I can only stand just so much of this joy….

Harris-Biden inner circle have almost no business experience — no wonder Americans are hurting

In her one and only interview of the presidential campaign, Kamala Harris claimed she is “very proud” of the economy she and Joe Biden have presided over for almost four years.

Her rosy view of their management of inflation echoes Biden’s tone-deaf boasts about what a great job he’s done, while Americans struggle to pay for groceries.

“I’m very proud of the work that we have done that has brought inflation down to less than 3%,” Harris told CNN last week.

Considering they inherited an inflation rate of 1.4%, and their reckless spending propelled it to a peak of 9.1% in June 2022, that’s not exactly something to boast about.

Harris said she is “proud” of the Biden administration’s record on the economy. Will Lanzoni/CNN

Biden and Harris ignored warnings that the $1.9 trillion “American Rescue” spending package would overstimulate the economy at precisely the wrong time, just as we were emerging from pandemic lockdowns in March 2021.

Their reckless disregard of economic reality turbocharged consumption and drove inflation to 40-year highs.

But at least Harris had the sense not to declare Bidenomics a “success” when prompted to do so by interviewer Dana Bash.

“There’s more to do,” she admitted. “But that’s good work.”

What exactly that “good work” would entail is a mystery, considering Harris still doesn’t have a single policy on her website, refuses to do interviews like a normal candidate, and is relying on compliant journalists to walk back her most whacky ideas.

But what policies she has divulged so far are not promising: Soviet-style price controls to address food inflation — which she attributes to “price gouging” — and $25,000 handouts to first home buyers which will simply push up the price of real estate are two of her brain explosions.

In her embarrassingly brief CNN interview, to which she insisted on bringing wingman Tim Walz for emotional support, Harris muttered something vague about an “opportunity economy” being her “day one” priority.

But nobody has a clue what she means. One way of assessing how a Harris presidency would affect the economy is to look at the economic competence of her advisers and other administration personnel, many of whom are likely to play a role if she is elected.

Alarmingly, a new report titled “Amateur Hour” from the Committee to Unleash Prosperity shows that most of the administration’s top officials have zero experience in business.

Economists Stephen Moore and Jon Decker have analyzed the work records and résumés of the top 66 officials who deal with economic policy, regulation, commerce, energy and finance and found 58 percent have virtually no business experience.

That includes Biden, Harris and Vice Presidential nominee Walz, none of whom has worked off the public teat. (A dubious tale Harris once told about working at McDonald’s while in college doesn’t count.)

Moore and Decker found that the average business experience of administration appointees is only 3.1 years and the median years of business experience is a big fat zero.

“The vast majority of the Biden-Harris economic/commerce team members are professional politicians, lawyers, academics, community organizers, or government employees.”

Only 12% of Biden-Harris appointees have extensive business experience, defined as 10 or more years in the private sector.

“Amateur Hour” is an update of a similar report Moore and Decker produced in 2022, but this time they have focused on six of Harris’ economic and finance advisers and found they have a “disturbingly low level of business/finance background . . .

“The total number of years of business experience for these top six staffers was 14.

“They combined for an average of 2.3 years and, once again, the median was zero years.”

Only one of the top six Harris appointees, her chief of staff, Lorraine Voles, had extensive business experience and only two had any business experience at all.

The average business experience of Biden-Harris appointees is well behind the record of President Donald Trump’s cabinet officials during his last year in office, who had an average of 13 years of business experience.

A new report from the Committee to Unleash Prosperity found that most of the Biden-Harris administration’s top officials have little to no business experience. Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post

“If history is any guide, it is likely that if Kamala Harris is elected president, many if not most of the Biden top officials will have positions of power in her administration — though possibly in different appointments and agencies 


“Based on the personnel that Harris has surrounded herself with, we would expect a continuation of the anti-business agenda that we have seen under Biden — and perhaps worse.”

Without management experience or economic competence, key officials in the administration have bungled their portfolios.

The authors single out Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, the former small town mayor of South Bend, Indiana, who has presided over a $6 billion program to build half a million electric vehicle stations — which has produced fewer than 20.

