Tom Tiffany's constituents pay more to Oneida Co than 414 folks do under "tax hiker" Crowley?

As part of the annoying level of ads I see from the Hendricks/Uihlein PACs and Tom Tiffany campaign (as if there's a difference), there's some that try to call David Crowley some kind of tax hiker over his 6 years as Milwaukee County executive.

A big reason it's annoying because it refuses to admit that maybe Wisconsin's largest-population county by 400,000 people presents a unique situation. And perhaps many other parts of Wisconsin don't have the scale of fiscal needs and services that exist in all-urban and densely-populated Milwaukee County.

But it led me down a rabbit hole, because I wanted to see what taxes look like in Tom Tiffany's home county of Oneida and home town of Minocqua, because maybe it's not just David Crowley's Milwaukee County that has rising taxes in the 2020s. I'll use the Wisconsin Policy Forum's Property Values and Taxes database for much of this.

Let's start from 2020 itself, as that's when Crowley was first elected as Milwaukee County executive, and we can look at what has happened to property taxes in the County since then. The last budget under Chris Abele had a total county tax levy of just under $302 million, so what's happened to property taxes since then in the County.

So this is where the Uihlein PAC makes the argument of "David Crowley raised property taxes 5 times in 6 years". Sure, but as you can see, the tax levy for Milwaukee County was less in 2026 than it was in 2022. Pretty good when you consider how much costs and prices have gone up over those 4 years (and how much more they will go up with 2026's inflation).

Of course, a big reason for that is the 2023 shared revenue bill (aka Act 12) that allowed for Milwaukee County to institute a 0.4% sales tax (described as "nearly doubling" by the GOP oligarch PACs). Now, much of that 0.4% sales tax is to pay off pension obligations and there are other requirements on public safety staffing and other handcuffs, but enough funds were freed up to allow for the property tax cut in 2024 that you see.

Now let's step away from Milwaukee County and look at Tom Tiffany's home of Oneida County. And their have a similar trajectory, except their property tax cut is one year later, as Oneida County got a big boost in shared revenue under the bill for 2025 (more on that later).

I'll add that, Oneida County's property tax levy went up by 12.6% in the 3 years before their Act 12 assistance, while Milwaukee County only had its levy go up by 3.8% in the 3 years before it got its sales tax.

Given that Oneida County had a little over 38,000 people for much of the last 4 years and Milwaukee County was between 921,000+ and 924,000+ for those years, how do we best compare tax burdens? One way might be to see what these places pay on property taxes per capita, and when you do that, Oneida County residents pay nearly 50% more in property taxes to their County than Milwaukee County residents do, and that was true even before Milwaukee County's sales tax.

But at the same time, the county property tax rate is more than double in Milwaukee County than in Oneida. Although I will add that both have seen significant declines in the last 4 years as property values keep going up.

Which hints at a major difference between Oneida and Milwaukee Counties. There's a lot more property value to tax per person in Oneida County than in Milwaukee County, three times as much.

And while GOPs may cynically rip on Crowley for approving a higher sales tax for Milwaukee County, it's worth noting that Oneida County was getting a lot more sales tax per person from its 0.5% sales tax before 2024 than Milwaukee County was, as a function of the high amount of tourism that the Northwoods relies on. And even with the sales tax now being 0.9% in MKE Co, it barely puts Crowley's county ahead of Tiffany's on a sales taxes paid per capita basis.

Now the idea decades ago was that shared revenues were supposed to be some kind of equalizer for inequities like these, and that Milwaukee County should get a larger share because of all of the economic activity and income tax that it generates (counties cannot have its own income tax by Wisconsin law). Likewise, property rich counties like Oneida were supposed to not need as many shared revenues, because they could make up the difference without making their residents pay a large tax rate. But when state shared revenues to counties and municipalities were raised in 2023 for the first time since Scott Walker, Tom Tiffany and the GOP took control of state government and gerrymandered the Legislature, there was some rebalancing done.

Not surprisingly, this 2023 adjustment favored property-rich and/or rural counties. And to compensate for being allowed to raise a sales tax, both Milwaukee County and the City of Milwaukee had a much smaller increase.

