Inequality

We had this Gilded Age up until the 1890s. The Progressive Era followed where most of the presidents during this time were Republicans. There are various similarities between the Gilded Age and today. Currently we have an eroded middle class, extreme wealth on the one end and people dealing with low wages and high costs on the other.

Extreme wealth usually results when entrepreneurs are really successful and they end up with a lot of stocks which have risen in value exponentially. Also, top corporate executives' pay has become, in general, grossly inflated. As for the former situation, the gains in wealth aren't taxable until the shares are sold. Service and retail workers need better wages and lower costs, so they can enjoy a more middle class-like lifestyle.

Tax policies can be used to equal-out the wealth gap. Costs, such as housing and medical, can be controlled so lower wage earners have a higher effective income. Labor laws need to be strengthened. Whereas high corporate salaries can be controlled, it is difficult to raise wages for those on the bottom. Corporations' savings in executive pay can be applied to lower earners, but it needs to be done the right way. Lower pay for top executives can lower operating costs, resulting in lower prices for goods and services, thereby benefiting lower wage earners. 

Raising minimum wage doesn't always work. Sometimes, this results in lost jobs and shifts to automation. Union numbers have declined, and unions can be influential by controlling executive pay, as well as championing worker interests. Often in management-worker relations, there's an us vs. them mentality. Managers might just want to win through strategy, and unions can be too demanding. Management and workers need more teamwork.

Stock buybacks became legal in 1982, around the same time executive pay started growing fast. Buybacks are bad because there's a conflict of interest (stock is given to employees while being inflated through buybacks), possibly resulting in a bubble. A lot of the pay package for top executives is stock awards. Companies could buyback less stock to give to top earners and just pay the under-paid more.

K-12 Public Education Spending

Sometimes organizations do things certain ways because that's the way they've been done in the past. Organizations need to adapt to changing circumstances. The costs associated with illiteracy in general are extensive.

Discrepancies in per-student spending between public K-12 school districts in local areas are a significant driver of inequality and reduced upward mobility. Under-educated individuals are less likely to function well in society. Incarceration and criminal activities stemming, in part, from poor education cost society more than education.

Most of the funding for these schools comes from state and local sources. Funding between districts can vary widely due to differences of wealth between districts.

Differences in per-student spending levels among different districts may perpetuate inequality. Making per-student spending equal within counties would be more realistic, then the state can try and level out the spending between counties. Poor counties can receive the same per-student resources as wealthier ones.

All K-12 students need a mandatory class on media literacy so they can decipher accurate information through the obscure media landscape and learn critical thinking skills.

Politics circa 2026

 

First of all, the legislative branch needs more power vs. the executive branch. This was the intention of the constitution. The two main parties have evolved and pivot over time. Neither very closely resemble their original forms. For example, Democrats have at times been anti-immigration in order to protect union members and low wage workers, whereas now Democrats are generally pro-immigration. 

Today's Democrats are less often centrists, and several Republicans are far-right. While the two parties become increasingly polarized,  inequality increases. Both parties are entrenched and people need more options. 

There should be at least 4 options on the general election ballots, with the other two representing other parties or running as independents. These other party candidates need to have access to the same resources, including debates, as the two major parties' candidates. 

Campaign finance reform is needed. Politicians shouldn't be sponsored, they're supposed to represent the people. It should be set up so there's general election funds for state and federal elections. Candidates on primary and general election ballots should get equal funding.

The definition of a Progressive politician sometimes includes "left-leaning." Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive Republican and did a lot of good things. The best way to straighten things out in the near future is to get someone smart in there as a Progressive Democrat. An effective Progressive Republican leader probably won't be an option anytime soon.

Corporate Operations Facilities and Society

Corporations can take a little more responsibility and do some things smarter when it comes to issues society is dealing with such as high housing costs. In many ways, places like San Francisco, LA and New York are a mess. These places are old, overpopulated, stressful, and expensive. While it makes sense for some companies to have their headquarters in these types of places, it doesn't make sense anymore with several other types of operations.

Sometimes professional employees and recent graduates want to be in certain locations because there's a lot of novelties, the shopping, or beaches are close, or there's a lot of recreation options. Often, many of the people that live in these areas don't have the time and/or money to take advantage of these local perks. And communications have evolved to where proximity isn't always necessary.