The report highlighted Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s failure to build promised electric vehicle charging stations. Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, the former Michigan governor, “has had a hard time with reporters even citing very basic energy statistics that calls into question her familiarity with the critical national energy issues she is overseeing.”

Granholm has said that she doesn’t have “a magic wand” to deal with rising gasoline and home heating costs, but her department has “helped kill vital pipelines and energy production and drilling facilities that could [help] alleviate the crisis.”

Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, a lawyer with little business or health care experience “botched the billion-dollar program for free COVID testing kits and has de-emphasized treatments for COVID that could have saved lives.”

Many Biden-Harris officials seem to be more interested in pursuing progressive social policies objectives than in expanding the economy, the authors say.

Neera Tanden, the head of the Domestic Policy Council, career experience is solely in political campaigns and nonprofits. AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File

For example, Lail Brainard, Biden’s choice as vice-chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, “wants climate change and gender equity issues to be concerns and priorities of the nation’s central bank [and] wants banks to stop lending to oil and gas companies.”

Phillip Jefferson, an economist at Davidson College, is now Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Board with no private sector experience. “This might explain why the Fed has failed in its mission over the past four years to keep inflation low and the dollar stable.”

Neera Tanden, who heads the administration’s Domestic Policy Council, has spent her entire career working for political campaigns and nonprofits.

Moore and Decker point to a few exceptions, such as Biden’s newish chief of staff Jeff Zients, who has over two decades of experience in venture capital, tech, and health care, and Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo, who worked for 11 years as a successful venture capitalist.

Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo recently claimed she wasn’t familiar with the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ downward revision of its recent jobs report. Ron Sachs – CNP for NY Post

However, Raimondo beclowned herself last month when she told ABC News she wasn’t “familiar” with the Bureau of Labor statistics downwards revision to its latest jobs report of a staggering 800,000 jobs. Raimondo tried to claim it was “misinformation” from Trump.

Doubling down on the administration’s progressive proclivity for wealth redistribution, higher tax rates on the rich, more regulation, more social welfare and climate-centric energy policies, a President Harris is a bleak prospect for the country’s economic wellbeing.

Polls show most Americans believe the economy is headed in the wrong direction, but there’s no hope on the horizon if she wins.

If they’re pushing such disconnected message, perhaps it’s because their brains (what they have of them) are disconnected from reality

If Biden Saved the Economy, Why Do We Need Price Controls?

Democrats are pushing a jarringly disconnected economic message.

Biden “recovered all those millions of jobs that [Donald] Trump watched slip away,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D–Ill.) declared. Biden “rebuilt the economy” after the pandemic put it “flat on its back,” intoned Sen. Chris Coons (D–Conn.), a longtime Biden stan.

Biden himself put the cherry on top. “We’ve had one of the most extraordinary four years of progress ever,” the president said. “We gone from economic crisis to the strongest economy in the entire world,” he claimed, pointing to job creation figures, economic growth, higher wages, and “inflation down, way down, and continuing to go down.”

If so, someone should probably tell Vice President Kamala Harris about all that.

Just four days ago, Harris outlined plans for gigantic government interventions in the economy, including price controls. In what was billed as the first major policy speech of her hastily assembled campaign, Harris promised to implement the “first-ever federal ban on price gouging on food and groceries” and to take other actions to empower the federal government to “bring down costs.”
(There’s been some debate in the days since her speech about whether it is fair to say Harris has called for price controls, but economist Brian Albretch has laid out clearly why she in fact did, writing that “any policy that gives the government the power to decide what price increases are ‘fair’ or ‘unfair’ is effectively a price control system. It doesn’t matter if you call it ‘anti-gouging,’ ‘fair pricing,’ or ‘consumer protection’—the effect is the same. When bureaucrats, not markets, determine acceptable prices, we’re dealing with price controls.”)

Continue reading “”

The Message Is Plain

There are no property rights in the United States
at least, none that the State deigns to honor.

Do you remember Teresa Ghilarducci? I do. Any American who has a 401(k), an IRA, or some equivalent should know about her and her chief ambition:

     Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.
     Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.
     The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration
.
     The current retirement system, Ghilarducci said, “exacerbates income and wealth inequalities” because tax breaks for voluntary retirement accounts are “skewed to the wealthy because it is easier for them to save, and because they receive bigger tax breaks when they do.”