Change in shared revenues post-Act 12
Oneida Co. +1,034.4%
Milwaukee Co. +16.2%

And while you might say "C'mon Jake, Milwaukee Co still got another $7.6 million while Oneida Co only got another $450,579." , on a per capita basis, Oneida County got 43.5% more in shared revenue than Milwaukee Co.

Lastly, David Crowley isn't the only candidate in the governor's race that signed off on raising a sales tax for his constituents. In 2015, Tom Tiffany approved of a state budget that allowed the Oneida County city of Rhinelander to put in its own 0.5% sales tax, as a way to help pay its bills without having to shove all the burden onto the property tax.

In addition, Tiffany represents Eagle River, which has had its own sales tax for 20 years, and Bayfield, which has had one for 23. And now Tiffany's own hometown of Minocqua has joined the club of 0.5% local sales taxes, even after a 275% boost in shared revenues the year before. But I don't hear Tom Tiffany or other WisGOPs complaining about Minocqua not being able to handle its own budget, so what's the difference?

(oh, we know the difference).

These are the numbers. I'm not even going to go much into the fact that Tom Tiffany and the rest of the WisGOPs approved of a tax writeoff in 2011 to manufacturers and ag businesses that is now likely to exceed half a bilion dollars a year....without requiring any job creation.

That $500 million a year could reduce property taxes for Wisconsin owners by approximately 3.75% (I'm using the LFB estimates of statewide property taxes). There's your property tax freeze right there, without blowing a hole in the budget.

I guess my main point is - if Tom TIffany and other WisGOPs want to get on David Crowley for Milwaukee County's tax situation, maybe he and the rest of them should look in their back yards and realize that a lot of local governments are still dealing with financial issues. And that a lot of Wisconsinites have higher tax burdens than residents in the 414, possibly including Tom Tiffany himself. And that's largely because of WisGOP policies over the last 15 years, where they chose to give away things to their donors while passing the taxes down to local governments.

Wisconsin jobs up and unemployment down in August

We got another Wisconsin jobs report this week discussing the employment market in August. And it looks like things went very well in our state last month.

Employment – There were 3,046,200 people employed in Wisconsin, up 9,300 over the month and up 36,900 over the year.
• Labor Force – The state’s labor force participation increased to 64.7% which is 3.1 percentage points above the national rate of 61.6%.
• Nonfarm Jobs – The total nonfarm jobs in the state were 3,057,300, an increase of 11,800 over last month.
• Unemployment – The state's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate ticked down to 3.2%, which is 0.9 percentage points below the national unemployment rate of 4.1%.

3.2% is the lowest unemployment rate Wisconsin has had in 2026, and the increase in our state’s participation rate over the last year has happening as the country continues to have its percentage of people working go down.

On the payrolls side, the 9,300 additional jobs continued a string of good jobs reports for our state in the middle of this year, and July's gain was revised by another 2,600. That comes after recent benchmark estimates that indicate Wisconsin held level for jobs in 2025 and early 2026, instead of losing jobs.

Yes, 2/3 of the additional 9,300 jobs were in local government and likely reflect new hires by public schools ahead of the start of the 26-27 school year (the US had an increase in these jobs of 41,900 in the same month, and likely for the same reason). But there were other good numbers in the Wisconsin jobs report, including the construction sector continuing its boom in our state, and another small increase in manufacturing jobs.

Pretty good spot to be in, and the good jobs numbers maybe help explain how Wisconsin exceeded revenue estimates by nearly $451 million. It's helped us withstand the less favorable trends in the overall US economy.

Can you imgaine how good a position we'd be in if we used those better revenues to lower property taxes for Wisconsin homeowners and make it easier for communities and public schools to pay for their needed services while increasing our quality of life? And encouraged investments that keep our construction boom sustainable and not be endangered by the inevitable popping of the AI Bubble? Just a thought.

The Fed hikes rates! But the real story is that they likely aren't done

The Federal Reserve made it official yesterday - we are back in tightening mode.

