker. That’s just my guess, I don’t know for sure. He shares your belief that our presidents have limited influence over our economy. He also believes the Fed also has limited influence. From your article, I take it you believe they hold a bit more punch than Mr. Tamny believes. Anyway, I find his writings interesting and wondered if you’d heard of him or what you thought. Thanks for the work you put into your blog. I’ve found it very inspirational over the years.

    Reply
  • Tanner October 13, 2024, 4:01 pm

    I agree with the vast majority of your post, most people are wildly misinformed about the economy and how it affects them, and people pursuing FI are likely doing great since the pandemic ended.

    While my families grocery costs have gone up, that has more than been offset by increased wages thanks to raises I got to keep up with “inflation.” And the 2.8% mortgage we got on a refi in 2020 is a massive bargain now. Gas prices don’t bother me since I’m riding my bike to work most days like a good Mustachian!

    Two minor quibbles: I don’t think Harris or any non Trump politician has ever said anything about wanting to control the Fed. I also don’t think the housing credit is a great idea, but Harris has said a lot about encouraging building by streamlining building approval. Unfortunately, those issues are generally hyper local and will have to be dealt with county by county.

    Reply
  • Republic DC-9 October 13, 2024, 4:47 pm

    MMM for President! :)

    And all great points.

    By following the principles in your articles over the years, my wife and I have noticed that (as you predicted in your articles) we’ve become millionaires with zero debt surprisingly quickly.

    We’ve simultaneously realized that we don’t need a lot of “stuff” nor unnecessary driving and travel to be happy, which makes us richer still (in both money AND time), and less susceptible to inflation (though my wages and net worth have risen faster than inflation).

    Both of these factors greatly reduce worry about inflation, gas prices, “the economy”, potential job loss, etc.while giving us NEW things to worry about like when to stop working and what we’d like life to be like after work stops.

    Glad to see another post, MMM, keep them coming and thank you as your blog really was the inspiration that caused us to take action and become FI (still working on pulling that RE plug).

    Reply
    • carl October 13, 2024, 5:21 pm

      I like the idea of President Stache’, but he’s too smart to take that awful job.

      Reply
      • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 6:00 pm

        You’re right, I am much more of a DICTATOR than the type of endlessly patient person you need to be to get things done in a big democracy. I can’t even stand the bureaucracy of getting a building permit!

        I’d personally love to see Jocko Willink hang up the machine gun and the microphone and come serve his country one last time as president. A bit of DISCIPLINE would do this country some good! (Plus his book Extreme Ownership is a damned good and fun to read leadership book)

        Oh, and Congratulations Republic, glad to hear things are going so well for you and your family!

        Reply
  • Betsy October 13, 2024, 6:38 pm

    I usually agree with you, but… “wages have still risen faster than inflation so we are all better off than before!” I haven’t received a paycheck since I retired 17 years ago, but all my expenses are up.

    I’ve cut back on discretionary purchases and am fortunate to still be able to pay my essential bills, but I am not better off.

    When Kamala starts taxing the unrealized appreciation on our assets, the government will really rack in the money. I hope after a down year we will get a refund for our unrealized losses.

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 8:12 pm

      Do you have any investments that are funding your retirement?

      If so, I’d encourage you to check their value now versus your balance in 2019, you might find you are better off than you think.

      However, unless that balance is over $100 million dollars, you wouldn’t be a target of Harris’ proposed tax on unrealized capital gains. Taxes almost NEVER rise on the middle class in this country because it’s too hard to do it from a political perspective.
      https://taxfoundation.org/blog/harris-unrealized-capital-gains-tax/

      In fact, even that $100-millionaire tax is unlikely to pass, because if the Democrats win they will be faced with a very divided house and senate.

      The real lesson: Don’t watch political debates and don’t listen to the flashy campaign promises! But *do* read the longer form analyses of all the proposals.

      Reply
    • Ken October 14, 2024, 11:03 am

      Harris has proposed taxing unrealized gains on portfolios of $100M or more. Pretty sure no Mustachean is in that crowd (though a couple of Billionaires do trend Mustachean in attitude). So this lament probably is a worry based on faulty information.

      Further, I don’t think it’ll become law as drafted, but people at that level of assets can (and do!) simply borrow money to live on & pledge assets as security. So instead of paying cap gain taxes, they pay meager interest. With $100M+, indeed it’s possible to live profligately while never sustaining significant cap gain tax because you can defer them your entire lifetime. That is some 🐂 💩 & should be fixed.

      But probably all Mustacheans *will* feel the pinch of harmonizing tax rates between labor income and realized appreciation. And while I don’t really love that I’ll pay more taxes, this position is fundamentally just. It’s high time we fixed it.

      Reply
  • Juice October 13, 2024, 6:50 pm

    Nice try Sparky. This entire article is a PsyOp and sounds like gas lighting to me.

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 8:12 pm

      Hahaha… Economics 101 is branded as gaslighting now?

      Reply
      • Aaron October 13, 2024, 10:46 pm

        “You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place.” Jonathan Swift

        Some people like Juice here aren’t worth wasting your breath on. I really appreciate the reminder and the timing of this article though. Those who DO reason appreciate a reminder of the real numbers and facts when we make our voting decisions.

        Reply
      • Glen October 13, 2024, 11:10 pm

        So interesting to read these comments trying to argue that the economy is in fact terrible right now because it feels bad.
        Unfortunately the fixes you identified for the housing market seem to me unlikely to happen.

        Reply
        • Tyler October 14, 2024, 6:58 am

          The fixes he identified for the housing market are happening all over the country, they just don’t tend to make national news. Check out Minneapolis if you want a larger scale example, or take a look at the Strong Towns organization for many, many more.

          Reply
          • Ben October 14, 2024, 12:48 pm

            Glad to see a Strong Towns mention here, they’re doing fantastic work!

            Reply
  • Margaret Barrett October 13, 2024, 6:55 pm

    Amen!!! It’s so sad that nobody remembers American Government from high school or college. Presidents have very little control over these things. Yes inflation is higher but we are also making more on investments. Even people who are risk averse have been making 5-6% on CDs and money market accounts. Even with the recent drop in interest rates high yield savings accounts are paying 4%. This stuff is all cyclical and politicians are preying on people who lack critical thinking skills and have a very limited understanding of the checks and balances that govern our political system.

