‘There are still a lot of people hurting’: Here’s what the midterms mean for your living standards, taxes, stocks — and inflation

- Advertisement -

During midterm elections, people’s finances – including abortion, among other issues January 6 Uprising – Were on the ballot.

- Advertisement -

Voters went to the polls wondering how four decades of high inflation rates had scorched their wallets.

- Advertisement -

In addition to considering what the array of candidates can do to bring relief at high prices, voters considered ballot measures on everything from millionaire taxes to minimum wages and rent controls.

The patterns of those ballot results are not the same across all states. For example, the vote for a millionaire tax prevailed in one heavily democratic state, but not in another. The fight over mandatory pay increases yielded divided results.

- Advertisement -

This reflects the uncertainty in the race for a majority in the Congress. Tight elections are still too close to determine whether Democrats can retain control of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

On Wednesday, President Joe Biden acknowledged that Democrats suffered losses — not as much as pollers had predicted. He also said that inflation weighs heavily on voters. “There are still many people hurt who are very worried,” he said.

“But voters were also clear that they were still disappointed,” Biden said. “I get it. I understand that some years in this country have been really tough for so many people.”

Investors and consumers got another remainder of the rise in the cost of living after the federal government released October inflation data on Thursday, showing it had slowed to 7.7%.

Here’s a look at what the midterm elections can put in people’s pockets:

Investment list

Markets don’t like uncertainty – in other words, Congress is just getting bullied, although cooler inflation data was welcomed on Wall Street. On Friday the Dow Jones Industrial Average, DJIA,
s&p 500 spx,
and Nasdaq Composite Comp,
Very close

Beyond the scope of mid-term election results, other persistent adverse conditions are dragging portfolios down: high inflation, rising interest rates and recession worries. Where the market bottom falls is still a guessing game.

Markets generally respond well to a divided Congress, experts note. When one party controls Congress and the other controls the White House, that can slow — or outright neutralize — the potential for laws changing federal regulations, tax provisions and, ultimately, corporate bottom lines.

UBS Group Ag. There’s still room for decline, according to economist Arend Kapten

In the face of weak corporate earnings and an even greater increase in Federal Reserve interest rates, the S&P 500 SPX,
It could drop another 16% by the middle of next year.

more health care coverage

South Dakota voters chose to make their home the latest red state to expand Medicaid, a government health-insurance program that covers low-income people, people with disabilities and more.

The Affordable Care Act originally intended for people with 138% of incomes below the federal poverty level – which is what it is today. approx $38,000 per year For a family of four – to qualify for Medicaid. But in 2012 the Supreme Court States voted to determine Would they like to participate in the expansion?

So far, 40 states and DCs have gone through with Medicaid expansion, According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, Meanwhile, 11 states, almost all in the South, have opposed the expansion, including the nation’s most uninsured state: Texas, where 18% of people lack health coverage, according to US Census Bureau data.

South Dakota’s Medicaid expansion measure, which passed with 56% of the vote on Tuesday, could cover more than 40,000 people. politician, The state’s Republican governor, Christie Noem, opposed the program, but said she implement measures when passed,

rent control

Voters fought Tuesday against pandemic-era fare hikes, even after facing sky-high price hikes at the start of the year, as markets showed signs of cold: Rent-control ballot measures passed in Orange County, Fla., and Portland, Maine, and a third rent-control measure, could score a narrow victory in Pasadena, Calif.

However, the most controversial local proposal was likely to be in Orange County. Although nearly 60% of Orange County voters approved an ordinance that would limit rent increases to 9.8% for one year, a Florida court said the ordinance was unconstitutional and was passed after litigation by industry groups. The ballot summary was misleading. Unless the county wins a legal appeal, the ordinance cannot become law despite the wishes of the electorate, Orlando Sentinel.

Orlando, the largest city in Orange County, was in the depths of a affordable housing Shortage even before the pandemic. Earlier this year, Walt Disney World dis,
said it would be set aside 80 acres of their land for affordable housing development.

Rental growth there has slowed, but county median rental prices this month are at $2,122, up more than 41% from the $1,500 average price seen in January 2021, according to statistics From Zillow Jade,

,‘The election results do not change the fact that this flawed and unconstitutional rent control measure was invalidated by the court.’,

—Chip Tatum, spokesman for the Florida Apartment Association

“The election results do not change the fact that this flawed and unconstitutional rent-control measure was invalidated by the court,” said Chip Tatum, a spokesman for the Florida Apartment Association, one of the groups that called for blocking the ordinance. The suit was filed, said. Statement. “With the election behind us, we look forward to working with Orange County leaders on real solutions that will encourage the creation of much-needed housing.”

Voters in Portland, Maine, who already had rent control, flagged a referendum that would allow landlords to simply increase the standard annual rent of 70% of the inflation rate instead of the current rule of 100%. will allow to. Portland Press Herald.

According to the Press Herald, the application fee was also banned, as was a security deposit of more than one month’s rent.

Similarly, voters in Pasadena can increase the rent at 75% of the annual increase of the Consumer Price Index, according to pasadena now, The outlet said the measure was ahead by 114 votes as of 3:30 a.m. local time on Wednesday. If approved, landlords would also be allowed to raise the rent only once a year, and could only evict tenants for “reasonable reason”, such as non-payment of rent.

minimum wage increase

Nebraskans have themselves to thank for the upcoming minimum wage increase.

Workers making the minimum wage can expect to earn $15 an hour from their current wage of $9 an hour by 2026, after voters on Tuesday approved a measure to gradually raise wages. The minimum wage will increase by $1.50 per year to $15, at which point further increases will be linked to inflation, according to Nebraska Public Media.

Nebraska isn’t the only red state to have had a minimum wage increase in recent years: Voters in Florida have chosen to gradually raise their state minimum wage. $15 in 2020 From $8.56 per hour.

Meanwhile, voters in dark blue DC on Tuesday easily approved a ballot measure that would eliminate a separate minimum wage for tipped workers, ensuring they have non-refundable wages by 2027. Tipped workers have the same pay level of $16.10-an-hour. Washington Post. (A similar measure was approved in 2018, but was repealed by the DC Council, according to the Post.) Opponents of the measure had said it would limit workers’ earning potential and affect high-cost businesses.

Still, minimum wage initiatives across the board on Tuesday were not successful. According to the Portland Press Herald, voters in Portland, Maine, rejected a measure that would have eliminated the lower minimum wage and raised the total minimum wage to $18 an hour.


Voters in Massachusetts and California, two Democratic-leaning states, considered whether to increase state income taxes on millionaires. Massachusetts voters supported the idea, but California voters rejected it.

State-level tax measures depend on local needs and perspectives and it is worth considering the differences between the two proposals. The Massachusetts “Fair Share Amendment” is imposing a 4% surcharge on top of the state’s flat 5% income tax rate. Additional tax applies to households making at least $1 million, and additional tax revenue goes to education and infrastructure expenses.

“We have done what some thought was impossible – passed the Fair Share Amendment to create a permanently fair tax system and deliver billions of dollars in new revenue for our public schools, colleges, roads, bridges and transit systems,” said Jeroen Mariani. Fair share for the Massachusetts campaign manager.

The Associated Press estimated Question 1 wins With 52% in support and 48% against the measure.

But in California, voters rejected a 2.75% tax increase on residents making at least $2…

Credit: www.marketwatch.com /

- Advertisement -

Recent Articles

Related Stories