The Federal Reserve raised interest rates for the first time in three years in a unanimous decision on Wednesday, with central bankers now seeing a second hike this year to arrest sticky inflation.

The Federal Open Market Committee voted to raise its benchmark interest rate to the range of 3.75% to 4% from 3.5% to 3.75%, the first rate hike since July 2023, as renewed tensions in the Middle East drive oil prices higher and raise concerns about broadening price pressures.

"We now have data broadly defined that says the economy has indeed strengthened," Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh said in a press conference following the meeting. "Underlying growth is higher. Inflation is the problem. Stable prices have been the problem for, now, more than five and a half years.

"So what the committee decided to do today was take an action to ensure a timely return to our price stability."

The ¼ point increase in the Fed Funds rate was expected. The bigger news is what Fed officials projected going forward for both rates and the economy as a whole. And once that information sunk in, Wall Streeters didn’t like it, with only half of those losses being recovered on Thursday.

So what freaked out Wall Street so much? It was a majority of Fed officials saying they are not one-and-done on rate hikes.

Most Federal Open Market Committee members see the need for at least one more 25 basis point rate hike this year, as 12 out of 18 members that submitted projections pegged their view of appropriate monetary policy in 2026 at an average of 4.125%.

That rate implies one more 25 basis point hike to come by year-end.

Four committee members see 50 more basis points' worth of rate hikes in 2026 as appropriate, while only two members see no more hikes this year — suggesting that the new effective target rate of 3.75% to 4% is adequate.

And that outlook was made because the Fed estimates inflation and the US economy as a whole to run hotter than what was expected 3 months ago.

Fed officials added that they expect unemployment to stay at or barely over 4% over the next 2 years. As we’ve found out in Trump 2.0, that doesn’t necessarily mean jobs will be added, but the lack of increases in the labor force and theft growth of productivity may be a trend that continues.

Another trend that seems to be continuing is Americans spending almost all of the money they make, which is also something that leans toward more rate hikes. On the morning of the Fed’s decision, the Census Bureau reported that retail sales had an especially strong August.

U.S. retail sales rebounded sharply in August as households boosted purchases of a range of goods while also spending more at restaurants and bars, reinforcing the economy's resilience even as consumers grow more anxious about high inflation.

The stronger-than-expected report from the Commerce Department on Wednesday prompted economists to upgrade their gross domestic product growth estimates for the third quarter. Inflation jitters were underscored by news of a surge in import ‌prices last month amid strong increases in the costs of capital and consumer goods….

"The pace of underlying consumer spending looks to be advancing at a healthy rate," said James McCann, senior economist at Edward Jones. "This should help​provide some reassurance around the resilience of the U.S. economy in the face of increasing short-term headwinds to growth, including higher interest rates, a renewed spike in oil prices, trade disruptions and waning support from tax cuts."

Retail​sales jumped 1.2% last month, the largest increase since March, after a revised 0.5% drop in July, the Commerce Department's Census Bureau said. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast ⁠retail sales, which are mostly goods and are not adjusted for inflation, would rebound 0.8% after a previously reported 0.6% drop in July.

Yes, some of that was due to the increase in gas prices that started in August, but retail sales also went up 1.1% if you take away gas stations, including a 1.2% increase at bars and restaurants, so Americans were still going out and spending as Summer wound down, even as consumers say they are increasingly gloomy.

The data so far shows a US economy that was still growing in Q3 2026, and the Federal Reserve sees the higher prices as the threat to the economy, and any slowdown would be as a result of spending not keeping up with the higher prices vs slowing down on its own. Of course, we’ll see if and when consumers stop accepting these higher prices, or if we higher interest rates bite back on an AI Bubble of investment that has heavily relied on debt as well as future revenues coming in to pay back that debt.

But on the spending and output side, nothing to worry about folks! At least until something comes along to change that situation.

More reasons behind the profit boom of 2026

We know that as prices went up after war broke out in Iran last February, so did profits and we recently got more evidence of that with a report from the Census Bureau on profits in manufacturing. In particular, check out this table.