    Reply
    • Kelly October 14, 2024, 6:36 am

      This is also why it’s important to emphasize that we’re not just electing a president, we’re voting all down the ballot – the folks that actually make and pass the laws. Pay attention to those folks and who they report to and what they hope/plan to do.

      Reply
  • Robert October 13, 2024, 7:04 pm

    Minor nit: Steve Ballmer did not co-found Microsoft. It was co-founded by Bill Gates and Paul Allen. Ballmer was an early employee who joined when the company was only a few years old, and eventually became CEO. He was there early enough on that he is commonly misidentified as a co-founder.

    Reply
  • Charlie October 13, 2024, 7:20 pm

    Policy does influence a few items in this list. The definition of inflation is government spending. Unnecessary COVID relief spending tipped inflation and set off a chain reaction.

    Many items in this article feel like a sponsored post. Hard to have someone preaching how things are actually better than what most people are feeling. This one is a miss for me.

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 8:01 pm

      How strange, I got almost the same comment over on Twitter – it’s a common misconception but no, inflation is absolutely NOT the same thing as government spending!

      A government can spend (and even run a deficit) in the presence of inflation, stable currency, or even deflation and we have seen examples of all three around the world in the modern era.

      Here’s that discussion over on that platform: https://x.com/BGA_512/status/1845568664637968781

      And I’ll also post the same response here to save people a click:

      – government deficits don’t necessarily cause inflation. They are funded by the sale of T-bills and bonds.

      – separately, the Federal Reserve Bank (which is not part of the federal government) controls the money supply, sometimes increasing it and other times decreasing (it shrank by over $2 trillion last year!) The Fed does not have to print money in order to fund a deficit.

      – but wait! Even an expanding money supply does not dictate the inflation rate. As we saw last year, we can have inflation even when the money supply shrinks, and this year we have much LOWER inflation even with a growing money supply

      – moderate inflation is NOT bad and does not destroy purchasing power (unless you keep your wealth all in cash)

      Reply
      • Charlie October 13, 2024, 10:03 pm

        I guess I return to government policy. Adding 2 trillion of unnecessary spending to try and “one up” an opposing party which then cascades (insert any technical justifications here) into 40 year high inflation is bad policy let alone the amount added to our ever growing debt. I am surprised at the levels of defense of what many Americans feel are very poor management of our tax resources (wiping out student loans for a targeted cohort, funding foreign conflicts, encouraging mass illegal immigration which then drives up housing prices due to increased demand, etc.). Stack that on top of talks of introducing taxation on future unrealized earnings which I’ve heard many concerned about the shock it would cause on the economy. Sure, these have been focused on the “billionaires”, but they have many tax and legal loopholes to minimize their exposure. It gets the concept on the books to then lower the thresholds down and down over time until it hits the “middle class”. The history of our income tax would show that these things begin small and naturally increase over time. Look at the impact to middle class taxes over time. And should we really give the government more of our income tax if they are so fiscally irresponsible with what they are taking now? When does it end?

        I know I am paying more for common goods, my wages are not keeping up with inflation, and I have a very real concern for my kids ability to afford home ownership given current market conditions.

        Our encouragement should be for responsible spending of available resources and balancing a budget as we would with our own finances. It feels like many of our own financial independence core principals are side stepped to support political beliefs. I guess saying the “President Controls” argument although technically accurate doesn’t appear to highlight that the “President Impacts” these same areas. I strongly feel policy matters.

        I personally feel the model below would serve our country well;
        https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/04/18/news-flash-your-debt-is-an-emergency/

        Thanks for the discussion.

        Reply
        • Frank October 14, 2024, 3:39 am

          Illegal immigration plays barely a role in driving up house prices, whereas most immigrants both legal and illegal contribute far more to the economy in taxes then they take out.

          On a side note this is why American politics is so warped at the moment. Someone says something, someone comes along and points out clearly and rationally why this or that statement is wrong and what the correct point is. But then the original persons ignores the science and the experts and believes what they want anyway.

          Reply
          • Charlie October 14, 2024, 8:19 am

            You agree government spending does not affect inflation? They may not control it but they do impact it. You may not live in a community impacted by illegal immigration but it does affect housing prices and rent affordability. I’m not saying it is tipping the scales overall. It would be interesting to see actual data on how much is contributed to the economy by illegal migrants vs the spending now to shelter and feed and social services consumed.

            Government wants to massively spend money, then warned of inflationary impact, then spends money, then inflationary impact, then justification and “science” and “experts” “fact check” everything to tell you “to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears”. We are definitely in a state where experts and science are justifiably questioned. It would have been nice to connect the dots on what then caused the last inflationary period without saying “the president doesn’t control inflation”.

            If 2 Trillion wasn’t spent, would we be in an inflationary period?

            Reply
        • fishfish October 14, 2024, 4:01 am

          Did you hear about the time the US paid off the national debt? The Indicator from Planet Money did an episode about it, which I found enlightening. An interesting illustration of the difference between personal debt and national debt.
          https://www.npr.org/2021/12/23/1067429082/the-time-the-us-paid-off-all-its-debt-indigator-favorite

          Reply
          • Charlie October 14, 2024, 8:21 am

            So debt is good? At what point between $0 and $35 Trillion should the US hold debt?

            Reply
      • Daragh October 14, 2024, 1:55 am

        I see things differently:

        1. “Government deficits don’t necessarily cause inflation. They are funded by the sale of T-bills and bonds.”

        Yes, but if demand for those bonds is weak, the central bank steps in as the lender of last resort, printing money to purchase them, which can lead to inflation.

        2. “Even an expanding money supply does not dictate the inflation rate. As we saw last year, we can have inflation even when the money supply shrinks, and this year we have much lower inflation even with a growing money supply.”

        Yes, but inflation often lags behind changes in the money supply—it can take time for new money to fully circulate and impact prices.

        3. “Moderate inflation is NOT bad and does not destroy purchasing power (unless you keep your wealth all in cash).”

        Inflation does destroy purchasing power. Investing in assets that grow faster than inflation, like stocks or real estate, can keep you ahead of it. They don’t avoid inflation, they just try to beat it.

