How is Business and your anticipation for the future?

[WestMichiganCG]

Reagan was a better actor than economist.

 

[J Grant]

Alternatives are out there that fly under the radar as a business. I paid a bee removal company a lot of $ to remove a hive on my property. Ditto for tree removal.

Hair dressing is overlooked - if I had to do it over, I'd go for that if I wanted a low-stress and higher-paid work than appraisal offers. At least in a salon, one is in a social environment, music playing, customers happy and smiling instead of hating you and asking for an ROV, or threatening a board complaint. Their rates are set, and they are not submitting humiliatingly low bids for each order. They get cash tips.

Hair colorists and cutters charge $150-$400 a service, which often takes less than an hour. In a city like NY or Miami, try $400 -$800 a service. Even if the stylists pay for a chair or split with salon, they are outperforming appraisers.

 

[WestMichiganCG]

 

[alebrewer]

View attachment 108984

Ahh... I think it's typically called 'trickle down' (i.e. the idea that the money would eventually trickle down to the masses), but you're exactly correct. This isn't a failure of supply side economics, though. It's a failure of having accessible elections. The grift amongst those who govern our nation is not limited to one or other of the parties. It exists because we incentivize folks to spend millions to get elected - with the expectation that they will be able to entrench themselves and continue the grift. It is an easily researched fact that the one who spends the most money wins the election.

 

[WestMichiganCG]

Ahh... I think it's typically called 'trickle down' (i.e. the idea that the money would eventually trickle down to the masses), but you're exactly correct. This isn't a failure of supply side economics, though. It's a failure of having accessible elections. The grift amongst those who govern our nation is not limited to one or other of the parties. It exists because we incentivize folks to spend millions to get elected - with the expectation that they will be able to entrench themselves and continue the grift. It is an easily researched fact that the one who spends the most money wins the election.

The point I was trying to make was that "trickle down" had the opposite effect. Upward mobility has been stymied and it's from a mix of tax policy benefitting the rich, deregulation and the gutting of unions. My daughter worked at the capital and said that our representatives were at lunch with rich people all day. If I call or email, I'm typically ignored and if I do get a response, it's from an assistant. The power is in the hands of the few and the few seem to be out of touch with the many.

 

[J Grant]

The point I was trying to make was that "trickle down" had the opposite effect. Upward mobility has been stymied and it's from a mix of tax policy benefitting the rich, deregulation and the gutting of unions. My daughter worked at the capital and said that our representatives were at lunch with rich people all day. If I call or email, I'm typically ignored and if I do get a response, it's from an assistant. The power is in the hands of the few and the few seem to be out of touch with the many.

The tragedy of MAGA is that favoring the wealthiest in $ and power is what Trump is doing while feeding a populist vision to his base.

The GOP generally favors the wealthy and corporations more, despising those who claim there is no difference between the parties. For all their faults, the Democrats support higher min wages, unions, affordable or universal health care, and more taxes on the wealthiest ( and enforcement for wealthy tax cheats)

The brilliance of the GOP is that they identify culturally with a value system or hard work and families and win voters over that way. They are for family values - but they don't value families, because the lack of affordable health care, affordable child care, the high cost of education, and lack of jobs is what hurts families.

People are irrationally afraid of communism, which is highly unlikely in America, and they denounce socialism - some social benefits from our own taxes are not pure socialism. It is investing back in our citizens. Defense is important but a bloated defense budget to support the arms industry and fat govt contracts cost far more than the smaller amounts of fraud DOGE found.

 

[alebrewer]

The point I was trying to make was that "trickle down" had the opposite effect. Upward mobility has been stymied and it's from a mix of tax policy benefitting the rich, deregulation and the gutting of unions. My daughter worked at the capital and said that our representatives were at lunch with rich people all day. If I call or email, I'm typically ignored and if I do get a response, it's from an assistant. The power is in the hands of the few and the few seem to be out of touch with the many.

Neither form of government (trickle down/trickle up) works so long as the folks in government are crooks. Which tends to be the case more often than not.

 

[Vermonter]

Exactly. Corruption is a bipartisan sport

 

[Elliott]

There's the problem. If the market (domestic and foreign) could see there way to a 5.5% mortgage, the market would improve substantially.