So post-tax (seasonally adjusted) income for manufacturers went up by nearly 22% in 3 months, and nearly 647 in 12 months.

Part of that reason is the signing of Trump/GOP Tax Scam 2.0 in July 2025 and its related incentives. But another part is in that “cents per dollar of sales” – aka profit margins. Margins are up nearly 40% on a non-seasonally adjusted basis and over 42% on a seasonally-adjusted one.

Not surprisingly, much of the increase in manufacturing profit comes oil and gas, whose prices started rising after we started bombing Iran in late February 2026.

After-tax profits, petroleum and coal products, US
Q1 2026 $13.15 billion
Q2 2026 $54.14 billion (+311.7%)

But it’s not only fossil fuel companies making more in profit. Durable manufacturing also had a big boost in the Spring and early Summer.

After-tax profits, durable manufacturing, US
Q1 2026 $204.42 billion
Q2 2026 $254.65 billion (+24.6%)

Out of that $50 billion+ in added profits, around $8.5 billion of that was in aerospace products and parts, which is a volatile category of big-ticket items that don’t necessarily show a trend. But post-tax profits in the machinery sectors more than doubled between Q1 and Q2, up by more than $12.4 billion. We also saw more than $3.0 billion in added Q2 profit for primary metals (+36.8%), and nonmetallic mineral products had its profits go up by more than 158%, from $2.95 billion to $7.63 billion.

(I’m not going to say these companies are pocketing the difference from the end of Trump’s tariffs and not passing those savings onto customers and/or workers. But if you want to…).

Computers and electronic equipment make up the largest of US durable manufacturer profits measured, but only made up slightly more than $11 billion of the $50.2 billion in the added profits of Q2 2026. But that may be because that tech equipment sector already had its profit boom in 2025 and early 2026.

After-tax profits, computer and electronic products, US
Q2 2025 $68.69 billion
Q2 2026 $156.03 billion (+127.2%)

And yet information technologies have been laying people off in large amounts for the last couple of years. Yes, that’s not exactly hardware, but it’s also not unrelated, since you oten need IT services to run the items on this equipment, so that’s an interesting cross-current.

Manufacturers aren’t the only businesses who saw a jump in profits in Q2. It also looks like retailers had a big increase as well.

Seasonally adjusted after-tax profits of U.S. retail corporations with assets of $50 million and over totaled $112.3 billion, up $45.1 (±0.5) billion from the $67.2 billion recorded in the first quarter of 2026, and up $51.7 (±0.9) billion from the $60.6 billion recorded in the second quarter of 2025.

Seasonally adjusted sales for the quarter totaled $1,171.1 billion, up $28.5 (±5.0) billion from the $1,142.6 billion recorded in the first quarter of 2026, and up $88.7 (±10.5) billion from the $1,082.4 billion recorded in the second quarter of 2025.

So profits were up nearly $17 billion more than sales were at these large retailers. Hmmm….

And if you look at the non-seasonally adjusted figures, the difference in those retail profits is due to a $36.4 billion increase in Q2 in what’s ID’d as non-operating income.

So what is an example of this type of non-operating income? Here’s what Investopedia has to say about it.

If a retail store invests $10,000 in the stock market and earns 5% in a month, the $500 earned would be non-operating income. When a person sets out to analyze this retail company, the $500 would be classified as nonoperating, or non-recurring, earnings because it can't be relied on as continuous income over the long term.

Alternatively, if a technology company sells or spins off one of its divisions for $400 million in cash and stock, the proceeds from the sale are considered non-operating income. If the technology company earns $1 billion in income in a year, it's easy to see that the additional $400 million will increase company earnings by 40%.

To an investor, a sharp bump in earnings like this makes the company look like a very attractive investment. However, since the sale cannot be replicated or duplicated, it can't be considered recurring operating income and should be removed from performance analysis.

So this appears to be paper gains and accounting tricks by major retailers, more than profiteering. And it’s not sustainable in the long-term, but in a corporate environment of “make number go up”, boardrooms don’t really care about that.