        Reply
  • Dharma Bum October 13, 2024, 7:31 pm

    You really hit the nail on the head this time. Whenever my acquaintances get into arguments about Trump vs Harris, Democrats vs Republicans, etc. (which is extra stupid because they are all Canadians), I point out that it’s mostly theatre and that the U.S. Machine pretty much runs itself regardless of whatever moron in “in charge”.
    Blaming others (including the president of the moment) for one’s financial situation is beyond ludicrous.
    Unfortunately this falls on deaf ears, so I am happy to see this post which corroborates my opinion. I will forward it on the the dumb and dumbers as a big fat “told ya!”.

    Reply
  • CK October 13, 2024, 7:33 pm

    I generally love your perspective on finance and work ethic etc. but the level of apathy in your political view is a perfect example of what is wrong with the US. Let’s help make this country as good for our children as it has been to us. No man is an island they say.

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 7:55 pm

      I’m surprised this article comes across as apathetic! It’s just me doing my part to help share information that can help people make a more informed decision, and then encouraging them to VOTE!

      Also, if more people call them out on their campaign rhetoric and instead show that we actually understand Economics, the politicians will gradually be forced to shift their campaign style towards facts rather than emotions.

      Or in fewer words: The only real safeguard of Democracy, is Education.

      Reply
      • Frank October 14, 2024, 3:45 am

        This article was great. If only more people understood the limited impact the president has on the economy the better. And the number of people who think recessions aren’t a part of the normal economic cycle is incredible

        Reply
      • Kelly October 14, 2024, 6:50 am

        I think all the things you talked about were helpful and true, and I know the focus of this post is on the top ticket, but I think it’s important to note that we’re also voting for the people who do actually impact the things you discussed. Dismissing the impact of politics on our financial well-being based on the presidential race alone might not be apathetic, but does feel a bit dismissive. We do have some control, it just happens to be down the ticket, including the local level. Folks making the laws about things like education (as you mention) are key, and slip through because we’re hand waving about the bluster at the top.

        Reply
  • Craig October 13, 2024, 7:35 pm

    Great article!! An Economics class would help a LOT of individuals understand things!! 😊

    Reply
  • Paul October 13, 2024, 7:39 pm

    Any guidance on buying used EVs?

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 8:26 pm

      Yeah!

      In a few words: Used Chevrolet Bolts and Tesla Model 3s and Ys

      Keep an eye on Carvana, Craigslist, Facebook Marketplace and any other used car sites you hear about. And compare those to the “Tesla Existing Inventory” page (because used model 3s are now under $20k!).

      Prioritize low mileage and check the battery health to see that the car’s range is still near its new level (both of those cars are known for long-lasting battery packs, 10+ years and upwards of 200,000 miles before they even lose significant range)

      Reply
    • Michael October 13, 2024, 8:52 pm

      Avoid Nissan Leafs since their charging standard is no longer used and their batteries are air cooled, leading to far more degradation than other EVs that have active cooling. If you’re looking at Chevy Bolt’s make sure the battery modules were repaired per the recall. One of the best things about them is that your house is your “fuel” station. If you don’t have at home charging available it can be more of a challenge (unless your work has chargers).

      Reply
    • THorton October 14, 2024, 1:55 pm

      https://www.autotempest.com/ aggregates a bunch of different used car sales websites & has filters to make searching really easy.

      Reply
  • kellie October 13, 2024, 7:51 pm

    “But most significantly, wages have still risen faster than inflation so we are all better off than before!”
    Hmm…what about seniors on fixed incomes? I’ve been shocked by the increase in monthly costs at my father’s assisted living facility.

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 13, 2024, 8:30 pm

      Yes, you’re right – if anyone does not have their own investments and is living on an income which is specifically NOT indexed to inflation, their spending power will decrease over time.

      Note that this is not the case with Social Security – that is sometimes referred to as “a fixed income” but in reality it is indexed to inflation. A few of the most recent adjustments:

      2022 5.9%
      2023 8.7%
      2024 3.2%
      2025 2.5%

      Reply
      • kellie October 14, 2024, 11:30 am

        Thanks for writing back! I always appreciate hearing your thoughts.

        There are plenty of people who say SS does NOT keep up with inflation:

        “Though the COLA is supposed to keep up with inflation, it’s missed the mark in eight of the last 15 adjustments, according to a recent analysis by The Senior Citizens League, an advocacy group, which looked at the annual increases prior to the one for 2025.
        Over the past five years, only the 2023 adjustment has beaten the rate of inflation. The COLAs lagged inflation by as much as 1.1 percentage points the other years.

        “Social Security benefits have lost 20% of their buying power since 2010, according to the league. Those who retired that year would need a boost of $370 a month, or $4,440 a year, on average, to regain the lost value.

        “The automatic annual cost-of-living adjustment is one of Social Security’s most essential and unique features. It is intended to ensure that benefits do not erode over time,” Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, an advocacy group, said in a statement. “However, the formula currently used to calculate annual COLAs under-measures the expenses that Social Security beneficiaries face. Seniors spend a greater proportion of their income on medical expenses―and the Social Security COLA should reflect that.”

        “What’s more, senior citizens typically don’t receive the full adjustment. Medicare Part B premiums, which are automatically deducted from monthly Social Security benefits, can erode the annual boost. For 2025, the standard monthly premium is expected to be $185, an increase of more than $10 from this year, according to the latest Medicare trustees report.”

        https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/10/politics/social-security-cola-increase/index.html#:~:text=Though%20the%20COLA%20is%20supposed%20to%20keep%20up,2023%20adjustment%20has%20beaten%20the%20rate%20of%20inflation.

        Reply
  • Roi October 13, 2024, 7:52 pm

    I am not US citizen or resident, but it is interesting reading your comments on inflation in US.

    In my country, Spain, we have suffered the same inflation rate more or less, but it has been really damaging to real economy, as salaries didn’t grow at the same rate and taxes didn’t change or adapt to adjust to inflation.

    I think inflation affects different to poor people that middle-upper class or more qualified workers. Those who are not invested in the market, who do not own houses or who have difficulties to negotiate salary raises or change jobs, are really affected negatively by inflation. That’s why I think is bad, mostly for the poorest part of the society.

    Reply
  • Vs October 13, 2024, 8:36 pm

    Vivek Ramaswamy (Republican) says he is going to stay in politics for a long time. Take a look at his books and podcasts (rather than his campaign speeches which are targeted at masses). He has some very good ideas about the country and economy.

    Reply
  • Ricky October 13, 2024, 9:40 pm

    As someone who enjoys the absurd, it has been great entertainment. Each side ratcheting up the ridiculous promises, divorced from reality. It is better than football, because of the hysterical responses from almost everyone.

