Americans Say the Economy Isn’t Working as Leaders Tout Improvements, Analyst Argues

A growing disconnect between official economic indicators and lived experience is fueling voter frustration, according to writer Corbin Trent, whose recent essay “It Works, If You Work It” argues that despite headlines celebrating growth, many Americans feel poorer and increasingly unable to afford basic necessities.

Trent writes, “By my math, we can’t buy 252 percent more of the essentials. We can afford 61 percent less,” challenging government and media narratives suggesting rising wages and economic strength. His piece asserts that the country’s economic system has shifted in ways that undermine the purchasing power of working people while rewarding corporations and financial markets.

Recent election results, Trent notes, reflect this gap. “49 percent of Virginia voters put the economy as their top issue,” he writes. “In NYC, 56 percent said cost of living. New Jersey voters focused on taxes and the economy.” He adds that public sentiment has effectively made the economy politically inseparable from President Donald Trump, writing, “Voters just told him they’re still broke and they’re blaming him for it.”

At the center of Trent’s argument is his “Years of Work” metric, which he uses to compare what it takes to afford key goods across generations. In 1950, he writes, the median worker needed about 3.73 years of income to purchase a home. In 2023, he says, that figure is approximately 10.16 years. “Our work is buying less of what we need to live — homes, cars, educations, childcare and healthcare,” he writes.

Trent contrasts this with record consumer debt. He notes that U.S. household debt totaled roughly $47 billion in 1950 and now exceeds $17.1 trillion. For him, this shift is not accidental, but structural. “Wall Street and the executives who built this system aren’t just taking our money. They’re taking our lives and leaving us with nothing to show for it,” he writes.

His argument comes as national media and policymakers increasingly describe the economy as stabilizing. In a recent piece in The New York Times, columnist Ezra Klein described the country’s housing crisis as a central driver of economic anxiety. Klein pointed to data showing that “home prices have risen more than 50 percent since the pandemic,” and argued that America has failed to build enough housing in the places people want to live.

Klein’s core argument is that solving affordability requires dramatically increasing supply. He wrote that the answer is not simply subsidies or income programs, but building enough homes to reduce scarcity-driven pricing. He has framed this idea as part of a broader “abundance agenda,” arguing the country must make essential goods — including housing — easier and cheaper to produce.

Klein’s framing provides a counterpoint to Trent. While Trent focuses on declining purchasing power, wage stagnation in relation to essential goods, and financial extraction, Klein points to production barriers, outdated zoning and political gridlock as core problems limiting access to affordable housing and contributing to economic distress.

Both acknowledge a sense of economic deterioration, but arrive at different diagnoses. Klein emphasizes policy choices that restrict growth. Trent emphasizes a system that has shifted away from wages and work and toward asset ownership, corporate consolidation and debt.

Neither author argues the economy is functioning well for most households. Trent writes, “We work harder than our parents did and fall further behind. … That’s not economic struggle. That’s dismissal.” His language underscores his belief that frustration is being met not with solutions, but with a narrative that denies the scale of the problem.

Klein similarly notes that cost-of-living pressures are no longer limited to high-cost coastal metros, writing that rising home prices and rents have now reached much of the country. His data suggests that the U.S. economy can no longer rely on low-cost housing markets to absorb working and middle-class families.

Where Trent argues the system must be fundamentally restructured, Klein focuses on changing rules to allow more building and expand housing options. But Trent questions whether incremental adjustments can close the gap. “Tweaking tax credits or adjusting interest rates isn’t going to restore affordability in any meaningful sense,” he writes. He adds, “We need to reverse a 50-year transfer of $79 trillion from the bottom 90 percent to the top 1 percent.”

Trent’s framing links the affordability crisis not only to housing, but to health care, higher education, food costs and childcare — sectors that have seen large price increases relative to income. He argues that affordability is the defining economic measure for working Americans, and that traditional indicators — GDP, unemployment rates and reported real wage growth — do not reflect lived financial pressure.

Klein, meanwhile, notes that political resistance — particularly at the local level — continues to block the construction needed to stabilize housing costs, writing previously that supply skeptics often acknowledge the problem but fight every project proposed to solve it.

Both writers suggest political consequences are mounting. Trent writes that economic distress is reshaping voter expectations and trust: “We work harder than our parents did and fall further behind.” He argues the sense of betrayal is fueling political volatility and distrust in institutions.

Klein has suggested the same trend could reshape American coalitions, as housing insecurity and affordability cross traditional ideological boundaries.

Despite different approaches, both pieces point to the same unresolved question: whether policymakers will respond with structural change or incremental measures.

Trent concludes his essay with a warning and a challenge. “We can do that again,” he writes, referring to an economy that broadly supports middle-class life. “But first we have to be honest about where we are.”

Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook.  Subscribe the Vanguard News letters.  To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue.  Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.

Categories:

Tags: