Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...

M
Category: Economy

EV Supply Outstrips Demand

by | 0808, 6 Nov 23 | , | 19 Comments

One wonders if EV demand has already peaked until there is a leap in the technology or it becomes significantly less expensive.

While there are positive signs in the electric vehicle market, supply is still far outstripping demand.

 

“The demand is not keeping up with production, which is the opposite story of a year ago,” Cox Automotive executive analyst Michelle Krebs told Grist. “We call it the ‘Field of Dreams’ moment. Automakers are building more, but not enough consumers have come to the field.”

 

But Krebs also observed that availability isn’t such a bad thing when compared to the wider market.

 

“A year ago, the average EV price was above the average luxury vehicle price. Today, as inventory and availability build, EV prices are moving closer to the industry average,” Krebs added.

Much of the societal angst for and against EVs is because there is a vanguard of people out there who insist that they are the future for everyone. EVs have become imbued with, ironically, environmental symbolism and represent a statement as much as a vehicle.

Reality is always different. I know a lot of people who love their EVs, but they have a lifestyle that allows for it. They have home chargers and don’t drive a lot. An EV wouldn’t work for my lifestyle. They don’t work for a lot of people, which is why forcing them into the market is causing so much angst.

Biden Considers Further Draining Oil Reserves for Political Gain

by | 1952, 2 Nov 23 | , | 0 Comments

We’re draining our leverage on the world stage.

If the White House follows through with this plan, it would represent the largest release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in its nearly 50-year history and mark the third time in the past six months that the U.S. government has tapped into its emergency supplies. The 180 million barrels of oil reportedly set to be accessed is equivalent to approximately two days of global demand, according to Reuters, and will be drawn from gradually over several months, with some sources saying that the plan is to tap into as much as 1 million barrels of oil per day.

President Joe Biden is expected to confirm these plans at 13:30 p.m. Eastern Time, when the White House has him scheduled to discuss “his administration’s actions to reduce the impact of Putin’s price hike on energy prices and lower gas prices at the pump for American families.”

Wage Transparency Laws Backfire

by | 2110, 30 Oct 23 | , , | 1 Comment

Ope.

State and local pay transparency laws enacted over the last few years have more employers disclosing salary ranges in job descriptions.

 

Yet, wages aren’t growing as expected. The growth of advertised wages for new hires is slowing, according to a report from job posting service ZipRecruiter — and in some cases, it’s reversing, with companies now posting lower pay ranges.

After two years of increasing wages, some companies are now leaving some jobs unfilled because candidates want more pay than the company is prepared to offer. Still, nearly half, 48%, say they have lowered pay bands for some roles in the past year, ZipRecruiter found. The site surveyed more than 2,000 recruiters and hiring managers this summer.

 

“Employers are trying to reset candidate expectations,” said Julia Pollak, chief economist at ZipRecruiter.

I don’t think wages should be transparent. There are innumerable factors that go into deciding on a wage. As long as the employer and employee have reached an agreement as to what the wage should be, then it’s nobody else’s business. If I believe that I am being fairly compensated for doing a job, then what business is it of mine if someone doing a similar job makes more? Or less?

I also detest this trend:

In addition to the states and local jurisdictions requiring employers to post salary ranges in job postings, employees have become more open to talking about their pay with their peers.

US to Borrow Another $776 Billion By End of Year

by | 2057, 30 Oct 23 | , | 0 Comments

Let this sink in. Our government will borrow… BORROW… $1.786 TRILLION in half a year. We are mortgaging our prosperity to people who hate us. Our nation is fast approaching the point of economic collapse.

In a closely watched announcement Monday afternoon, the U.S. Department of the Treasury said it will be looking to borrow $776 billion, which is below the $1.01 trillion in privately held marketable debt the department borrowed in the July-through-September period, the highest ever for that particular quarter.

We are also approaching another fake “shut down” controversy. The Republicans in the House need to force meaningful spending reductions.