And given that these companies rely so heavily on these large profit numbers to keep these stocks pumped up, I can’t see them cutting their inflated prices any time soon. And they clearly haven’t passed these higher profits onto workers, as we are in a multi-year low for average hourly wages on a year-over-year basis.

More proof that the economy in Summer 2026 was a nice situation if you’re a CEO or if you’re someone who lives off of wealth. But not so good if you’re a person with a real job that has to buy stuff and pay bills.

INFLATION WATCH! Will August's 0.4% be the "good old days" vs what's coming?

Many were waiting for Friday’s Consumer Price Index report, as prices of gasoline and other products had risen in much of America in August. And it was the last major economic report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics before the Federal Reserve makes their decision on interest rates next week.

Well, the report came out and…. inflation had yet to spiral.

The consumer price index rose a seasonally adjusted 0.4% for the month, putting the 12-month increase at 3.4%, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday. Both readings were in line with the Dow Jones consensus.

However, stripping out volatile food and energy prices, the core CPI posted a 0.3% monthly gain, or 0.1 percentage point higher than forecast. The core annual rate came in at 2.4%, matching the estimate.

Dig into the actual CPI report, and you’ll see that one reason prices didn’t go up by more than 0.4% overall was because grocery prices (aka – “food at home”) were flat in August after a 0.1% drop in July.

Doubly interesting is that a main reason behind the flattening in grocery prices comes from beef, whose prices that President Trump wants to cut even further with less safe and imported meat.

Change in prices, beef and veal
July -0.8%
Aug -1.0%
Aug 2025-Aug 2026 +5.9%

So is the BLS part about food prices BS? Or is the Trump Administration behind the curve of something that was already happening, and now will overcorrect and crash prices for American producers?

The CPI report came one day after the Bureau of Labor Statistics said that Producer Prices had risen at a similar rate.

The producer price index, a measure of final demand costs for goods and services, increased a seasonally adjusted 0.4% for the month, in line with the Dow Jones consensus, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported.

On an annual basis, that put the PPI at 5.4%, still well above the Fed’s 2% inflation target and 0.1 percentage point higher than expected. The PPI rose 0.1% in July, a slight upward revision from the original estimate of no change.

Excluding food and energy, the core PPI accelerated by 0.2%, against the forecast for a 0.3% increase. Core less trade services, another volatile category, was up 0.3%, in line with estimates…..

There were further signs of pipeline pressures: Processed goods prices increased 1.8% while unprocessed goods accelerated 1.1%.

But the increased costs at the start of the product pipe3line has yet to show up on store shelves, apparently.

Do I buy it? I’d say I’m confused by the disconnect where businesses keep reporting higher prices for the products they get, the costs of transport run higher, this is somehow not passed on much to the consumer, but profits go through the roof. Yes, some of that is theft using gains of increased worker productivity, but given the wide gap between prices only going up by 3-4% while profits and margins rise by double digits, it also seems to be something else that is not apparent in the data.

Even with inflation staying at 3.4% year-over-year, wage growth still was lower than that over 12 months, making year-long real earnings negative for the 3rd month in a row.

Everyday Americans certainly don’t think things are getting better, as consumer sentiment is back in the bad place it was when gas prices first spiked up this Spring.

The University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers said its Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 47.8 this month ⁠from 51.7 in August. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the index at 51.0. Sentiment sagged among consumers identifying as Democrats and Republicans, but was little changed among Independents.

"With a resurgence in fuel prices and trade tensions, consumers anticipate greater pressures on their pocketbooks ‌to ⁠come," said Joanne Hsu, the director of the Surveys of Consumers.

The survey's measure of consumer expectations for inflation over the next year jumped to ⁠4.6% from 4.0% last month. Twelve-month inflation expectations were at 3.4% in February before the U.S.-led war with ⁠Iran started. Consumers' expectations for inflation over the next five years edged up 3.4% from ⁠3.3% in August. They are higher than their 2024 range of 2.8% to 3.2%.