    Reply
  • Madge October 13, 2024, 10:37 pm

    I mean, no, the president does not “control” the economy, but certainly bone-headed moves like putting giant tariffs on imported goods and destroying the capacity of the government to regulate or enforce safety and environmental standards makes a big difference in how the economy functions. Surely if the United States is seen as not operating under the rule of law, or not actually being a democratic republic anymore, that impacts the economy, too.

    Reply
  • Nico October 13, 2024, 10:46 pm

    I see that in your country, as in Europe, disinformation is there.

    Reply
  • Zack October 14, 2024, 12:01 am

    Since January 2019, my hourly wage is up about 20% and my investment portfolio has gone from about $10,000 to about $220,000. Because I discovered this Blog in October 2018 and never looked back.

    Between Covid, the 2022 recession, and all of the other geopolitical insanity between now and then, I’ve focused on what *I* can control (dumping money into index funds as often as possible) and while I paid attention to everything going on, I didn’t let it Influence me to get off track.

    So yeah, while some things such as assisted living facilities (as my 98 year old grandmother will attest) have no doubt gone through the roof, on AVERAGE, things are better now than they were 4 years ago. They’re damn sure better for me.

    I’ve discussed the points in this article with close friends and family over the last year or so. It’s often met with the same skepticism I’m seeing in this comment section. Every time, we end up at the same conclusion: THEY are actually a lot better off today than they were 4 years ago, but that’s “only them” because they’re “lucky” and “everyone else” is suffering. The news and youtube said so, after all.

    Excellent post, MMM

    Reply
  • Greg October 14, 2024, 12:04 am

    As always, I agree with the bulk of your article.

    On point 3 though, in my view this is superceded by point 4. Rents have risen so fast compared to wages that imo this torpedoes any argument anyone could make that life isn’t harder now than it was 5 years ago

    Wages/investment income have kept pace with groceries, and even if they hadn’t, no biggie – root veg/alliums/dried pulses/plant oils/spices allow us to make a healthy and tasty meal for pennies if we learn to cook some basic Indian or middle eastern recipes, rendering it a non-issue for most people

    Same for gas prices – as you say, it’s such a small percentage of overall spending that it’s a non issue for most people

    However, when your biggest expense goes up by 50% more than your wages, this is an issue. Shelter is so low on the hierarchy of needs and relatively inelastic. I enjoyed your previous post on moving to a different area (maybe because that’s what I did 7 years ago, so I’ve got the bias lol), but we shouldn’t pretend that a disproportionate increase in rent in most metro areas isn’t making life harder for many people

    In point 4 onwards I’m back to fully agreeing with you as normal. There doesn’t appear to be a cogent plan from any politician right now to address long-term falling housing affordability. We’ll move through the economic cycle and a time will come when housing is temporarily less unaffordable, but I don’t see any longer term potential solutions being mooted. Mustachians will of course be fine as always, but my empathy for those who haven’t been lucky enough to find your wonderful blog is strong on this issue

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 14, 2024, 7:08 am

      Sounds like we both agree that rent and housing have outpaced inflation in the last few years. But I still disagree on the “torpedo” effect:

      Housing (aka “Shelter”) is part of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and it is weighted at a pretty appropriate level in my opinion – I see it’s currently 36%. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has always done pretty good work!

      https://www.bls.gov/cpi/factsheets/owners-equivalent-rent-and-rent.htm

      So with the overall CPI up by 19% and average wages up by 21%, we are still probably doing all right. It’s just that our mix of expenses has shifted around.

      I have a theory that the natural Human bias towards negativity is playing into this as well: we notice eggs doubling in price and are EXTREMELY pissed about that every time we go to the grocery store. Meanwhile, the decreased price of things like clothing and home goods and other things which have actually dropped on an inflation-adjusted basis doesn’t feel nearly as “good” as the eggs feel “Bad”.

      Reply
      • Dharma Bum October 14, 2024, 7:52 am

        I guess it’s because you can’t do clothes and home goods scrambled, Western, over easy, poached, omelet, devilled, hard boiled, soft boiled, sunny side up, Florentine orBenedict.

        Reply
      • Madge October 14, 2024, 9:02 am

        Sure would be a shame if the candidate running on a platform of getting rid of all the hardworking public servants in agencies like the BLS and replacing them with sycophantic goons got a chance to do that.

        Reply
      • Greg October 14, 2024, 10:08 am

        I agree that our mix of expenses has shifted – clothes, home goods, and other semi-luxury items are more affordable than ever, while housing is notably less affordable than it was 5 years ago

        I’m undecided on your theory about a bias towards negativity. On the one hand, I’m originally from England, so moaning is deeply embedded in my DNA. On the other hand, the thing that can most effectively hinder the Mustachian dream of a 66% (or higher) savings rate is a significant relative increase in our biggest and least elastic expense

        When the cost of clothes and household goods goes down (relatively speaking), the real numbers change in weekly expenditure is minimal. Barbells, bikes and salads mean that expensive flattering clothes aren’t needed. Active participation in buy nothing groups and repair cafes keeps spending on household goods to a minimum

        When mortgage repayments double, the real numbers change in weekly expenditure is huge. Whilst not everyone keeps their spending on clothes and household goods sensibly low, the option is there if needed. Going without that new shirt or dishwasher for a few months is doable with no real negative consequences. Going without shelter isn’t

        I’m fortunate in that my weekly income far outstrips my housing cost, so the only real consequences I’ve felt from the spiralling prices are a delay in my FIRE date and an urge to spend more time on online forums complaining that housing is unacceptably overpriced/the politicians who actively create policies which cause housing undersupply and misuse are bellends

        However, for the people for whom the significant increase in relative cost of shelter takes care of a large chunk of their weekly income, I still believe the stress created means that life does indeed feel much harder now than it did 5 years ago.

        I completely agree that a president won’t come along and magically solve it, especially given the apparent accidie demonstrated by both Trump and Harris on the issue

        Reply
        • Patrick October 14, 2024, 11:22 am

          I’m with Greg on this. The BLS is not perfect, and the CPI estimate of housing costs leaves a lot to be desired (Google it). That is just an average across the country. Coastal cities have gone up a lot more, and not everyone can easily move to Colorado, where real estate is still surprisingly affordable.