     All workers would have 5 percent of their annual pay deducted from their paychecks and deposited to the GRA. They would still be paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, as would the employers. The GRA contribution would be shared equally by the worker and the employee. Employers no longer would be able to write off their contributions. Any capital gains would be taxable year-on-year.

Socialists are forever talking about “inequality” (or in their more recent argot, “inequity”) because it affords them a pretext for seizing our money and property in pursuit of their agenda. It’s well established historically that “inequality” increases under socialism, but they’d rather we didn’t notice that. At any rate, they constantly seek rationales under which to “redistribute” what we’ve earned and saved. We must all be equally poor – except for our loving rulers, of course. Anything else would be “unfair!”

Continue reading “”

The US Fed may kill the Biden presidency

It is no secret that one of President Biden’s key weaknesses in the upcoming presidential election is the economy. A USA TODAY/Suffolk University poll in March put Trump at 40pc, just ahead of Biden on 38pc. The same poll showed many Americans remain undecided; among those surveyed inflation and the economy were listed as the most important issues determining their vote.

As such, a core problem for Biden is the recent price rises and resultant cost of living crisis. In the past few months, political strategists have marvelled at the fact that the economy under Biden was growing (at 3.2pc in the fourth quarter of 2024) but polling on Biden’s performance on the economy was dismal.

A recent paper led by former treasury of the secretary Larry Summers has helped clear up the discrepancy. Summers and his co-authors show that if we adjust American inflation data to consider changes in methodology that have taken place over the past few decades, we see inflation not peaking at 9pc, as the official data indicates, but rather at 18pc. The paper also suggests that inflation measured in line with historical norms would have been 8pc at the end of 2023, not the 3pc shown in the official statistics.

This explains why the average American voter is angry at Biden about the economy: prices are still rising at a rapid clip and living standards have been substantially eroded under his administration. This puts the Federal Reserve in a very unusual position this electoral cycle, because what the central bank does in the coming months could have a huge impact on the outcome of the election.

Continue reading “”

Proof eco-extremists don’t want to fix the problem, they want to tear down society.

This week, Harvard University has shut down a Bill Gates-funded geoengineering experiment. The controversial Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment, or SCoPEx, run by professors David Keith and Frank Keutsch, aimed to study the potential future implementation of geoengineering by crop dusting sulphuric acid into our stratosphere. Nice.

Even if you put aside the almost instant validity such an experiment would give to conspiracy theories like chemtrails and HAARP, it still sounds a bit too much, playing with our thin air like that — in an unprecedented, and potentially catastrophic, manner, too.

But let’s not kid ourselves. The plug wasn’t pulled over fears of playing fast and loose with the venusformation of Earth’s atmosphere.

Nor was it due to the Harvard faculty’s occasional (yet frequent) dalliance with plagiarism or concerns over the lack of diversity within the ivory tower.

No, according to the MIT Technology Review, it was something else entirely: “Even studying the possibility of solar geoengineering eases the societal pressure to cut greenhouse gas emissions,” it clarified.

The Harvard Crimson picked up the scent too, noting that “a vocal minority of scientists have voiced concern that [the experiment’s] technology may provide an excuse to reduce pressure to cut emissions.”

And that’s the irony. Fixing “climate change” without destroying capitalism and everything the West stands for does nothing for the revolution.

What a waste of a good crisis!

It turns out, the climate change business thrives on more climate change alarmism. Whodathunk?

Continue reading “”

Tell me about it. My insurance premium went up 10% and the Tahoee is a year older…..Of course I’m a year older too and ‘seasoned citizens’ supposedly are higher risks as they get older.


Why auto insurance costs are rising at the fastest rate in 47 years.

As car prices moderate from a pandemic-era surge, insurance has pushed the cost of car ownership to the brink for many Americans.

New data out this week showed auto insurance costs rose 20.6% from the prior year in February, matching January’s increase as the most since December 1976, when costs rose 22.4% over the prior year.