By the time we get to the October surveys, a whole lot of Americans are likely to be notified of higher health insurance premiums, so I can’t imagine they’d be feeling better by that point. And with nationwide diesel prices rising to more than $6 a gallon (as it did on Friday), that'S going to be passed through to other products at some point, doesn’t it?

We might well look back to the 3.4% year-over-year CPI figure that was reported for August as a goal to fall back toward for 2027. And how much longer are Americans going to keep up their strong consumer spending when wages keep failing to keep up with those higher prices? Especially if the Bubbly stock market makes a correction back toward reality?

Higher gas prices, higher interest rates, and TrumpWorld flailing

As war in the Middle East goes past the 6-month mark with more bombs falling in September, the oil markets finally have admitted reality. Shorter supplies and uncertainties of future availabilities have caused oil prices to spike from less than $69 a barrel on the 4th of July to more than $97 after the close of trading in the week of Labor Day.

Gas prices being downstream of oil prices, it's no surprise that the average US gas price went back over $4 a gallon since the start of August and has not gone below it.

Up until today, Wisconsin had been protected from the jump in gas prices that much of the nation has dealt with over the last month. AAA tells us that regular gas prices went up by 14 cents a gallon between August 9 and September 8, but went down by 4 cents a gallon in our state.

But today, I noticed my local Kwik Trip posting at $3.99 a gallon, and sure enough, the average price of a gallon of gas statewide went up 16 cents today while the national price only went up by 7.

This now means average gas prices for both the US and Wisconsin are up by more than $1 a gallon vs September 2025.

The bond market also noticed that gas prices, other costs, and the US's deficits and debts aren’t going down any time soon. And bond yields have resembled the oil charts over the last 2 ½ months, with both the benchmark 10- and 30-year yields rising by more than 40 points without any change in interest rates from the Federal Reserve.

10-year note

30-year bond

Also today, the Treasury auctioned off $39 billion in 10-year notes to pay for more debt, and the median yield of those notes went from 4.63% in August to nearly 4.77% today. That followed $58 billion in 3-year notes that were auctioned off yesterday, which ended up with a median yield of 4.43% vs 4.24% for the same term and amount in August.

And what’s on the docket for auction tomorrow? It’s the 30-year bond. Uh oh….

It looks like the Trump Administration is getting a bit shook by these developments.

The Treasury Department on Wednesday said it will buy back up to $6 billion of government debt in an operation aimed at keeping bond markets functioning.

The much-anticipated announcement triples the normal buyback operation and follows an announcement Aug. 19 from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that the department would at least double the normal amount for already-issued securities….

“Moving the sizes up to $6 billion would amount to tripling the size of the buybacks, which would be a meaningful escalation but would not be wildly out of line with the spirit of the ‘at least double’ language.,” Wrightson ICAP analysts wrote earlier this week.

“Quadrupling or even quintupling the size to the $8 billion to $10 billion range is not out of the question, but would represent a second major shift in the Treasury’s debt strategy in just two weeks,” they added. “It would be an admission that the Treasury hadn’t thought through its hasty August 19 announcement in the first place.”

The actual buybacks will happen Thursday in a 20-minute operation that will conclude at 2 p.m. ET.

From what I can glean off the Treasury Department’s FAQ page on buybacks and the connected statute that buyback operations are under, this is done by

us[ing] money received from the sale of an obligation and other money in the general fund of the Treasury Department in making such purchases, redemptions, or refunds.

It’s the equivalent of spending more money on anything else, except it’s a direct payment to the banks and other bond holders that choose to take the cash instead of holding onto the US’s bonds.

We’ll see how many bondholders take up the US on this offer tomorrow, and what our government has to give up in order to make those exchanges. But I have a hard time believing these billions in Treasury dollars being sent out would lower our fiscal deficit or inflation, so beyond a short-term attempt to boost demand (and lower rates) for 10-year and 30-year bonds, this move won't solve the underlying economic problems. And likely means even more funds have to be made up for in the near future.

Oh, but don’t worry, because Bessent claims the US economy will grow by 3% at the same time that we cut spending, which will allow us to "grow our way out of" debt as an economic problem! How are we going to double our post-inflation growth while cutting demand and having higher interest rates restrict borrowing? DON'T ASK QUESTIONS, JUST BELIEVE IT!

