Tuesday, September 22, 2026
Most Americans Blame Donald Trump For Rising Inflation
The chart above reflects the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between September 11th and 14th of a nationwide sample of 1,461 registered voters, with a 3.3 point margin of error.
Some Numbers To Think About
Most Americans know, or are starting to realize, that there is a huge divide between the super-rich and the rest of America. But few realize how bad that divide has become. Most think there are a few people that are super-rich, But the truth is that there are millions of them - even though they make up a tiny percentage of the total population.
Forbes recently released their annual list of the richest 400 households in the United States. A shocking fact about that list was that there were more than 500 billionaires that weren't rich enough to make the list. That means the U.S. has more than 900 billionaires. That was a surprisingly large number to me, but it is only .0000026% of the U.S. population. However they control trillions of dollars of the nation's wealth.
If you add in those who have at least $100 million dollars or more, you get to about .01% of the population. This is still a tiny percentage of the population, but they have about 10% of all wealth in the country.
To be in the top .1% of the population, you must have about $62 million. This group controls about 14% of the nation's wealth.
To be in the top 1% of the population, you would need about $13.7 million. This group controls about 31.7% of all U.S. wealth.
To be in the top 10% in wealth in this country, you would need to have about $1.8 million. That group controls about 68% of the nation's wealth. That means the bottom 90% of the U.S. population only controls about 32% of the country's wealth.
The bottom 50% of the population (about 170 million people) only controls about 2.5% of the country's wealth.
The median wage in the United States is about $87,000 a year. Half of the population makes less than that and half makes more. Many in the bottom half are only a couple of missed paychecks from falling into poverty.
If a person made that median wage for his/her entire working life (about 45 years), they would earn only about $3.9 million. But most people start their working life with a much lower wage and are lucky to end it making the median wage. So the reality of a lifetime earning is much less than that.
This new "Gilded Age" was created by Republican policies that started about 1980 with the presidency of Ronald Reagan. They lowered taxes on the rich, suppressed the wages of ordinary Americans by allowing the rich to keep the lion's share of rising productivity, and made to harder to start and join a labor union. The nation's economic policies were tilted to benefit the rich and punish workers.
It is no wonder that 46 years of those policies have created an economy where the rich thrive and workers find it hard to be able to afford to live in this country. But it does not have to be that way. Before 1980 the country's economic policies were much fairer, and a large a thriving middle class was created. That middle class is now shrinking.
We could return to a much fairer economy, but it would require taking power away from the Republicans.
Monday, September 21, 2026
More Than A Third Of Americans Cannot Name The Three Branches Of Government
The chart above is from the Annenberg Public Policy Center Constitution Day Survey -- done between August 6th and 9th of a nationwide sample of 1,034 adults, with a 3.5 point margin of error.
Most Americans Are Pessimistic About The Remaining Term Of Donald Trump
The chart above is from The Center for North Carolina Politics and Public Service at Catawba College / YouGov Poll -- done between September 4th and 9th of a nationwide sample of 1,200 adults, with a 3.6 point margin of error.
Trump Violates Constitution By Banning News Sites From The White House
Donald Trump, while campaigning for his second term, made the statement that you cannot have a free country without free speech. It's one of the few things he's said that is true. Our Founding Fathers knew this - it's why they included free speech and a free press in the First Amendment to the Constitution.
The problem is that Donald Trump doesn't know (or care) about real free speech. To him, free speech only includes speech that agrees with him. That is not free speech. Every dictator in the world agrees with and allows speech that agrees with them. Real free speech must also includes speech you disagree with and maybe even are offended by.
Trump made it clear he doesn't really believe in free speech a few days ago when he banned three news organizations (MS NOW, Politico, and CNN) from the White House. They were banned for printing/telling the truth about his administration. He has said he may include other news organizations in the ban (including The New York Times and The Washington Post).
Trump's action is clearly unconstitutional, and no doubt will be overturned by the courts. But in the meantime, he is suppressing free speech and a free press - and that hurts our democracy.
Here is some of what former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance had to say about Trump's action:
By now you’ve likely seen the news: Donald Trump banned, via Truth Social post, MS NOW, CNN, and Politico from the White House. Journalists from those outlets were denied access to the White House when they came to work today, Saturday.
Almost certainly, the first thought that crosses your mind is, “That has to violate the First Amendment.” You would not be wrong.
What Trump has done is a fundamental violation of the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process. George Lehner, the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) counsel for 18 years, assessed the same basic issue in November 2018, after the Trump administration suspended CNN Chief White House Correspondent Jim Acosta’s credentials when he pressed Trump for answers about disappearing “caravans” of migrants after the midterm elections. In its amicus brief, the WHCA argued that “the First Amendment requires a compelling government interest—not whim, prejudice, or dislike—for the President to strip a journalist of his or her ability to report from the White House.” It took a judge less than two weeks to restore Acosta’s credentials.
Tonight, Jim Acosta told me, “I think Trump is almost certain to lose this case. During his comments Friday he didn’t even cite a specific reason for banning these outlets. I can’t imagine a scenario in which a judge allows this irrational, desperate ban to become permanent.”
Trump even lost Jonathan Turley, the conservative lawyer who testified on his behalf during his first impeachment and went on Fox News to criticize both the second impeachment and criminal charges that were brought against Trump. On Friday, Turley tweeted that a ban on CNN, Politico, and MS NOW by Trump “would be an assault on long-honored principles of a free press.” He continued, “Barring disfavored media from the White House is a terrible precedent and practice. Such a move would raise serious constitutional questions.”
Authoritarian governments use press access to keep reporters in line and prevent negative coverage. Denying access threatens a reporter’s ability to do their job and, ultimately, their livelihood. Trump’s “ban” is a tactic to silence voices that report the news as it happens. No American president should ban “disfavored outlets” from the access that is essential to covering our government. Even a more modest restriction, the 2009 effort by the Obama White House to block Fox News from a round of interviews with the executive-pay czar Kenneth R. Feinberg, provoked outrage from news outlets, as it should have. The White House said Fox News was blurring the distinction between news and “anti-Obama advocacy.” CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC, who were also part of the pool doing the interview, refused to go forward unless Fox was included. The White House backed down.
So far, the Associated Press, The New York Times, and The Washington Post have joined ranks with MS NOW, CNN, and Politico. The WHCA has taken an uncompromising stance in support of the banned news organizations. Will more outlets support the First Amendment in this extraordinarily dangerous moment for democracy? I suspect that legitimate news organizations will; in fact, this may well be a moment that separates professional journalists from sycophantic so-called members of the press. . . .
The First Amendment includes rights beyond a free press, including free speech, the right to assemble, and the right to petition the government. The other rights are facilitated by, if not dependent upon, having a free press, as is much of the conduct of our society. Knowledge is power. And perhaps that’s what Trump hates the most. He hates being criticized; he hates that having his plans exposed publicly has drummed up opposition and kept him from doing what he wants to do whenever he wants to do it. Without a free press, Richard Nixon would have probably gotten away with Watergate. If a president wants to be an authoritarian, he’s got to do away with them. . . .
So be outraged. Be very, very outraged. Because this is nothing short of outrageous. But don’t stop there. Keep your eyes on the ball. Keep your eyes on everything Trump is trying to prevent you from thinking about and seeing. And get ready to vote in the midterm elections like your future depends on it. Because as we all know, it does.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)