Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter

“For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” – Thessalonians 3:10

Affordability in the USA is a problem. That current buzz about the affordability problem helped elect a socialist as mayor of New York City. What is the government’s role for improving affordability for consumers/voters? The government must play a role because it’s part of the macro-economic system. “How can the government fulfill a role with the greatest long-term benefits with the least long-term harm”? A short-term approach is likely wasteful.

When my low tire pressure indicator illuminated on my dashboard I immediately stopped and investigated. I found the low-pressure tire and refilled it. This was a short-term solution. A nail (root cause) likely created the hole and needed to be removed.

Do I continue to invest my time to refill the pressure (short-term) whenever the indicator illuminates? Or do I invest the time and money to remove the nail (long-term)? A short-term reactive strategy risks a flat tire and safety issue. A long-term strategy (removing the nail) saves the most time and effort and is the safest.

Which government role will best create long-term affordability? The answer will of course depend on who you ask. The political left believes in proactive government intervention. Therefore, Keynesian economics is popular with the left.

The political right embraces free market capitalism which resists government interventions. Therefore, free market monetarists like Milton Friedman are popular with the right. Is Keynesian economics the best approach? Or is free market capitalism and Milton Friedman monetarism the best? It depends on who you ask.

What is Affordability?

Affordability, in its simplest terms, means income (salary, investment etc.) is higher than the cost of living (housing, healthcare, food, education, transportation, insurance etc.). Income minus cost is a measure of affordability. A positive number means it’s affordable. A negative one means unaffordable. Just one important measure relates to housing. Between 2000 and 2024 median family income increased 91% while the median home prices increased 217%.  We clearly have a housing affordability problem. This gap alone explains the negative emotional reactions about affordability.

Both political parties want an affordable economy. Which method is best?

Keynesian Economics

Keynesian Economics became popular during the Great Depression. John Maynard Keynes argued for government to become a major factor in boosting economic health. By creating increased demand for goods and services through government spending, the economy could be boosted and prevented from languishing in a recession.

Solutions to problems can create unintended new problems. In the case of Keynesian economics, government debt can increase. During the Great Depression (1930 – 1937) government debt more than doubled from 20% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to 43%.

Today our Government Debt amounts to 118% of GDP. Interest paid on this debt amounts to 13% of the entire yearly Government Budget.

From 1939 to 2025 the political left had the majority in both the House of Representatives and Senate 52 of 85 sessions (61%). In theory, 61% of the time over the past 85 years our government was likely to embrace and act with Keynesian economics. With Keynesian economics the government is proactive.

Can we agree:

· Significant growth of our debt is in part a result of the embrace of Keynesian Economics?

· Our national debt level is in a danger zone?

· Decisions by our elected officials have created, by definition, a lack of affordability because revenue is dwarfed by spending (costs)?

· Continuous growth of national debt is a long-term danger to the economy?

· Significant increases in government spending will increase inflation?

· Significant increases in inflation hurt lower income families more than wealthy families?

· These actions have damaged affordability?

The Political Right Embraces Free Market Capitalism

Capitalism is an economic system that encourages individuals to act in their own interests and reap the benefits. It’s a system of voluntary exchange. An individual freely offers (sells) a product or service at a price (investment). Another individual voluntarily decides (buys) that the value of that product or service is greater than the price paid.

Free market capitalism encourages long-term thinking, ethics, and the concept of optimization (an act or process that provides the greatest value in the most effective and efficient manner using the resources available). Short-term action of individuals acting for their own interests can lead to optimized long-term benefits for all.

Milton Friedman advocated for closely managing the money supply to avoid the most insidious enemy of affordability, inflation. Government spending increases the money supply and leads to inflation.

Which Method Helps Affordability?

The political left’s affordability strategy relies mainly on two short-term reaction factors:

· Government spending (Keynes) to boost demand and encourage artificial supply (growth) in slow economic cycles.

· Redistribution of wealth to those who suffer most from unaffordability.

The political right’s strategy is long-term, i.e. create the conditions essential for free market capitalists to act in their own interests and reap the benefits. Those conditions include:

· Effective and sound monetary policy to keep inflation low. High government spending increases inflation. (Heritage ) High inflation hurts affordability for the low and middle classes.

· Deregulation to encourage innovation to increase the speed of economic activity and supply of goods and services (e.g. housing). Note: Fewer regulations reduce costs, increase supply, leading to lower costs, therefore improving affordability.

· Reducing energy cost. An increase in energy supply reduces costs for nearly everything in the economy and improves affordability.

· Reducing healthcare costs. We have a “sickcare” system, not a healthcare system. Increasing self-sufficiency and reducing dependency on government spending can improve affordability.

· Lowering Taxes for taxpayers. Tax policy that returns money back to the taxpayers improves affordability. The Big Beautiful Bill includes “no tax on tips”, “no tax on Social Security”, “no tax on overtime”, “no tax on car loan interest”, deductions for seniors, renewal of opportunity zones, and makes permanent the tax cuts of 2017.

· Lowering taxes for businesses. Lowering business taxes enables greater opportunities for investment in both capital and hiring staff. Business owners can write off the entire investment in technology, equipment, furniture, and vehicles improving affordability.

· Bringing in high paying jobs. Tariff negotiations have secured promises for $17 Trillion new investments into the economy. More high paying jobs increases salaries and improves affordability.

“Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need.” – Ephesians 4:28

Summary

The political left’s strategy is “refilling the tire pressure”. The Biden administration increased regulations (increased costs), raised government spending (increased inflation), and reduced energy supply (increased costs). The left even facilitated the recent government shutdown to increase government spending to provide healthcare to illegal immigrants and subsidies for Obamacare. Providing subsidies is “refilling the tire pressure”. Subsidies do nothing to address the root cause of the higher healthcare costs. Furthermore, fraud in government programs accelerates the “leak in the tire”. The office of the inspector general discovered $249 million fraudulent payments in Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). (Ballasy, 2025)

Obamacare (the Affordable healthcare Act or ACA) is clearly a failure because it requires continuous “refilling of the tire pressure”. The political right has an opportunity to create a substitute for Obamacare. Perhaps some combination of a tax advantage Health Savings Accounts (HSA) and Christian medical sharing program like Medishare could be one option.

The political right’s strategy is about improving the overall economic conditions that facilitate healthy economic activity and growth (“removing the nail”). The political right trusts the individual and the market. The political left trusts the “experts”.

It seems the political left is winning some of the arguments based on the recent election results in New York City, Virginia and New Jersey. Perhaps these voters are saying, “Hey, we don’t have time to wait for the nail to be removed. We need affordability relief now. Let’s put air in the tire now.” The political left’s strategy leverages the deadly disease of envy.

A combination of urgency, lack of patience, and ignorance of economic principles can perhaps begin to explain these election results. Perhaps educating the electorate about the long-term economic benefits of free market capitalism would change some minds. Perhaps that education could create a little more patience to invest in the time to “remove the nail”.

Can we afford the government to improve affordability? Apparently only if the political right is in charge.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'