Biden’s Social Security Plan Would Further Hammer Economy

by | 1200, 29 Oct 23 | , , | 0 Comments

Why do all of Biden’s policies make things worse? That has to be intentional, right?

In March 2020, the research-driven Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM) analyzed the fiscal impacts of Biden’s Social Security proposals and came to the conclusion that it would, ultimately, hurt economic activity. The economists behind PWBM estimate a 0.6% decline in U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030 and an even greater 0.8% drop in U.S. GDP by 2050.  With a separate report from PwC in 2017 estimating the U.S. will reach $34.1 trillion in GDP by 2050, the implication would be for a $273 billion future cost to America.

 

PWBM’s economists note two prominent issues with Joe Biden’s plan that would lead to this estimated reduction in U.S. GDP by 2050.

 

To begin with, switching to the CPI-E would increase COLAs across the board. Though it would offer a lift to low earners and those with little retirement savings who need it most, it would also encourage high earners and those with a lot of retirement savings to retire sooner or work fewer hours. The end result would be lower productivity for the U.S. economy.

 

The other problem noted by PWBM’s economists is that Biden’s plan would “distort labor supply decisions by more than the current payroll tax.”

 

In plainer English, there’s the perception of a contribution-benefit link when it comes to Social Security. Even though workers aren’t getting back the same dollar they’re contributing to the program via the payroll tax, there’s the belief that if you pay more into Social Security, you’ll get more out of it.

 

If Biden’s proposal to reinstate the payroll tax at $400,000 were to become law, high earners, who’d receive no extra benefit yet would suddenly owe a lot more in taxes, would opt to work less, defer their income, or potentially generate their income from alternative sources that aren’t taxable by Social Security.

Bidenomics Causes Crappy Halloween Treats

by | 1912, 28 Oct 23 | | 5 Comments

It’s candy corn for everyone this year.

For the second year in a row, U.S. shoppers are seeing double-digit inflation in the candy aisle. Candy and gum prices are up an average of 13% this month compared to last October, more than double the 6% increase in all grocery prices, according to Datasembly, a retail price tracker. That’s on top of a 14% increase in candy and gum prices in October 2022.

 

“The price of candy has gotten to be outrageous,” said Jessica Weathers, a small business owner in Shiloh, Illinois. “It doesn’t make sense to me to spend $100 on candy.”

 

Weathers said she usually buys plenty of candy for trick-or-treaters and events at school and church. But this year, she only bought two bags and plans to turn off her porch light on Halloween when she runs out.

 

Other consumers are changing what they buy. Numerator, a market research firm, said its surveys show about one-third of U.S. consumers plan to trade down to value or store brands when buying candy for trick-or-treaters this year.

Biden Ignores Supreme Court

by | 1007, 22 Oct 23 | , | 0 Comments

Our system of government only works when people in power willingly adhere to the Constitution and law.

WashingtonCNN — Although the Supreme Court struck down President Joe Biden’s signature student loan forgiveness program in late June, his administration has found ways to cancel more than $48 billion in debt since then.

The cancellations have come through existing federal student loan forgiveness programs, which are limited to specific categories of borrowers, such as public-sector workers, people defrauded by for-profit colleges, and borrowers who have paid for at least 20 years.

These programs are separate from the rejected forgiveness plan, which would have canceled about $430 billion of the $1.6 trillion of outstanding federal student loan debt all at one time.

Biden Loosens Restrictions on Tyrants as He Tightens Them on Americans

by | 2116, 20 Oct 23 | , , | 1 Comment

His policies seem to hate Americans.

With little fanfare, the Biden administration on Oct. 18 eased sanctions on Venezuela’s oil sector, which should allow the beleaguered socialist nation to export more oil to the United States and to global markets. Venezuela is one of the world’s most oil-rich countries, but incompetent, repressive dictators and US sanctions have wrecked much of the industry and left it pumping a fraction of its potential.

