wages have actually outpaced inflation since ~2015

Umm okay so many other aspects of the cpi respond slower and this is a recent shock…

Food and fuel are more sensitive and respond first. There’s been no time for the effects to really get into the others.

And Food and fuel having huge jumps in inflation is major visible pain for consumers.

But it's a bit of a nasty trick because food, in particular, has inflated in price a lot the past 3 years. Some items, like sugar, are legitimately double the price they were.

Usually from what I have seen, most SWE's partners are also in tech or "white collar adjacent" making similar money. Which makes a household income of $270k, putting them in somewhere around the top ~7.5%.

You do realize food and fuel didn’t just rise 1% on an annual basis? Right?

I still don't think that's right.

You have food and fuel, which is some fraction of the economy - call that F. You have a rate of inflation in fuel and food - call that f. And you have a rate of inflation in everything else - call that e. Then you have

  3.8 = e(1-F) + fF.

I think what you're claiming is that fF = 1.0, so that e(1-F) = 2.8. And I think that's wrong. When they say inflation apart from food and fuel is 2.8, they mean e, not e(1-F).

Depends on what you call a “war” since the last time the US declared war was in WW II.. In terms of military operations, a partial list would probably include:

Democrat Presidents: Bosnia, Haiti, Iran, Kosovo, Libya, Niger, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.

Republican Presidents: Afghanistan, Cambodia, Grenada, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Panama, Somalia, Syria, and Venezuela.

It is outside the 50 year timeframe, but go back another 10 years and you have Viet Nam which caused more deaths than all the rest combined.

Syria, Libya, Kosovo probably more I am just naming the ones off the top of my head.

Vietnam.

Yes, MAGA ran on a broad platform of chaos, griefing, and personal vendettas. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to connect the dots and know war was on the agenda.

aside from the first term? guy lost his marbles after 2020 but there were no new wars in the first term and that was evidence. turns out he has different handlers this time. and dementia. but there were 4 years with no new wars. I liked that.

There is a long history of evidence that voting for establishment candidates leads to more wars and Trump didn't start any new wars in his first term and reduced troop deployments in places where existing conflicts were active so I'm not sure what you mean by no evidence. Supporters were happy about that aspect of his first term.

But, like I said, desperate people make desperate choices. If you're a person who feels strongly about something the establishment wing of both parties agrees on, anti-establishment candidates look very appealing, warts and all.

Well, when the rich control both sides and both sides conspire to create drama to continue to control the country as they want....can't really do much. This country is done for.

I voted for the only candidate (Chase Oliver) that appeared on my ballot that was basically 100% certain to not get us into wars, and I've had absolute vitriol spewed at me (including here on HN) because I was informed it was a default to Trump.

There's no way to act where you won't be hated by someone. Even if you stop paying taxes for the bombs someone will scream that you hate old people or the children.