          Also, CPI up by 19% with wages up 21% – those are just averages across a very large bucket (the US). As an engineer I can’t believe MMM isn’t getting this. You can have an average which makes it seem like the average person is doing fine but within that average distribution you can have people that are doing horrible. And you can have more people that are doing poorly if you have a small number of people that are doing much better. Averages mean nothing about distribution.

          Reply
          • Amy October 14, 2024, 5:30 pm

            Great point! As a data analyst my supervisors would be very disappointed in my analysis if I only presented averages as a holistic summary. I would very much like to see the distributions. For anyone interested, the BLS website does show geographic distribution of CPI by geography (regions and select major metro areas). Based on some cursory analysis wage and price increases are not homogeneous geographically, and the inelastic nature of housing (as already mentioned) makes it difficult for people to move to take advantage of inefficiencies in wage/price changes.

            Reply
      • DLL October 14, 2024, 3:39 pm

        Some things are definitely not controlled by the government. Who can I blame? The avians? From Investopedia: “Egg prices have surged since late spring, rising amid a surge in avian influenza in the nation’s commercial poultry flocks. (There was a similar outbreak in late 2022.) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in July estimated that avian flu had sickened over 3 million birds, or roughly about 1% of the nation’s supply of egg-laying chickens”

        Reply
  • Matt Hofmann October 14, 2024, 2:08 am

    Hi MMM
    What will the effect of a win of Trump be on the US stock market, the economics of high market capital US corporations and the economic emotions amongst Americans??
    Thanks for your opinion!
    Matt

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 14, 2024, 6:53 am

      Oh that’s another great question that I should have included in the article:

      7) The President does not control the stock market

      The effect of a Trump or Harris win on the stock market will be pretty much neutral, just as it was in 2016 when Trump won or 2020 when Biden did. Lots of short term noise, but no real effect over the years. The stock market will continue going UP as long as our economy continues to grow.

      Of course, a bad enough president/government CAN steer our giant ship into an iceberg if they push through enough dumb policies. Tariffs and trade wars (currently promised by both sides) are one such dumb idea. Another one is behaving erratically so that companies have less trust in our economic and legal systems – stable institutions and predictable policies matter if you want big companies to continue investing and hiring people in your country.

      But in general, our big corporations have such a big say in US politics that both parties need to be pretty business-friendly in order to get anything passed.

      And although some corporations do plenty of bad things at the margins, I’m still in favor of a business friendly country that is not overly regulated. It’s why I moved here in the first place!

      Reply
  • Sally Hill October 14, 2024, 2:55 am

    Although it might seem the chief executive would be unable to directly influence concerns you’ve mentioned, dedication to maintaining power by one political group might inspire actions by other influential people

    We don’t know ANYONE who isn’t impacted by inflation, crime, world war.

    And frankly, the attacks on constitutional freedoms are deeply concerning.

    Any concerns about globalism?

    Reply
  • Geoff October 14, 2024, 3:26 am

    As an observer across the pond in the UK, your election looks very different. The US economy looks like it’s doing just fine from here, frankly. Obviously there will always be individuals affected in different ways – some of the comments reflect this. But you might (or might not!) be surprised at how the candidates are perceived overseas – things like personal integrity for example. Although sadly we’ve had some crappy politicians elected here over the last 5 years based on unjustified economic claims. Feels like it’s way too easy to fool people with this stuff.

    Reply
  • Aaron Hemry October 14, 2024, 5:26 am

    Great article!

    You said it all when you advised to concentrate on our circle of control.

    I wonder how much time and money, and how many family connections and friendships are wasted fighting over who should or shouldn’t get elected president.

    Unless you can personally influence thousands of voters in a swing state to vote for your chosen candidate, I say go back to your normally scheduled lives…

    Reply
  • Eva October 14, 2024, 6:23 am

    MMM,

    Always excited to see a new post from you! I discovered your blog in December of 2022 and it completely changed my life. I became a single mom about 4 years ago and had to completely start over. Today I have a 6 figure net worth, went back to school and finished my degree that was paid for with scholarships and grants, bought a house with %20 down last May (even with these high rates), and I’m on track to pay off the house and have 1 million invested in 13 years (right around the time my kids will graduate high school). This stuff really does work, even in “today’s economy”. I just want to say thank you for the inspiring content.

    Reply
  • G October 14, 2024, 6:36 am

    I disagree with the “bonus dumbness” about corporate greed. Yes, grocery stores and food producers didn’t make more money, but they didn’t lose money either, they passed on the extra costs to the customer. The main cause of the increase in grocery prices, especially fresh meat and produce, was fuel costs. The groceries, actually, everything we buy, gets shipped via giant diesel guzzling tractor trailer trucks. The price of fuel tanked during the pandemic, and both OPEC and american oil companies shut down production in the face of reduced demand, then the war in Ukraine cut off Russia from the global oil market. Suddenly the recovered economy from the pandemic increased demand, and supply was still low, so fuel prices skyrocketed. Instead of keeping production up, for fear of losing money, or quickly ramping production back up, petroleum producers deliberately dragged their feet in ramping production back up to artificially lower supply to increase prices and make record profits. This is somewhat similar to the DeBeers diamond corporation hoarding diamonds to artificially reduce supply to increase prices and thus profits.
    The end result is higher prices of everything, since everything is shipped via trucks that use too much fuel. I long for the day when our entire economy doesn’t depend upon a global oil market, when electric tractor trailers deliver goods using electricity generated by solar panels and windmills, but we aren’t there yet unfortunately. I personally work from home as a software engineer, and from the teachings of this blog deliberately live within bicycle distance of the grocery store, so I have minimal fuel costs, however I still feel the effects of fuel costs at the grocery store, from my home builder, other contractors (which is why I try to DIY everything), etc. Car prices went up from chip shortages after covid, like way up. Housing prices when up after covid because people like myself no longer had to live near our high paying jobs and could work remotely from a lower cost of living area, so people suddenly increased demand in the suburban/exurban/semi-rural areas. I do agree with the main point of the article, is that the president has nothing to do with this, lol. What I disagree with is that corporate greed has nothing to do with this either. Business works the way it works. Capitalism works the way it works. No business will deliberately lose money to please its customers, and displease it’s shareholders. I guess this makes me anti-capitalist. I am working on FIRE, so I can retire early and join the owner class, so I do buy VTSAX, but I am still in the working class, and I guess I’m just jealous of those who are rich enough they don’t have to work. To those who think I am a hypocrite, I cite the old saying “if ya can’t beat em, join em” and by them I mean the capitalists.