On an annual basis, motor vehicle insurance costs rose 17.4% in 2023, the most since a 28.7% increase in 1976, according to data from the BLS.

The sticker shock hitting many American drivers is being driven by a rise in accidents, the severity of accidents, and geographical factors combining to create a perfect storm and push costs higher.

The most alarming factor driving insurance costs higher is more severe claims.

“In general, the numbers of crashes, injuries, and fatalities are up, and inflation has made the cost of repairs more expensive,” AAA spokesperson Robert Sinclair told Yahoo Finance.

Sinclair said motorists developed “bad habits” on the road during pandemic lockdowns, contributing to current behavior. For example, as the New York Times reported earlier this year, researchers in Nevada discovered that during the pandemic, motorists were speeding more (and driving through intersections), seat belt use was down, and intoxicated driving arrests were up to near historic highs.

Sinclair also pointed to NHTSA data, which found that in 2021, at the height of the pandemic, road fatalities increased by 10.5% to their highest level since 2005, even while most Americans stayed at home. The NHTSA said it was the highest percentage increase it had ever seen. The agency found that fatalities in 2022 only decreased by 0.3% as compared to 2021.

Insurance tech firm Insurify found that auto insurance premium hikes were “largely due to the skyrocketing price of auto parts and the increasing number and severity of claims.” And while increases may moderate, analysts still believe further premium hikes are on the horizon.

“While the magnitude of rate increases is likely to ease somewhat, after several years of double-digit increases, some lingering claim cost inflation and adverse claim severity and frequency will likely lead to a ‘higher for longer’ auto rate environment,” CFRA analyst Cathy Seifert told Yahoo Finance.

Not surprisingly, severe accidents leave insurance companies with rising loss ratios, or a share of premiums collected that insurers paid out in claims.

Continue reading “”

Bidenflation Is Even Worse Than You Think.

It doesn’t take a master’s degree in economics to understand that prices are up in every sector of the economy. The economy under Joe Biden is nickel-and-diming us at every turn, and Americans can see past the smoke and mirrors that the White House is using to try to convince us that everything is fine.

The federal government’s measure of price increases, the Consumer Price Index (CPI), has consistently shown that inflation isn’t going away. The most recent CPI report indicates a 3.2% increase in prices from Feb. 2023 to Feb. 2024. That’s a significant increase, but it only shows the increase over a rolling 12 months.

To get a clearer picture of what Bidenflation looks like, we need to compare prices between now and when Biden took office. That’s what TIPPinsights did, and the results show you that Bidenflation isn’t just worse than the White House wants you to believe — it’s worse than you might have realized.

“We developed the TIPP CPI, a metric that uses February 2021, the month after President Biden’s inauguration, as its base to measure the rate of change,” TIPPinsights explains. “All TIPP CPI measures are anchored to the base month of February 2021, making it exclusive to the economy under President Biden’s watch.”

The rationale is that a year-over-year comparison looks at current prices next to already inflated prices, which masks the effect of inflation over time. The TIPP CPI measures Bidenflation as a whopping 18%. TIPPinsights broke down various sectors of the economy in a similar way that the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does in its CPI.

Related: Welcome to Nickel-and-Dime Nation

Here’s a sample (emphasis in the original):

Food prices increased by 20.6% under Biden compared to only 2.2% as per BLS CPI, a difference of 18.5 points.

TIPP CPI data show that Energy prices increased by 29.6%. But, according to the BLS CPI, energy prices improved by 1.9%. The difference between the two is a whopping 31.5 points.

The Core CPI measures the price increase for all items, excluding food and energy. In the year-over-year measure, the Core TIPP CPI is 16.5% compared to 3.8% BLS CPI, a 12.8-point difference.

Further, gasoline prices have increased by 29.9% since President Biden took office, whereas the BLS CPI shows that gasoline prices have improved by 3.9%, a difference of 33.8 points.

Americans have noticed these differences in prices. Two recent TIPP polls have shown this phenomenon. One shows that 84% of American adults are concerned about inflation — 51% “very concerned” and 33% “somewhat concerned.” It’s the 25th consecutive month that over 80% of people surveyed have expressed concerns about inflation.

Continue reading “”