If you look at Wisconsin, you'll notice a lot of pale yellow, indicating smaller increases than most counties. But not all, and it's telling which Wisconsin counties had increases well beyond the state’s 5.1% increase in 2020 - rural places with relatively low per-capita incomes overall. Largest increases in per capita income, Wisconsin counties 2020See how personal income in your county measured up in 2020; read our latest blog: https://t.co/yfzVWv1vYb. pic.twitter.com/4p0lBk0H5U
— BEA News (@BEA_News) November 16, 2021
Lafayette +12.1%
Taylor +10.7%
Richland +9.8%
Pepin Co. +9.7%
Buffalo +9.2%
Grant Co. +8.9%
Jackson +8.7%
Kewaunee +8.6%
Clark Co. +8.6%
Langlade +8.5% That’s reflective of the stimulus and expanded unemployment payments that was the same amount no matter where you lived, and (mostly) regardless of how much income you made. These areas also were less likely to have densely populated areas and needs for shutdowns and spcae limitations like urban areas did. And I'm betting Trump's bailouts to farmers didn't hurt, either. Likewise, I noticed that the lowest increases in per-capita income generally happened in counties with still-high levels of income, or communities with large Native American or college student populations. Bottom 10 counties for per capita income growth, Wisconsin 2020
Florence -3.2% (still 8th in state for 2020 per capita income)
Ozaukee +2.2% (1st in state)
Sauk Co. +2.5% (13th in state)
Waukesha +2.8% (2nd in state)
St. Croix Co. +3.3% (6th in state)
Dane Co. +3.8% (4th in state)
Douglas +3.9% (62nd in state)
Winnebago +3.9% (33rd in state)
Pierce Co. +4.1% (50th in state)
Menominee +4.1% (72nd in state) You could argue that 2020’s shutdowns and increased remote work had a bigger effect here than in rural Wisconsin, but I’d take that trade-off for better public health, which largely has been the case in these counties (other than the COVID breakout happening in NW Wisconsin these days). It also illustrates that there was serious help for those most in need with 2020 relief packages, and I would imagine we see the same in 2021. Fortunately, wage growth has been strong at the lower ends of the wage scale, and richer people are more likely to be invested in the rising stock and housing markets. The biggest drag on consumer sentiment these days is coming from GOPperganda about “inflation” which reflects this jump in demand and COVID-induced tightness of supply (along with record corporate profits). But the government-driven part of our boost in income is fading away, and you gotta think the easy money policy of the Fed is going to be leveling out soon enough, which means there is a significant danger of people having the floor taken out from under them as 2022 goes along. Much of this has already happened, and if the refundable and expanded Child Tax Credit cannot be extended in the Build Back Better bill (shown in light blue in this chart), another key source of income will go away. It’s one of the best arguments for Build Back Better that there is, as we know the music will stop at some point on wage increases as demand-supply levels out for both supplies and labor for lower-wage service jobs. It's all the more important to have supports and options for services be available as those economic re-adjustments come up, so it isn’t as easy for employers and insurers to take advantage of Americans, and gives aid to the elderly and other vulnerable populations that haven’t been able to get those wage increases in 2021. And it also makes it all the more absurd that it's largely rural states and counties that are "represented" by Republicans who are trying to pull out all the stops to prevent further stimulus help. Know why? BECAUSE IT WORKS AND PEOPLE LIKE IT, and that can't happen under a Democratic president in GOPWorld.
I took a quick look at broadband speeds for the 10 counties in which income grew. For the most part speed is lower than in counties that had lower income growth. It wasn't a perfect match but it was interesting. https://maps.psc.wi.gov/apps/WisconsinBroadbandMap/
ReplyDelete