    Reply
  • The Orchard October 14, 2024, 7:08 am

    Great article. This is a misconception I notice all the time, and it’s good to see more high-profile debunkings.

    It’s true that politicians can steer the long-term direction of the economy – either with bad policies like immigration restrictions, NIMBY laws and trade wars, or good policies like fixing infrastructure, incentivizing renewable energy and making healthcare affordable.

    But far too many people think that the president has a magic wand to control inflation or gas prices. When their lives are going well, they give the party in power too much of the credit, and when their lives are going badly, they give the party in power too much of the blame.

    The unfortunate thing about democracy is that most people who study the issues and think carefully have already decided who they’re going to vote for. For politicians to win elections, they have to get the increasingly tiny slice of swing voters – who, by definition, tend to be the people who don’t pay attention to politics or know very much about policy. Thus, those politicians have to pander to swing voters with ideas that don’t make sense but sound good to the uninformed. If us Mustachians were in charge, things would be different.

    Reply
  • Tim Livian October 14, 2024, 7:20 am

    Great post clarifying things! It’s similar to religion, if people are small and helpless they need someone big and mighty to help them get what they deserve. Sad that politicians take this same route and don’t try to better explain how things worth and have faith in the masses ability to eventually learn how things actually work, even though it’s not black or white, but more nuanced. Similar to why they don’t have real economists on CNBC/Bloomberg, but instead pumpers and forecasters that make definitive statements with what’s a guess seem like a certainty. People have to learn about statistics and probabilities and that there’s a range of possibilities that are weighted differently. But I guess that would make people feel nervous and uneasy and not confident in their leaders abilities to try and will things in the direction of their wishes, even if in reality they have very few levers to enact the changes. Most of it is just political circus and wasting everyones time with another version of the Colosseum or a soap opera-like bunch of drama that distracts us from the real issues that should be priorities.

    *Dismount from my soapbox*

    Reply
  • Tim Livian October 14, 2024, 7:39 am

    Quick correction: Steve Balmer was not a co-founder of Microsoft, that would be Bill Gates and Paul Allen, he’s just a CEO (that did a pretty bad job running the company and kept wasting shareholder capital on acquisitions that didn’t materialize and ended up getting written down. But since MSFT is like a quasi-monopoly it still did fine during that time, but nothing special. Similar to how Zuckerberg is now throwing billions at the Metaverse now in hopes that he can finally have his own platform and not be at the mercy of iOS or Android, with very little care for shareholders capital and no real estimate of when/if these HUGE investments will pay off. It’s nice to have supervising shares and effectively control a public company)

    Reply
  • Matias October 14, 2024, 8:00 am

    “Yes, we have income and wealth inequality so that the rich tend to get richer more quickly. And yes, we should keep that in check with a somewhat progressive tax system because a more equal society tends to be a more peaceful and happy one. ”
    “Socialist detected!”
    Real nice post as usual MMM. AS you say, “we should keep that in check”. I ‘m a Milton Friedman kind of capiltalist, and I’m convinced that way too much money in too few hands destroys markets and kills capitalism.

    Reply
  • Jason October 14, 2024, 8:08 am

    #7) Your vote for president is so precious that it must be the majority of the focus of all major, minor, and social media outlets.

    As a resident of the “Republic or non-Purple States,” you’re influence on the outcome of the presidential election is miniscule. For those, who instead reside the Democratic Republic of GA, NC, PA, MI, WI, AZ, NV – your vote counts about 10X (or more), so don’t screw it up!

    Reply
  • Todd October 14, 2024, 9:11 am

    Nice Article! As usual people hate facts. My general impression is I am certainly am better off than I was 4-5 yrs ago. No mortgage, no debt, 40% savings rate on my way to early retirement even though I started late.

    Reply
  • Laura Sonnier October 14, 2024, 9:57 am

    Gonna have to disagree with the salaries keeping pace with inflation. I’m in Texas and our food has doubled. We had $1500 disposable income before covid. Now our bills exceed our income. We have no debt. Don’t go on vacation, etc. I don’t know anyone whose salary has kept up. We are on the lower salary end tho (Is $70k lower end? Feels like it!). Maybe some white collar jobs have kept up? But two of the engineers I know have had tiny raises and two were laid off.

    My husband worked for Gallup as a pollster for years and he started laughing when I mentioned this article. He said not to put any stock in polls.

    My dad is on social security only and we all know that has NOT kept up.

    my cousins in central Texas and Arkansas are getting into debt too because salaries have not kept up. They said they don’t know anyone whose salary has kept up either. My cousins are very good with what little they have. Our grandmother was in a work house in the Great Depression. She taught us to be careful with money. We all respected that.

    It would be a blessing for sure if we would get raises commensurate with inflation! God bless.

    Reply
    • Kevin October 14, 2024, 12:02 pm

      Where I live, I have found that if you worked at a company, you definitely would not get a raise equal to inflation (I continued to get my 3% merit for 2 years). I started looking for jobs outside my company and the same job title with comparable work was offering me a 32% raise. After working that job for a year, I got an additional 15% for getting another job. My wife also netted a nice raise for searching outside her own company. In 2024, our pre-tax salaries are 64% higher than they were at the end of 2019 doing comparable work.

      I don’t live in Texas, so I’m not going to pretend that I know the job market there. But I think overall, people have to be willing to look if they want to earn more money, your current employer is probably not going to just hand you a raise to keep up with inflation.

      Reply
  • Kevin October 14, 2024, 10:23 am

    My new year’s resolution this year was not to give a poop about politics. Best resolution I’ve ever made! I still plan to vote, but it’s very nice channeling out the constant noise telling me how terrible everything is or will be. Americans need better/healthier hobbies than politics.

    Reply
  • Patrick October 14, 2024, 10:45 am

    Well said.
    The one true messed up thing with the economy is the growing wealth disparity. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting not poorer but they feel poorer because the gap between them and the rich is so ridiculously huge now.

    It’s not surprising the Republicans don’t point this out because then they’d have to admit their tax cuts for the rich are one of the causes of it. I don’t understand why the Democrats don’t point it out more though. The Republican candidates actually campaign on tax cuts, which mostly benefit the rich, at rallies that are mostly attended by people the tax cuts will hurt. It’s crazy.