When possible, newer facilities such as offices, manufacturing and distribution facilities should be located in more rural, usually inland places where land is cheap. As long as there's smaller towns or a small city around, that's all they really need. Being within a reasonable commute to some recreation opportunities is relevant.

Somewhere within 50 miles of a large town or small city is ideal. That way people can commute if necessary until things develop. If there's minimal infrastructure there, everything else will follow. Less populated areas are also more conducive to solar farms.

Companies could use this as a selling point to employees because that's developing places where modern urban planning can be implemented, and there aren't all of the negative aspects associated with overbuilt places (high taxes, high housing costs, traffic, long commutes, stress, dirty air). This map shows all of these places which are underdeveloped.

GE is opening several facilities in the south and southeast which seems to be pretty smart planning. 

These are in mostly more rural areas that can use development and are affordable.

 

Effects of High Housing Costs

Extremely high housing costs have numerous consequences. If people are spending most of their money on housing, they don't have money for other necessities, such as healthcare, retail goods and food. There is also lower morale, and upward mobility is diminished. People need to be motivated by opportunities, they can't just be hanging on by a thread.

When people don't have money for healthcare, they either get Medicaid or end up at medical facilities without insurance. When people are treated without insurance or cash, it drives up healthcare costs. There is also more reliance on other social services.

There's all kinds of indirect effects with something like high housing costs. For example, when people can't have enough money, they're more likely to get things other ways. Retail theft can rise. People might engage in other illegal or corrupt activities. With retail theft, this results in higher costs for numerous reasons. Retailers need more security, things get locked up, stores close, and shrinkage raises prices.

A misconception exists where some people think affordable housing developments will depreciate their property values. When prices are inflated, this could make the issue worse because they have more to lose (depreciation). LIHTC projects may face more pushback or require more expensive design features in order to compete with inflated interests.

Other considerations include consumption, inflation and exports. People don't consume as much when they have less discretionary income. Employers need to pay workers more so they can afford housing and this drives up costs. Rising production costs mean lower exports. Excessive borrowing and predatory lending may also factor in.

When competing in a global economy, people need to be competitive. A major part of this is controlling costs, all kinds of costs: Labor costs, production costs, transportation costs, government spending and taxation, healthcare costs, retail costs, infrastructure costs, etc. All of these things end up in the prices of goods and services sold domestically and exported. 

The Unfixable Housing Crisis

Housing and land costs have become inflated to the point where they would be very difficult to fix. It would be subjective to say where prices would ideally be. A $300,000 house might realistically be priced at $200,000. So, if measures were taken to straighten out the discrepancies, people and businesses would lose money. Who is going to vote for this?

A major contributing factor to these inflated prices is long term capitol gains tax policies on residential and multifamily real estate. Policies should probably be set back to those similar to the early 1990's, The 0-15-20 rule should be more like 0-20-35, with the 35 due to growth in inequality. The $250,000/$500,000 exemption should be eliminated. The best way to do all of this would be to phase it in over 3-5 years so people can work with their finances. 

Most of the non-institutional investment in residential real estate is by small to medium size investors. Larger investors invest less, with mega-investors representing a minimal share of the investments in homes. The percentage of home sales to investors in 2025 was about 1/3, and is growing.

There are more investment options now than ever. People can choose between stocks, cryptocurrency, derivatives, etc. Small businesses are investments. Real estate shouldn't be such an attractive investment to where it causes a major affordability problem.

More housing isn't always a solution. Underlying land costs are also an issue. Here, something like a 0-20-35 rule would help keep wealthy investors from inflating land values.

Some people probably don't understand the issues with the current structure. If someone buys a house for $200,000 and sells it for $300,000, then they buy another house, they need to pay more for it. Unless they're moving to a nursing home or something, they're not really getting ahead. Also, a more expensive house means a much more expensive mortgage, if financed, because there's more interest costs on bigger loans.

Using a simple loan calculator, the interest paid on a 30 year loan at 6% interest for $300,000 with no down payment is $347,514.57. The interest on a 30 year loan at 6% for $400,000 with no down is $463,352.76.

These policy changes would result in more affordable houses and multifamily units being built as well. Smaller homes on smaller lots, more affordable apartments and fewer mansions and McMansions.