 

The Biden administration says the sanctions relief is aimed at cajoling Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro into holding free-ish elections next year. The deal has a six-month shelf life and can either be extended or canceled, based on whether Maduro seems to be abiding by the terms.

 

But there’s good reason to think the Biden administration cares about oil supplies at least as much as the prospect for democracy in Latin America. Research firm ClearView Energy Partners thinks Venezuela is one of four sources of additional oil the Biden administration has been trying to draw on to the market for the last several months. Two other sources — Iran and Saudi Arabia — may now be off the table due to the mushrooming war between Israel and the Palestinian terror group Hamas. The fourth source is Russian crude, via relaxed enforcement of a US-led price cap scheme that went into effect last December.

Biden Threatens Banks Who Deny Loans to Illegals

by | 0850, 14 Oct 23 | , | 1 Comment

Oh, ffs. So banks shouldn’t consider the credit worthiness of someone who may flee the country at any moment – by their choice or not? It really is frustrating for regular middle class Americans who play by the rules and seem to get denied help at every turn. And don’t get me started on the way the government weakens our banking system with these ridiculous mandates and then bails them out with taxpayer money when the banks collapse.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a joint statement telling financial institutions that while it is not illegal to consider a person’s immigration status in the decision on whether to lend money, an overreliance on it could run afoul of the law, according to the statement. The statement implicates the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), which makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex and more in considering a person’s credit application as the mechanism, even though the law does list citizenship status as a protected attribute.

Student loan repayments restart

by | 2028, 8 Oct 23 | , , , | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News last week:

With October upon us, the well-meaning, morally repugnant, and oft-extended moratorium on student loan repayments has finally come to an end. It is not a crisis. It is a return to normalcy.

 

According to Forbes, borrowers owe $1.75 trillion in student debt, including federal and private loans, or about $28,950 per student. Interestingly, the average debt for just federal loans is $35,210 per borrower, indicating that federal loans are granted much more liberally than private loans. In Wisconsin, the average borrower owes $30,778 in federal student loans.

 

That is a lot of money by any measurement. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that many of the people who owe tens of thousands of dollars for their education are not earning enough money to comfortably pay it back. It is difficult for a person earning $36,754 per year (the average per-capita income in Wisconsin in 2021 according to the U.S. Census Bureau) to fit student loan payments into their monthly budget — especially in Biden’s inflationary economy.

 

Student loans have been around for generations, but the issue has become acute in recent decades because of two aggravating factors. First, the cost of a college education has skyrocketed. Between 1992 and 2022, the inflation-adjusted average cost of college at a four-year public university increased by 26.7% according to College Board. A $50,000 education in 1992 now costs $129,000. Over the same period, inflation-adjusted median household income rose by only 17.6%. The price of higher education has been increasing much faster than students’ ability to pay.

 

The reasons for those increases are myriad. The federalization of student loans made for easy money for universities to tap. They took advantage of students flush with borrowed cash to bloat up their administrations and go on a building binge.

 

Meanwhile, the second aggravating factor is that demand has risen as high schools across America portray a college education as the only viable path to stave off poverty. Instead of portraying the military, the trades, entrepreneurship, or other career paths as equally viable, too many high school teachers and counselors — all college graduates themselves — have culturalized kids to think that anyone without a college degree is lesser.

 

Compounding the misleading culturalization, the abysmally wretched financial education provided in those high schools leave prospective students ill-equipped to evaluate the risk/reward of financing a college degree with debt. Ignorant of the power of compounding interest, too many kids are borrowing tens of thousands of dollars to get a degree with little market value. The result is that they are unable to get jobs after graduation that pay enough to easily pay off the debt.

 

It is true that some people are not getting the value out of their degrees that they had hoped for or were promised. It is true that college costs more than it should. It is true that student loan payments make it more difficult to afford other things and that everything is more expensive than it used to be. It is true that lenders were all too eager to dole out money without any consideration of the degree being pursued or potential future earnings of the graduate.

