‘Gave Iran Week Off Because We’re Nice’: Trump References Ayatollah Funeral In Rushmore Speech
On Friday President Trump delivered a speech at Mount Rushmore to kick off the nation’s 250th anniversary celebrations, and in it he confirmed that everything regarding Iran – whether on the military or diplomatic fronts – have been paused to allow for the Islamic Republic to bury its late supreme leader Ali Khamenei.
Trump said Washington “knocked the hell out of Iran” and that the country was “dying to settle”. He also made comparisons between the lengthy Iran conflict and the brief US operation to overthrow Maduro of Venezuela.
“We beat Venezuela in one day, and we knocked the hell out of Iran,” he said. That’s when he claimed that the current US posture and pause in action is all about allowing the Iranians time to conduct a week-long funeral for the slain Khamenei, killed during the opening day of Operation Epic Fury.
“We gave them a week off for a funeral because we’re nice,“ he said.
The funeral ceremonies began in Tehran on Friday, with government representatives from dozens of countries paying respects, and with the public multi-city procession in full swing on Saturday, amid a heavy Iranian security presence.
While the US administration is touting its Iran ‘excursion’ as a ‘win’ – the reality is that it is looking more like a quagmire with each passing week.
Iran is no closer to abandoning its nuclear program, it is proclaiming its own control over the Strait of Hormuz under Iranian protocol, and its ruling clerics and IRGC military apparatus are firmly in place. Trump and White House officials had from day one vowed a rapid engagement, saying repeatedly it would end ‘fast’ – and had even initially touted that regime change would be imminent – but now it’s been 127 days since the conflict’s start.
Trump in his Rushmore speech didn’t dwell long on the Iran (mis)adventure, but moved on rather quickly to themes of American exceptionalism.
“Americans honor excellence; we admire boldness; we respect ambition,” Trump said. “We are a nation of dreamers and believers, warriors and explorers, doers and fighters and in every human endeavor Americans see an unfinished competition.
“What is strong can be made stronger. What is fast can be made faster. What is great can be made greater than ever before. And that’s what’s happening with America.”
He continued: “Show us a mountain, and we’ll just climb it. Show us an ocean and we’ll just cross it. Show us a problem and we will just solve it. Show us a task the world calls impossible and Americans will get it done.”
Trump: “We knocked the Hell out of Iran. They’re dying to settle. They want to settle so badly. We gave them a week off for a funeral because we’re nice.” pic.twitter.com/wV13cT3FLp
There’s a rich irony in Khamenei’s public funeral starting on the very day, July 4th, that America celebrates the 250th anniversary of its founding. The founding fathers warned the young Republic that America “goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy.“
John Quincy Adams famously warned, “She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.”
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has directed hundreds of employees who live outside the Washington area to relocate to the agency’s new headquarters or face losing their jobs, a move that could significantly reduce the bureau’s workforce.
Acting Director Russell Vought notified employees in a memorandum Tuesday that approximately 450 remote workers must commit to relocating to Washington by July 14. Employees who agree to the move are scheduled to begin reporting to the bureau’s new headquarters September 6.
According to the directive, employees who decline to relocate or fail to respond by the deadline will be separated from the agency.
The CFPB’s new headquarters, located at 445 12th St. SW in Washington, previously housed the Federal Communications Commission and currently houses the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. The facility has space for about 550 employees, roughly half of the bureau’s current workforce of approximately 1,100.
The bureau’s employee union characterized the relocation order as a de facto workforce reduction, arguing the requirement is likely to prompt many employees to resign rather than move to Washington.
A limited number of employees appear to have been exempted from the relocation requirement, though the agency has not publicly explained the exemptions.
The CFPB has not publicly commented on the relocation notices.
There was a time when Bitcoin’s biggest selling point was that it existed outside the financial system. No governments. No central banks. No bailouts. No “too big to fail.” It was supposed to be the antidote to everything that happened in 2008. In fact, I once argued that another 2008 is what could standardize bitcoin.