The desperation from TrumpWorld is obvious and not fooling anyone. Even the coked-up finance bros are seeing through it.

State of Working Wisconsin - gaining ground, but higher earners are still behind

Wanted to mention a few things on the recently released State of Working Wisconsin report for 2026. It's put out by High Road Strategy Center at UW-Madison And on the wage-earning side, this report says Wisconsin was performin well by the end of year.

In 2025, Wisconsin’s median wage – $26.17 per hour – reached a new high (see W2). Workers in the state have experienced three years of solid wage growth that have more than made up for the damage to wages inflicted by the very high inflation of 2022. From 2022 to 2025, the inflation-adjusted value of wages grew by $2.00 per hour. Further, the current wage is $4.00 higher than the 2015 median. This advance in wages is unprecedented in the data we have. Real wage growth in the past decade is stronger than in any period back to 1979. The 2025 Wisconsin median wage slightly exceeds the national median (which is unusual but not unprecedented).

The long-term view provided by W2 shows how remarkable the last decade of wage growth has been. Wisconsin workers actually lost ground in the 1980s with wages falling to well below the national median. Wisconsin began to make up the wage loss and finally got ahead of the 1979 median wage toward the end of the growth of the 1990s.

In the early 2000s, wages were stagnant, and the Great Recession brought wages to the 21st century’s low point in 2012. Wages grew slowly from 2012 until 2018 during the sluggish recovery from the Great Recession.

Since 2018, however, wage growth has been strong. While high inflation in 2022 brought wages down, wages grew in 2023, 2024, and 2025, and in each of the last two years, Wisconsin has reached a record high.

I did find it interesting that the report had data showing Wisconsin with slightly higher wages vs the rest of the country at the 20th and 50th percentiles, but trailing when it comes to higher-paying jobs.

This goes along with the recent “brain drain” report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum, which showed college-educated Wisconsinites frequently going to higher-paying states like Minnesota, Illinois and California.

That said, while we still lagged behind in 2025, higher-paid workers in Wisconsin have gotten stronger wage gains (by percentage) than the rest of the country over the last 6 years.

But these increased wages in recent years haven't necessarily made it easier for Wisconsinites when it comes to paying their bills and/or getting ahead. The High Road report mentions that times are still tough for many Wisconsinites, as their everyday costs are outpacing whatever their incomes may be going up by. And it may well get worse in the near future.

To provide a picture of issues around affordability, we draw on Wisconsin data from United for ALICE. This United Way project identifies the ALICE (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed) in each state. The ALICE Household Survival Budget includes only essential expenses, such as housing, food, transportation, child care, health care, technology, and taxes. The ALICE standard is more conservative than other basic budget standards. (See EPI’s Family Budget Calculator and the MIT Living Wage Calculator for alternative models of the disconnect between wages and costs of living).

The ALICE standard shows that more than one-in-three households in Wisconsin (35% of households) faced financial hardship. Of these households, 11% were below the federal poverty line, another 24% of the state’s households earned more than the poverty-level but still faced considerable financial hardship and did not earn enough to afford a minimal cost of living. This kind of struggle – working people who do not earn enough to make ends meet – is a long-standing problem for working people in the state. Between 32-35% of Wisconsin families have faced financial hardship since 2010….

As energy, food, and housing prices rise, families feel increasingly squeezed. Recent analysis shows that utility bills are growing rapidly: Wisconsin households are paying 19% more today than they were in 2022. The federal approach to tariffs has increased costs for families by $1,100 per year according to the Budget Lab at Yale. The federal budget cuts for health insurance, Medicaid, and food assistance are making life more expensive for working families across Wisconsin. Many of the biggest cuts to Medicaid are yet to come.

Which should tell you that while it's nice that Wisconsin was outpacing the country's wage growth in 2025, it wasn't necessarily translating into a better life. And we know prices have gone up more while wage growth has gone down in 2026, so this time next year, we might well see the real wage gains of 2023, 2024 and 2025 go away.