    Slightly disagree on your #6 though – everyone has enough and the middle class shouldn’t complain about how hard they have it these days? Well, I think it’s actually the lower class that is complaining, and they have good reason to because they’re hamstrung by the high cost of real estate (which affects rentals too), low minimum wages, and inflation that raised the cost of basic essential goods (like groceries).

    Totally agree with you on gasoline being way too cheap. I filled up our car for $27 ($3/gallon with Fred Meyer discount points) which was only a little more than I paid for a bacon cheeseburger + fries + tip at an average local restaurant. 9.3 gallons of gas, which lasts me a month, should cost *way* more than one take-out meal.

    Reply
  • Frugal Bazooka October 14, 2024, 11:44 am

    3M,

    You’re missing a lot of nuance in your analysis of the effects of policy on the economy and the average American.
    Does the president set interest rates? No. Does his policies affect interest rates? 100% yes. If you’re going to glibly refer to Econ 101 as the stuff that everyone should already know, then you need to take a refresher course. If the president signs a spending bill for 3 Trillion dollars, those dollars will chase fewer and fewer goods – otherwise known as inflation. Yes Covid was a factor, so why would they pass the “Inflation Reduction Act” spending trillions of dollars right on the heels of an already inflationary Macro event? Let’s talk about Gov’t regulation of oil production thru lease permits and regulations that cause the cost of oil to increase. If oil/gas go up guess what else goes up in price? EVERYTHING. Trucks move products and oil moves trucks. Price of oil goes up, price of moving products goes up, product price goes up. I know you are smart enough to know this stuff, but you left it out of your analysis. If I am wrong, explain how.
    Others have already talked about how much more things cost for the average family especially food. The rich on the other hand, have hardly noticed inflation. I guess the severity of inflation truly is in the eye of the beholder. I know that I cannot afford the same amount of protein as I did 5 years ago and nearly everything I buy at the grocery store is up 20 – 30%. Some things are even higher. I know that none of the prices I pay today have matched my yearly 2% increase in pay.
    When I read stories in the national media written by relatively wealthy national reporters that tell me that my economic life is “much” better than it was 5 years ago, I know it because they are either out of touch or have an agenda.
    If higher prices and stagnant wages are what elites are trying to convince average people is a great economy…then please, bring back the terrible economy of 5 years ago. All this greatness is kicking my ass.

    Reply
    • Luke October 14, 2024, 1:16 pm

      MMM responded to a similar comment above, but the gist of it is this: government deficits do not cause inflation. If that were the case, we wouldn’t have had such an extended period of ultra-low inflation leading up to the recent spike.

      You are also falsely attributing the rise in gas prices solely to US economic decisions. But if that was such a critical factor, then why are we now producing more oil than ever before? It’s the unrest in the other oil-producing countries that drove up the price of oil, which made it more profitable to extract and refine it here.

      Ironically, blanket tariffs will do the same thing to the rest of imported goods: they will raise the price you pay, potentially making it possible to produce those goods locally. Not more cheaply, mind you…more profitably. With blanket tariffs, the prices will go up.

      Reply
      • Frugal Bazooka October 15, 2024, 1:29 am

        With all due respect my post has nothing to do with deficits. You’re conflating massive govt spending with deficit spending – they are 2 distinctly different economic policies. Massive govt spending causes inflation every time. That’s why the Fed can reduce inflation by raising the prime interest rate and tightening the money supply. It’s not a theory, it works every time that’s why they do it to reduce inflation. I have been a fan of 3M for many years. Sometimes he’s right and sometimes he’s wrong, but none of that changes economic realities.

        No where do I falsely attribute gas price increases solely to “US economic decisions”. I simply state well established Economics – Govt Regs and interference in markets will cost those markets more to create their product. They will in turn pass those costs on to the consumers. It just so happens that decreased oil production has a significant ripple effect because nearly everything we consume in the US is made in China and must be shipped to consumers on gas guzzling ships and trucks. Those ship owners and truck drivers will pass the increase in gas prices onto the consumer. Again not a theory, well established economic behavior.

        Oil, as you know, is an inelastic commodity and therefore demand will be immune to increases in price. In fact, as I’m sure you also know, when the Govt tries to reduce oil production it typically increases oil company profits because smaller, competitive oil companies are priced out of the market, which decreases competition. That causes only the larger more profitable companies to survive and reap the upward pressure on prices. Until the supply of oil is increased dramatically the price of oil will remain high and inflation will be higher than it needs to be. The fact remains that “unrest” does not directly affect oil production. It might affect the price of a barrel of oil on the spot market on a day to day basis, but oil production is immune to nearly every economic pressure (again, inelastic demand) except US govt interference. It has been well established that the US has potentially billions of barrels of oil that could be exploited. Ironically if this were to happen the price of oil could fall so dramatically that the low profit margins would cause oil companies to view oil as a bad idea and seek more profitable energy sources. It’s unfortunate that our Govt officials never took a basic Econ class. It might unleash some efficient and logical policies.

        I’m not sure what tariffs have to do with this convo but ok. I’ve not heard anyone talk about blanket tariffs, only targeted tariffs against unfair trading partners who already impose tariffs on US products. The result of foreign based tariffs are US products are essentially blocked from some foreign markets and our workers lose their jobs because the cost of producing stuff in the US is significantly higher than other countries and foreign tariffs cause our companies prices to be non-competitive in those markets-de facto we are blocked from those markets. This has been going on for 40 plus years and American politicians have allowed it to happen to the detriment of our working and middle class. Meanwhile the rich enjoy cheap products, cheap labor and have no repercussions because they typically don’t have jobs that involve making products that have to compete with China.

        Reply
  • Crow October 14, 2024, 12:33 pm

    Always makes my day when I open my email and see that MMM posted.
    When reading the electric vehicle part I made a comment that your blog seems to be more city centric and doesn’t really work for country folks or people that have ranches. But I did some research after, and lo and behold, there ARE electric trucks with towing capacity. Granted they are ~$15,000 more expensive than their gas counterparts, which makes me wonder if they are worth it, but… I’m glad to see I have options.
    Do you think your economic and saving philosophies are applicable to small ranch owners who on average make maybe a ~11% profit margin? Many family ranches have to spend most of their yearly profits on the business, not even including food, personal items, etc. Plus when you live in an agricultural zone you can’t walk to the store, or take public transport. I very much subscribe to your philosophies and I am interested to hear your thoughts on non city-centric living.