Fast forward fifteen years, and we’ve somehow reached the point where I’m asking myself whether the last remaining bailout for crypto might actually be…the U.S. government. Think about how unbelievably sickening that would be. It’s the terminus I kept arriving at yesterday while thinking about the only way Strategy would be able to survive if Bitcoin continued getting decimated from these prices. And sadly, the idea isn’t really unimaginable given our current administration’s ties with crypto.
Yesterday I wrote that Strategy’s new capital framework effectively buys the company time. And to be fair, it does. Management rolled out dedicated cash reserves, formal dividend policies, billions of dollars in buyback authorizations, and what at least appears to be a more disciplined approach to capital allocation.
Strategy has now openly acknowledged that Bitcoin is no longer untouchable. For years, Strategy built its identity around buying Bitcoin and never selling it. Now it has explicitly stated that those holdings can be monetized if necessary to fund dividends, replenish reserves, service obligations, or support buybacks. If Bitcoin keeps climbing, nobody will care. If Bitcoin starts falling hard, suddenly everyone will.
Selling Bitcoin to raise liquidity sounds perfectly prudent until you’re forced to sell into a declining market. At that point, the math starts working against you. Selling creates additional supply. Additional supply can pressure prices. Lower prices reduce the value of Strategy’s largest asset, potentially creating an even greater need for liquidity. That can lead to more selling, which creates more pressure, and before long you’ve got the financial equivalent of a dog chasing its own tail into a neighborhood wood chipper.
I’m not predicting that’s how this ends. Bitcoin is a massive global asset, and Strategy alone isn’t going to dictate where it trades. But the possibility now officially exists because management has crossed a line that investors once assumed would never be crossed. Bitcoin is no longer sacred. It’s now part of the liquidity toolkit.
That raises a much bigger question. What happens after every private-sector solution has been exhausted? What happens when the equity markets stop funding you, the preferred market dries up, convertible debt becomes too expensive, and you’ve already started selling Bitcoin? Who’s the buyer of last resort?
Historically, there’s almost always been one. Banks got one. Money market funds got one. The auto industry got one. Regional banks got one. The corporate bond market got one. During COVID we were buying damn near everything that wasn’t bolted to the floor. Whenever markets become sufficiently interconnected with the rest of the financial system, Washington inevitably starts talking about “systemic risk,” and once those two words enter the conversation, almost anything becomes possible. And remember, back in August of last year, I already asked whether or not Bitcoin was too deep in the fabric of the U.S. financial system: Is Bitcoin Too Deep In The Fabric Of The U.S. Financial System?
So why not a Bitcoin bailout from the government?
The Trump administration has developed some of the closest ties to the cryptocurrency industry of any U.S. administration in history. It has installed officials viewed as supportive of digital assets, pushed for clearer rules governing the industry, and repeatedly framed Bitcoin and blockchain innovation as strategic priorities for American competitiveness.
Trump himself has gone from skeptic to outspoken advocate, publicly backing Bitcoin mining, supporting the creation of a national strategic Bitcoin reserve, and cultivating close relationships with many of the industry’s largest executives and investors. The result is an administration that is no longer merely tolerant of crypto, but one that is increasingly politically invested in its success, making the industry’s fortunes more closely aligned with the White House than at any point since Bitcoin was created.
I can already imagine the press conference. “Today, in order to preserve financial stability, the United States government is announcing a Strategic Bitcoin Stabilization Facility.”
I honestly think I’d oscillate between laughing, crying and vomiting. The irony would be almost too perfect. The asset invented to escape governments…saved by the government. The people screaming “End the Fed”…saved by the Fed. The same crowd that spent fifteen years explaining why Bitcoin doesn’t need the traditional financial system suddenly hoping Washington becomes the biggest whale on Earth.
You couldn’t write satire this good.
Politically, I think it would be suicide. The government would be accused of bailing out crypto bros. Every taxpayer would ask why Washington is spending public money supporting digital assets while families are still struggling with the cost of living. It would probably become one of the most universally despised bailouts in modern American history. Democrats would run rampant in trying to regulate and suffocate crypto if they won in 2028. And yet…I can’t completely dismiss it.