 

All of these things are true, but it does not absolve the borrowers from the obligation to pay off their own debt. It is not a financial question. It is a moral one. If you borrowed the money, then you must pay it back. To fail to do so makes you a shameful deadbeat and a drain on your family and community. Having a college degree does not make you any less of a loser if you renege on your obligations.

 

Furthermore, nobody wants to hear you whine about your student loans. In 2022, less than 38% of adults 25 and older had at least a bachelor’s degree. Three in five adults in the United States do not have a college degree and did not sign up to pay off the debt of people who have one. Most adults who do have a college degree have either paid off their student loans, are paying off their own student loans, or never took out a loan in the first place. They did not sign up to subsidize deadbeats who do not want to pay off their student loans.

 

The college and student loan system is terribly broken and has led far too many people into borrowing more money than they can easily afford to buy degrees of marginal value. Honor, respect, and dignity demand that the borrowers pay it back as promised.

Bidenomics = Skimpflation

by | 0744, 4 Oct 23 | | 5 Comments

It’s fun that we all get to learn these new words in Biden’s economy.

Products on shelves are getting quantifiably smaller, yet you’re paying the same price: a practice known as ‘shrinkflation’. But in addition to shrinking products, businesses are also cutting back on the quality and availability of their services, while keeping prices steady. This is called ‘skimpflation’ – and although the changes are sometimes significant, they often fly under the radar.

 

“Skimpflation is defined as businesses ‘skimping’ on the quality of a product or service,” says Scott A Wolla, economic education officer at the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis. As raw prices go up with inflation, businesses skimp by spending less on services or materials to stay profitable – cuts that get passed down to the customer, even as prices remain stable.

 

[…]

 

In grocery stores, explains Balagtas, it’s now common for customers to bag their own items at checkout instead of having a clerk do it for them. The number of self-checkout stations has increased around the world, with fewer workers available to help customers pay – a change some consumers construe as a degradation of service.

 

Grocery aisles are also rife with skimpflation. Along with shrinking size and quantity of products, food manufacturers are applying skimpflation to the quality of goods to reduce costs. Often, this includes swapping out expensive, premium ingredients for cheaper, lower-quality ones while keeping the same price tags, or even raising them. To save money, for instance, Balagtas says some ice cream manufacturers have reduced some of the expensive milkfat in their products, instead replacing them with “other ingredients, including water and other components of milk, but also sweeteners”, says Balagtas.

Student loan repayments restart

by | 0731, 3 Oct 23 | , , , | 6 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

Meanwhile, the second aggravating factor is that demand has risen as high schools across America portray a college education as the only viable path to stave off poverty. Instead of portraying the military, the trades, entrepreneurship, or other career paths as equally viable, too many high school teachers and counselors — all college graduates themselves — have culturalized kids to think that anyone without a college degree is lesser.

 

Compounding the misleading culturalization, the abysmally wretched financial education provided in those high schools leave prospective students ill-equipped to evaluate the risk/reward of financing a college degree with debt. Ignorant of the power of compounding interest, too many kids are borrowing tens of thousands of dollars to get a degree with little market value. The result is that they are unable to get jobs after graduation that pay enough to easily pay off the debt.

 

It is true that some people are not getting the value out of their degrees that they had hoped for or were promised. It is true that college costs more than it should. It is true that student loan payments make it more difficult to afford other things and that everything is more expensive than it used to be. It is true that lenders were all too eager to dole out money without any consideration of the degree being pursued or potential future earnings of the graduate.

 

All of these things are true, but it does not absolve the borrowers from the obligation to pay off their own debt. It is not a financial question. It is a moral one. If you borrowed the money, then you must pay it back. To fail to do so makes you a shameful deadbeat and a drain on your family and community. Having a college degree does not make you any less of a loser if you renege on your obligations.

