Elections
Can consumption Theory be applied to a partial segment of the population? In 2016, I did a chart showing the effect of rural voters income as percentage of disposable personal income and it did show that the up and down of this ratio having an effect on U.S. presidential elections. After Trump II election, I revised the chart to include data back to 1959 and I was surprised to learn that in 15 out of 17 times the election could be explained by farm income. Furthermore, political affiliation did not determine the result of elections, only the farm income! This behavior confirms voters' self interest, i.e. preference for policies that increase farm income, as motivator for elections, which is a plus for the micro foundations of the consumption theory!
From 1959 to 2024, the chart below confirms that, with two exceptions (Johnson and Clinton II), when farm income drops there is a shift in presidential election, independently of the president (or party) in power. (Johnson election may have been affected by Kennedy’s assassination. Clinton II had strong farm partial recovery in first two quarters of 1996.). Note that in 2024 (for first three quarters), farm income as percentage of disposable personal income reached the lowest level in the last 65 years. In all likelyhood, any Republican presidential candidate, even J.D. Vance, would have won the election of 2024.
Wu, Cheng (2024): "Consumption Theory and Why Any GOP Candidate, Including J.D. Vance, Would Have Won the 2024 Election: Comment and Update to the Original Paper of 2016" (“Economics and How Obama Could Have Lost the 2016 Election Too”). https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/122718/