We’ve spent the better part of two decades responding to every financial emergency with the same basic solution: print money, borrow money, guarantee money, or throw taxpayer money at the problem until everyone stops panicking. If crypto continues weaving itself into public companies, pension funds, ETFs, banks, retirement accounts, and increasingly complex financing structures, politicians will eventually start arguing that the consequences of doing nothing are worse than the consequences of stepping in.
The funny part is that, by Washington standards, Bitcoin wouldn’t even be that expensive to rescue. With a market capitalization hovering around a $1.2 trillion dollars, you’re talking about an amount of money that barely registers compared to the trillions we’ve borrowed, printed, guaranteed, and spent over the past twenty years.
I’m not saying the government would do it, but it’s amazing that we’re now living in a world where it’s no longer completely absurd to imagine the conversation taking place.
If Strategy’s increasingly elaborate financial engineering ultimately isn’t enough…if Bitcoin falls much faster and much farther than anyone expects…and if every private buyer finally disappears, the last remaining bailout may come from the very institution Bitcoin was created to replace.
And if that day ever comes, don’t tell me it’s impossible. The government has done a lot dumber sh*t with a lot more money.
—
QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only.In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.
This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions.
And all positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.
The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.
Chart Of The Day: Democrats’ Patriotism Falls Off A Cliff. Here’s One Reason Why
American pride remains high in absolute terms, but the trend is clear: the U.S. has shifted from being one of the world’s most nationally proud countries to one that now resembles a typical Western nation.
There are multiple forces behind this decline, but the largest political signal comes from the transformation of the Democratic Party. What was once a center-left party has increasingly embraced socialism and Marxism, frequently expressing anti-American rhetoric while seeking to undermine capitalism and national identity with migrants who don’t want to assimilate.
The new face of the Democratic Party is NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose team of unhinged Democratic Socialists apparently thought it was a good idea to use George Washington’s desk as the centerpiece of a propaganda video attacking America just one day before the country’s 250th anniversary. That was not a coincidence – it was a signal.
Communist NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who just came to this country, chose to become an American, is deciding he is the foremost authority to tell Americans what it means to be American.
He has the AUDACITY, on America’s 250th birthday, to call our great nation “an arena of… pic.twitter.com/sayf6IDu90
The larger message is that the DSA, their billionaire-funded NGO network, and many of their far-left thought leaders are fueling an anti-American sentiment campaign, while their base of migrants and white liberals, affected by nation-killing suicidal empathy, increasingly view everything about the U.S. as racist. That helps explain, in part, why national pride among the left has collapsed.
One X user points out a recent Nate Silver survey showing that American pride has tumbled. That person noted, “Paul @WomanDefiner: Funny things happen when 30% of people in America aren’t American-born.” And that’s most likely correct, given that many of these migrants have little desire to assimilate…
Funny things happen when 30% of people in America aren’t American born. https://t.co/Va84BVULjO
Another survey by YouGov found that Democrats view the Black Lives Matter flag more favorably than the actual American flag.
YouGov poll | 6/30-7/2
Do you have a positive or negative view of the following flags?
(By party, net)
🟦Democrats
Black Lives Matter +69
American +62
Mexican +54
Ukrainian +54
Gay pride +48
Transgender pride +35
Palestinian +15
Israeli −8
Thin Blue Line −24
Gadsden… pic.twitter.com/rFWHQNN7j0
— Politics & Poll Tracker 📡 (@PollTracker2024) July 2, 2026
Last week, mainstream Democrats began to panic over what years of welcoming socialists and Marxists into their DEI-powered coalition may have unleashed. The concern now is that DSA activists are no longer just an activist flank, but are hijacking parts of the party, seizing institutional power, and dragging the broader Democratic brand into an increasingly anti-American posture.
This shift has been fueled by an ecosystem of far-left NGOs, activist networks, and what may be foreign influence operations that have helped normalize socialist and Marxist politics within the party’s base. Read more here.
“Democrats legitimately need to calm down. I’m a traditional Democrat, but I can’t support the party right now. America is a great country, and it’s not hard to live a relatively comfortable life here,” another X user said.
Another poll.
And another.