 

Furthermore, nobody wants to hear you whine about your student loans. In 2022, less than 38% of adults 25 and older had at least a bachelor’s degree. Three in five adults in the United States do not have a college degree and did not sign up to pay off the debt of people who have one. Most adults who do have a college degree have either paid off their student loans, are paying off their own student loans, or never took out a loan in the first place. They did not sign up to subsidize deadbeats who do not want to pay off their student loans.

 

The college and student loan system is terribly broken and has led far too many people into borrowing more money than they can easily afford to buy degrees of marginal value. Honor, respect, and dignity demand that the borrowers pay it back as promised.

Automakers Can’t Meet Onerous Government Regulations

by | 1704, 29 Sep 23 | , | 0 Comments

Just remember that as Biden mouths support for auto workers, he is actively killing off their jobs.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The Biden administration proposal to hike fuel economy standards through 2032 is not feasible and could cost automakers a total of more than $14 billion in fines, an automotive group said Friday.

 

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents General Motors, Toyota Motor, Volkswagen, Hyundai and others, said the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Corporate Average Fuel Economy proposal “exceeds maximum feasibility” and that the agency projects “manufacturers will pay over $14 billion in non-compliance penalties between 2027 and 2032”.

 

The fines would impact one in every two light trucks and one in every three passenger cars in 2027-2032, the group added.

 

A separate document viewed by Reuters said the Detroit Three – GM, Ford Motor and Chrysler-parent Stellantis – would face about $10 billion in CAFE fines in that period.

“Unemployment happens here first”

by | 1925, 28 Sep 23 | , | 1 Comment

The technology to automate almost every fast food job is getting cheaper and cheaper. And tech doesn’t come in late. It doesn’t whine about the patriarchy. It doesn’t have body odor. It doesn’t steal from you. It just works. And if the customer gets a good burger with a lower risk of someone having spit in it… all the better.

(Reuters) -Fast-food workers in California will earn a minimum of $20 an hour and have a greater say in setting workplace standards under a new bill signed into law on Thursday by Governor Gavin Newsom.

 

“The future happens here first,” Newsom said at an event in Los Angeles, with labor officials and fast-food workers flanking him.

 

The legislation emerged as part of a broader compromise in which fast-food companies agreed to remove a 2024 ballot referendum asking voters to repeal a law aimed at improving wages and working conditions for employees.

 

Labor unions, meanwhile, dropped their push to hold fast-food corporations liable for violations committed by their franchisees.

The median fast-food worker in the U.S. earned $13.43 an hour in 2022, while those in California made an average of $16.60 an hour, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The new minimum, which takes effect in April, equates to an annual salary of $41,600.

Wisconsin is shrinking

by | 0735, 15 Aug 23 | , , | 2 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a slice:

We are going to return to a topic that this column broached several weeks ago because policymakers in Madison fail to appreciate the severity of what is to come. Wisconsin is losing population. This is happening in a time of national population growth and the negative consequences will be unavoidable. The time to act is now.

 

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the United States added 1.8 million, or 0.6%, people between 2020 and 2022. Over the same period, Wisconsin lost 3,372 people, or 0.06%, of its population. After counting all of the people who moved out of the state and subtracting all of the people who moved into the state, Wisconsin’s population is declining despite the fact that the nation, as a whole, is gaining population.

 

A deeper look into the data reveals an even more dire situation. In the prime working years between 25 and 59 years old, Wisconsin lost nearly 39,000, or 1.5%, of its people. This is the age group that fills jobs, pays the most taxes, and spends the most on things like houses, vehicles, groceries, and the rest that fuels the consumer economy. Even worse, men are leaving the state at a rate faster than women. Given that on average more men participate in the labor force than women, that means that the decline in the available labor force is more pronounced than the overall number suggests.