    Reply
  • Chris October 14, 2024, 12:47 pm

    Insightful article, overall.

    BUT, this election is a bit different in that I would say it’s existential to our country. If you have a crazy enough human, at the controls, that destabilizes our country to the point of war (civil or cross-border) or even brings down our democratic system, as we kn0w it (protesting a fair election and overturning), then we have bigger problems, than the economy.

    Reply
  • Mary stone October 14, 2024, 1:17 pm

    Ballmer’s videos were on broadcast TV a few weeks ago (CBS, I think), and he was featured on 10/13/24 60 Minutes episode (more emphasis on his work as Clippers owners). His videos debunk all the noise about the emotional campaign issues that Congress influences (more so than whoever’s president) in easy understood terms. But some cannot and will not be swayed by facts because they are mired in hating perceived common enemy

    Reply
  • John Lanza October 14, 2024, 1:40 pm

    Great post!

    A few questions about your recommendations at the end:
    >Doesn’t the amazing Mint Mobile deal last only 3 months? That doesn’t seem like a great deal.
    >Did you just use Personal Capital for tracking or investing? I ask because we found the investing fees weren’t worth it and switched to Fidelity Zero Total Stock Marketing Index funds.

    Thanks again for your thoughtful insights.

    Reply
    • Mr. Money Mustache October 14, 2024, 5:01 pm

      Thanks for checking those out John!

      The Mint Mobile phone plans are a pretty great deal regardless of the time period ($15/month for 5GB of data which is way more than I use). In fact, since they finally added free data roaming to Canada I am finally going to make the switch from Google Fi which I’ve had for the past 10 years.

      https://mint-mobile.58dp.net/c/2096958/447965/7915

      One interesting feature: they actually *subsidize* the phones and plans if you buy a new phone through them. The deal I want is the Google Pixel 9 at $399 which also unlocks a year of unlimited data at $15/month. So you pay $579 for the phone AND a year of unlimited service – way less than Google wants for just the phone!

      https://www.mintmobile.com/devices/google-pixel-9/6810275/

      Personal Capital: yeah I’m in the same boat – I only use their net worth and spending tracking features, my actual investments are with Vanguard and Betterment.

      Reply
  • tag999 October 14, 2024, 1:41 pm

    On the Harris/Walton policy proposals there is info about incentives for new housing construction to address the shortage.

    https://nhc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Harris-Walz-economic-policy-press-release.pdf

    Reply
  • Tammy from San Diego October 14, 2024, 2:02 pm

    I think this is my first post here, but I wanted to say that I appreciate your tone, your clarity , your honesty and your bravery. Your articles and thoughtful research have helped me quite a bit on my own path, so thank you.

    Reply
  • Clinton October 14, 2024, 4:18 pm

    These are things that I know but forget sometimes.
    I’m grateful for Mr Money Mustache in times like these to keep me grounded and sane.

    Reply
  • Bob Reisner October 14, 2024, 4:19 pm

    Maybe the word ‘controls’ gives the advantage to your point of view. But the simple substitute of ‘heavily influences’, in my mind, changes your conclusions. In 2017, federal spending was around $4 trillion. In 2025 it will be over $7 trillion. Absent a general war or a rogue congress, this inflationary and deficit adding growth was driven by our last two presidents. By intent, ignorance or indifference, it was the call of the last two presidents.

    Presidents have great power especially since the federal system was changed to make the executive stronger. Elected senators took states out of the loop. Congressional districts were originally about 1 district per 30,000 persons. Today about 500,000 per district. Congress is totally a big money purchase. The 2020 NC senate race was a $300 million campaign. The presidential campaign in 2020 was over $2.5 billion. This kind of spending screams that the federal offices and especially the executive are offices that are on the spectrum of ‘influential’ to ‘controlling’.

    Presidents create wars (Vietnam), wage freezes (Nixon), high inflation (Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter), immigrant influx (Biden) and a wide range of ‘bad things’. Some presidents do some good like tax cuts (Regan, Trump) or lower mortgage interest rates (Clinton, Bush). We can disagree on what is a good or bad change but we can usually a president involved in big changes.

    You and many on here might not care because you and they are fully successful and can ride out almost anything that happens. It certainly includes me and my family. But what about those starting out on their life journey or those who are less successful (for whatever reason)?

    Take a look at median household income (HHI) between 1995 and 2022: https://taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/household-income-quintiles The median HHI (call it average) has barely doubled for the bottom 40% of American families from 1995 to 2022 (27 years). Home prices are up over 3x in the same period. New cars about the same. Gas from $1.11 to around $3.5.

    Politics matter. For some of us, it means less rich at worst. For others, like the bottom 40%, it might mean less opportunity to do what many in this group has done.

    Reply
  • Peter Harpster October 14, 2024, 6:27 pm

    MMM – I have had similar thoughts to what you shared today. When voting, I ask myself, is my life better today, from an economic standpoint, than it was four years ago? The answer in 2024, 2020, 2016, and 2012 (my first time being able to vote in a federal election) was YES. I also take a look around and see family and friends complaining about inflation yet continuing to purchase new vehicles, take vacations, and eat out. It doesn’t add up. Thanks for this read.

    Reply
  • Kevin October 14, 2024, 8:56 pm

    Always appreciate a good MMM article to help me chill out. My biggest worry right now (as a 30yo) is the job market. I’ve been fortunate to not be affected by layoffs but know many who have, so my biggest concern is getting laid off and losing headway on purchasing a house at some point. Been applying to new jobs as my current one is getting stale but it has been pretty dry.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

To keep things non-promotional, please use a real name or nickname
(not Blogger @ My Blog Name)

The most useful comments are those written with the goal of learning from or helping out other readers – after reading the whole article and all the earlier comments. Complaints and insults generally won’t make the cut here, but by all means write them on your own blog!

connect

welcome new readers

Take a look around. If you think you are hardcore enough to handle Maximum Mustache, feel free to start at the first article and read your way up to the present using the links at the bottom of each article.

For more casual sampling, have a look at this complete list of all posts since the beginning of time. Go ahead and click on any titles that intrigue you, and I hope to see you around here more often.

Love, Mr. Money Mustache

latest tweets