Chart of the Day: We’ll leave you with this chart: U.S. National Pride vs. Foreign-Born Share…
Trump last night:
Trump:
You can be loyal to Karl Marx or you can be loyal to America.
DRAMageddon Deepens As Samsung Prepares 20% Memory Price Hike
There is no immediate price relief coming for cutting-edge memory chips, even as South Korea moves to double memory capacity. New fabs and expanded lines take time to build and then ramp production, meaning the supply response will lag demand. For now, DRAM inventories remain tight through year-end as data center buildouts accelerate, keeping producers like Samsung in control of the market, with more price hikes likely ahead.
The memory-chip squeeze is not easing anytime soon. That is the clear takeaway from a new report by the Shanghai-based Chinese financial media group Yicai, which says Samsung plans to raise average third-quarter DRAM prices by about 20% from the prior quarter.
More color from Yicai:
On July 3, it was reported that Samsung Electronics plans to raise the average selling price of its DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory) by 20% in the third quarter of this year compared to the previous quarter.
“It’s true,” an executive from a consumer electronics manufacturer told CBN reporters. “Samsung had already spoken with us in June and we have now received verbal notification from Samsung about raising DRAM prices.”
“The significant price increase of upstream components will be passed on to the final price of the finished product, which will curb market demand to some extent. However, since the overall price of consumer electronics products is not high now, even if prices rise, it is not expected to significantly affect users’ purchasing decisions,” said the person in charge of the aforementioned consumer electronics terminal manufacturer.
Another industry veteran also told reporters that the news that Samsung plans to raise DRAM prices by 20% in the third quarter is true, and Samsung has already notified some customers of the verbal price quote.
DDR4 DRAM spot prices tracked by inSpectrum Tech suggest the memory squeeze still has room to run, with the latest rebound pointing to another potential leg higher.
The industry response, and in South Korea’s case, a national-level response, has been a massive push by giants Samsung and SK Hynix to double memory-chip production. But that chip capacity buildout will take years, meaning the current supply crunch is unlikely to ease quickly in the near term.
The situation is worsening, with a recent report detailing Apple’s plan to buy cheaper DRAM from China. Meanwhile, there have been price hikes on popular gaming consoles, from Xbox to PlayStation, as tech giants can no longer shield consumers from memory-chip inflation and are now being forced to pass those costs along to customers.
At what point does Trump start raging at soaring memory prices
A massive $126 billion spending plan approved by the New York City Council earlier this week includes nearly $7 million for so-called ‘trans equity’ programs and drag queen story hours.
The New York Post reports that the budget was approved by Mayor Zohran Mamdani and directs the taxpayer money to programs and services “to help empower the transgender and gender non-conforming (TGNC) community.”
NYC budget funnels $7M to transgender programs, drag story hours
For the record, Drag Queen Story Hour now receives more city funding than the Department of Veterans Services.
The city council said, “Funding may support education programs, employment services, workforce development, healthcare navigation, legal guidance, community workshops, or academic research, among others.”
According to The National Review, the new budget doesn’t include any spending for the additional 580 police officers Mayor Mamdani promised to hire.
State Conservative Party Chairman Gerard Kassar questioned, “Why isn’t there more money for police?”
“This goes way beyond recognizing transgender individuals into spending millions of taxpayer dollars to promote transgenderism.”
Key funding initiatives of the nearly $7 million earmark include $1 million for directed to Destiny Tomorrow for the first transitional housing program for transgender individuals in the Bronx as well as $705,000 for community health for the Gay Men’s Health Crisis and $600,000 for the Caribbean Equality Project.
The allocation also includes funding for education and tolerance with funds for the Advocates for Trans Equality Education Fund and the Trans Formative Schools program, alongside localized funding from city council members for drag story hours in schools and libraries.
Allen Roskoff, head of the Jim Owles Liberal LGBT Democratic Club, told the New York Post, “Transgender youth need our support. These individuals are the most vulnerable people out there. We will do everything in our power to protect these children from hate orchestrated by far right Republicans. We are going to see to it they get the health care and protection they deserve.”
The approval of the nearly $7 million earmark comes on the heels of Mamdani encouraging New Yorkers to set their thermostats to 78 degrees to conserve energy, with Republicans calling the mayor’s budgeting priorities into question.