 

It gets worse. Coming up behind those working adults, Wisconsin’s population is declining even faster. Between the ages of birth and 19 years old, Wisconsin lost almost 41,000, or 2.8%, of its people. That means that there will be fewer people entering the workforce to replace those exiting.

 

The only age group that is increasing in Wisconsin is at the top of the age groups. Wisconsin gained almost 67,000, or a whopping 4.6%, people above the age of 60. This age group tends to be at the end of their working career and are drawing down their consumption as they enjoy their well-earned silver years.

USA’s Credit Score Declines

by | 1225, 2 Aug 23 | , | 10 Comments

Ouch.

Fitch Ratings downgraded the United States’ long-term foreign currency issuer default rating to AA+ from AAA on Tuesday, pointing to “expected fiscal deterioration over the next three years,” an erosion of governance and a growing general debt burden.

 

[…]

 

“In Fitch’s view, there has been a steady deterioration in standards of governance over the last 20 years, including on fiscal and debt matters, notwithstanding the June bipartisan agreement to suspend the debt limit until January 2025,” the ratings agency said.

 

Fitch also highlighted the rising general government deficit, which it anticipates will rise to 6.3% of gross domestic product in 2023, from 3.7% in 2022. “Cuts to non-defense discretionary spending (15% of total federal spending) as agreed in the Fiscal Responsibility Act offer only a modest improvement to the medium-term fiscal outlook,” Fitch said.

The agency also noted that a combination of tightening credit conditions, weakening business investment and a slowdown in consumption could lead the economy into a “mild” recession in the fourth quarter of 2023 and first quarter of next year.

All true. The federal government is led by a bipartisan group of big-spending geriatrics with no thought to America’s long-term solvency. It like the broke grandpa running up credit cards in a booze-fueled binge at a casino. At some point, you gotta cut him off.

Milwaukee County Looks at Ways to Get Landlords to Rent to Section 8 Tenants

by | 0710, 11 Jul 23 | , | 2 Comments

This is a good example of the power of incentives.

“If Milwaukee County cannot use a metaphorical stick to force landlords to accept tenants with a Section 8 voucher, then we should consider offering a carrot,” Rolland told the Journal Sentinel. “At the end of the day, Milwaukee County is healthier when everybody can find a safe place to live.”

 

The Section 8 tenant-based Housing Choice Voucher Program was designed to help with rental assistance for low-income residents and families with a family income of no more than 50% of the median income of the county, roughly $27,396, according to U.S. Census Bureau data.

 

[…]

 

In 2018, the County Board amended the County Code of General Ordinance about fair housing and included “receipt of rental or housing assistance” as a protected class.

“Big picture: the ordinance was well-intentioned, but after five years of it being in place we can see that renters were not getting the help that they needed,” Rolland said. “And today we know that punishments for landlords are unenforceable.”

Milwaukee County tried to force landlords to rent to Section 8 tenants and it failed. In the end, whatever minimal risk a landlord takes to avoid renting to Section 8 tenants is outweighed by the potential risk of renting to them.

What the politicians fail to understand is why many landlords avoid renting to Section 8 tenants. We all know why… you can identify the apartments in town that accept Section 8 tenants. They tend to be the ones that are the most run down and trashy. They are the apartments that we encourage our adult children to avoid.

Why? Because many (not all) Section 8 tenants treat their apartments like crap. They don’t care for it and often leave it damaged when they leave.

Why? Because they aren’t using their own money to pay for it. The tenant lacks the pride of ownership, even if it is rented, that comes with paying for something with money that he or she earned through the sweat of their brow or firing of neurons. There is no incentive for the tenant to care for the apartment because it costs them nothing to treat it like crap. Thus, many landlords avoid them because the landlords do bear the costs of damage and neglect.

So let’s follow the train of thought… if Milwaukee County creates a bundle of financial incentives for landlords to accept Section 8 tenants, it will likely work for some. More landlords will accept Section 8 housing. Why? Because they are no longer bearing the burden and cost of damage and neglect to their properties. That burden will shift to the taxpayers who are funding the incentives.