Ships Abruptly U-Turn Near Hormuz As Some Shift To Iran-Approved Routes
The reopening of the Hormuz chokepoint has proceeded relatively smoothly for weeks, but an overnight development shows that the process remains fragile. At least eight ships attempting to exit the Persian Gulf abruptly reversed course near the critical waterway.
Bloomberg cites ship-tracking data showing that the vessels, including oil tankers, product carriers, bulk carriers, and vehicle carriers, were moving toward the strait along the Omani coast before abruptly turning back. Several ships later resumed their transits through the strait by shifting northward onto a route closer to the Iranian coast, in line with Tehran’s request that ships use authorized Iranian-designated lanes.
via Bloomberg:
It is unclear why the ships abruptly altered course, though Tehran has repeatedly warned vessels by VHF radio to follow designated routes.
Earlier on Saturday, Iran warned Western powers that the Hormuz waterway is not a “theater for the military display of extra-regional powers.”
Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said Iran views itself as the responsible power and security guarantor of the strait, adding that Tehran would closely monitor any foreign military movements in the waterway.
Gharibabadi’s warning came shortly after the UK and France announced that their navies were ready to support freedom-of-navigation operations in the waterway.
“Iran, as the responsible power and guarantor of the Strait’s security, warns with sensitivity to any military movement in this waterway,” Gharibabadi said on X.
He added, “The security of Hormuz lies with the coastal states; the crisis-makers will be held accountable for the consequences of their adventurism; this is a serious warning.”
While daily commodity vessel crossings have averaged around 34 since Monday, Hormuz vessel traffic remains well below pre-war levels.
Natasha Kaneva, JPMorgan’s top commodities strategist, provided clients with more color on Hormuz ship flows and what it means for energy markets:
There is now a rush to move stranded cargoes out of the Strait of Hormuz. Average crude exports from the Persian Gulf plus re-routed volumes over the last ten days have already recovered to about 19 mbd, just 3 mbd below pre-war levels. The backlog is also disappearing quickly: floating storage has fallen to just 20 million barrels, while another 10 million barrels remain in onshore tanks awaiting exports.
Meanwhile, inbound tankers are lining up to enter the Strait, preparing to load barrels that have been sitting in storage tanks for months. More entering vessels will be needed as production across the Gulf gradually returns to normal operating levels. We are already seeing a growing queue of ballast VLCCs moving towards the Gulf.
The line is long and deep—an important signal that the logistical chain is reconnecting and that loadings can continue uninterrupted as the system works its way back toward normal.
The United States has transformed from a collection of 13 eastern colonies into a transcontinental nation spanning 50 states, one district, and five major territories—a geographic expansion forged through land purchases and war treaties.
America’s two-and-a-half-century evolution includes not only geographic growth, but also transformations in population, family structures, wages, the housing market, and health.
Through data and graphics, here is a look at how the country has changed over 250 years.
Changing Face of America
In 1790, 95 percent of Americans resided in rural areas; by 2020, that figure had dropped to 20 percent.
This demographic shift transformed the rural landscape itself. More than 50 percent of rural residents lived on farms prior to 1940, but that share dwindled to a mere 5 percent by 2000.
Although the U.S. urban population surged from 5 percent in 1790 to 80 percent in 2020, this growth shifted heavily toward suburban and outlying areas after 1950, leaving central cities with less than half of the total urban population.
While domestic migration altered where Americans lived, shifting global immigration patterns simultaneously refined who made up the nation.
The number of U.S. foreign-born residents grew from 2.2 million in 1850 to 50.2 million in 2024, or from 9 percent of the national population to nearly 15 percent.
Europe supplied the majority of immigrants during a century-long window from 1850 to 1970, though its share dropped from 92 percent to about 62 percent.
The Mexican-born population of the United States multiplied more than 15 times between 1970 and 2010, exploding from fewer than 800,000 to nearly 12 million.
The pivot point of modern immigration was the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, according to a 1999 study from the Organization of American Historians.