So in the end, the taxpayer becomes the forgotten man who bears all of the risks and costs and derives none of the benefits. The tenants benefit from subsidized rents. The landlords benefit from both the additional tenants and the additional incentives. The taxpayer is paying both bills plus their own rent.

Thus spins the flywheel of ever-growing government.

The beginning of a long winter

by | 0628, 11 Jul 23 | , | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

One must give credit where credit is due. Democrat Gov. Tony Evers has had as successful a year as any governor in Wisconsin history, and he did it with strong Republican majorities in both houses of the Legislature. He has begun his second term in office with a lengthy string of accomplishments.

 

[…]

 

Evers was just getting started. Taking the big-spending budget bill crafted by legislative Republicans that already increased spending by almost 10%, Evers used his powerful veto to reshape the budget to his liking.

 

The biggest change was in the income tax. The Republicans had written a tax cut into the budget that would have simplified and lowered the state income tax such that it would have resulted in a $3.5 billion tax decrease. Evers reshaped the tax plan to where it is actually a $603.4 million tax increase. That is a swing of $4.1 net increase in taxes with a strike of his pen according to the estimate by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau. The governor does not have the power to appropriate that money, so it will be seen in future years as an unallocated budget surplus that will burn holes in the pockets of politicians. We remember that we entered this budget with a $7 billion budget surplus that was completely spent.

 

In addition, the governor used his veto pen to give local school districts the power to increase the property tax levy by $325 per pupil per year until the year 2425. That is over four centuries of tax increases that, if local school districts tax to the max like usual, will result in an increase in school spending of $130,650 per student, or $111 billion increase in K-12 taxing and spending with the current student population.

 

[…]

 

All told, the governor delivered on his campaign promises and advanced his ideology. Under his watch, Wisconsin will see record increases in government spending coupled with record increases of property, sales, and income taxes to support that spending. He has reset the baseline of state government spending to the highest level it has ever been. His party has waged successful campaigns to put radical leftists on the Supreme Court to further protect and advance his ideological beliefs. 

 

Were I a leftist, I would be applauding his success in the face of a Legislature controlled by the oppositions. As a conservative, however, I lament that Evers has pushed Wisconsin into what will be at least a decade of decline.

 

Pray that it is only a decade.

EVs Aren’t the Savings You Think

by | 0934, 8 Jul 23 | , , | 19 Comments

Heh.

However experts are warning that it takes an average of six years to break even on a purchase – and it can take up to a decade for the premium to pay off.

 

Customers are also taking to social media to express their regret at their EV purchase, with difficulties tracking down charging spots and unexpected costs. So how long does it really take to save money on an electric car – and is it worth the price?

 

[…]

 

When it comes to fuel, electricity is generally cheaper than gas. On July 7, the average cost of gas in the US was $3.53 a gallon.

 

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the cost of charging an EV is equivalent to filling up a gas tank at roughly $1 per gallon.

 

Gas prices also tend to be more volatile than electricity prices, which have historically been more stable.

 

[…]

 

The calculator estimates that the electric car owner will save $1,404 a year charging their vehicle rather than filling up on gas.

 

By dividing the price premium on the EV by the estimated annual savings on fuel, it would take over eight years to break even on the purchase.

The article shares stories from EV buyers who have buyer’s remorse. I say shame on them for not doing more homework before buying their cars. I’ll say the same thing I’ve said for years… EVs can be an excellent option for some people and a terrible option for others.

EV discussions have become common with people I know. I’ll give two examples of people who have Teslas and love them. Both are high-income people where the purchase price was not much of a factor. It’s more about the experience.

The first person lives in the Bay Area. He rarely drives for more than a couple of hours a day and has a charger in his garage. He commented that he can’t remember the last time that he charged in public. When he travels, he will generally fly if it is more than a 3 or 4 hour drive. He loves his Tesla and raves about the lack of maintenance required (oil changes, etc.) The Tesla simply has fewer moving parts to maintain. He did comment that it burns through tires rather quickly, but that’s a minor inconvenience.

The other person lives in Colorado. The person is single and travels a lot. The person likes his Tesla, but is annoyed by a few of the aesthetic features like the gull wing doors and the long windshield. This person works from home and doesn’t drive much, but occasionally goes on a long trip. In a recent example, the person drove from Colorado to Tulsa to Austin and back home. The travel time took twice as long as it would have in a gasoline car because of the time needed to charge. And in one example riding through the panhandle of Texas, the car almost ran out of charge before sliding into a station. To compensate, the person slowed way down. Overall, the person was annoyed with the travel time, but as a single person without a pressing reason to get back home, the extra time of travel was just that – an annoyance.

In both circumstances, the people like their EVs and are willing to put up with the inconveniences, and, more importantly, can afford to put up with the inconveniences.

In my own case, we do not own a garage or driveway in which to charge an EV. We would have to rely on public chargers. Also, we regularly take cross-country road trips (4 to 6 times a year) where we need to make the transit in a day or two to work around my work schedule. Owning an EV would be incompatible with our lifestyle.

This is where I would like the national conversation to progress. EVs are not morally or economically superior to gasoline vehicles (GVs). They are simply a different technology designed to complete the same task of personal transportation. The choice should center around lifestyle and preference instead of being some political or ethical talisman.

Who Pays for Misadventure?

by | 0743, 25 Jun 23 | , | 1 Comment

It’s a good question.

“Five people have just lost their lives and to start talking about insurance, all the rescue efforts and the cost can seem pretty heartless — but the thing is, at the end of the day, there are costs,” said Arun Upneja, dean of Boston University’s School of Hospitality Administration and a researcher on tourism.

“There are many people who are going to say, ‘Why should the society spend money on the rescue effort if (these people) are wealthy enough to be able to … engage in these risky activities?’”

 

That question is gaining attention as very wealthy travelers in search of singular adventures spend big to scale peaks, sail across oceans and blast off for space.

 

The U.S. Coast Guard declined Friday to provide a cost estimate for its efforts to locate the Titan, the submersible investigators say imploded not far from the world’s most famous shipwreck. The five people lost included a billionaire British businessman and a father and son from one of Pakistan’s most prominent families. The operator charged passengers $250,000 each to participate in the voyage.

 

“We cannot attribute a monetary value to Search and Rescue cases, as the Coast Guard does not associate cost with saving a life,” the agency said.

 

While the Coast Guard’s cost for the mission is likely to run into the millions of dollars, it is generally prohibited by federal law from collecting reimbursement related to any search or rescue service, said Stephen Koerting, a U.S. attorney in Maine who specializes in maritime law.

 

But that does not resolve the larger issue of whether wealthy travelers or companies should bear responsibility to the public and governments for exposing themselves to such risk.

I rather agree with the Coast Guard’s stance. The vast majority of their rescues are not for wealthy adventurers, but for normal people who find themselves in distress – perhaps due to some negligence, but often due to unfortunate circumstances. All of their work is supported by tax dollars for the general good. I don’t really want our government to get in the habit of rendering vital services based on the ability of the recipient to reimburse. While some might get frustrated with the expensive rescue of wealthy people who take extraordinary risks, the action of forcing reimbursement would likely have the opposite of the desired effect. If the Coast Guard can get paid for rescuing rich people, who is to say that they won’t allocate more resources to that effort than rescuing less affluent people? Does not a public university (another taxpayer funded institution) lavish more access and resources on their wealthy students than on middle class ones?

Whenever money changes hands, an incentive is created. I don’t think we want our Cast Guard to be incentivized to allocate scare resources based on the recipients’ ability to pay instead of their risk of life.

Login | Register

Archives

Categories

Pin It on Pinterest