Men sit on a bench outside a Mexican restaurant in Los Angeles on April 27, 2005. The Mexican-born population in the United States grew from fewer than 800,000 in 1970 to nearly 12 million in 2010. Hector Mata/AFP via Getty Images
The law was “instrumental in transforming Mexican immigration” from a seasonal flow of undocumented workers into settled families across the country, according to the journal.
Spurred by economic instability in Mexico in the late 1980s, migrants “opted to remain abroad, accept the proffered legalization, and settle more permanently into a United States life.”
By 2010, the regional makeup of the foreign-born population was led by Latin America (over 50 percent), followed by Asia (28 percent) and Europe (12 percent).
California, Texas, and Illinois were the leading states of residence for Mexican-born populations.
Despite the global immigration and an 84-fold population increase over 230 years, the most common American last names have remained consistent, according to an April report from the U.S. Census Bureau.
Surnames such as Smith, Johnson, Williams, Brown, Jones, Miller, Davis, and Wilson all placed in the top 15 in both the 1790 and 2020 censuses.
Notably, Asian last names such as Zhang, Liu, and Wang ranked among the fastest-growing surnames between 2010 and 2020, according to the bureau’s data.
Evolution of the American Household
America was young in 1800, with high fertility rates and abundant land. Its population was young, too—roughly 50 percent of the population was 16 years old or younger.
In the 18th century, the average American woman bore at least seven children.
Benjamin Franklin attributed the high fertility rates to the ease of acquiring good farmland.
A portrait of the D.D. Miller family of Goshen, Ind., from an album dated 1910–1920. Large families were common in the United States in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries. Mennonite Church USA Archives/Public Domain
“So vast is the Territory of North-America, that it will require many Ages to settle fully,” he said in a 1751 essay. “Land being thus plenty … a labouring man, that understands Husbandry, can in a short Time save Money enough to purchase a Piece of new Land sufficient for a Plantation, whereon he may subsist a Family.”
The American population grew and lived longer. It expanded from from 3.9 million in 1790 to roughly 342.6 million by June 2026, while its median age more than doubled, from 16 to around 39.
In 1790, large families dominated the landscape, with 36 percent of U.S. households containing seven or more members. Conversely, small households (one to two people) made up just 11.5 percent of the population.
The trend reversed over time. By 2010, large households with seven or more people dwindled to under 2 percent, while small households of one or two individuals surged to a 60 percent majority.
Despite the shrinking size of the American family, the cultural ideal of a stable, self-sufficient home remained a cornerstone of national policy.
“A family that owns its home takes pride in it, maintains it better, gets more pleasure out of it, and has a more wholesome, healthful, and happy atmosphere in which to bring up children,” President Herbert Hoover said in a 1931 handbook for homebuyers.
The federal government implemented standardized housing, city plans, and building codes to increase homeownership beginning in the 1920s.
By 1930, the federal government introduced long-term, fixed-rate mortgages that self-amortized over 20 years—later expanded to 30 years.
Homes in Staten Island, N.Y., on April 10, 2025. The modern, long-term mortgage introduced during the 1930s, to combat a foreclosure crisis during the Great Depression, enabled widespread middle-class homeownership. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times
But before 1940, homeownership never exceeded 50 percent.
Then began, in 1945, the economic miracle of the postwar era—a “golden era” for the American family.
Homeownership climbed steadily through this era and reached almost 65 percent by the end of the 1960s, according to the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. Since then, it has stayed relatively stable, rising to just over 66 percent in 2000 and dropping to 63 percent in 2020.
In the pre-Depression era, most homeowners were mortgage free. Those who carried mortgages often had short-term contracts of around one to five years, with large downpayments of more than 50 percent. Many homeowners turned to second mortgages as a source for downpayments.
The modern, long-term mortgage introduced during the 1930s to combat a foreclosure crisis during the Great Depression enabled widespread middle-class homeownership.
At the same time, it had the effect of reducing the number of homeowners who owned their homes outright. Less than 19 percent of Americans owned their homes free and clear in 2000, but the number is rising, according to Census Bureau data. Almost a quarter of Americans owned their homes outright in 2020.
Cost of the American Dream
The U.S. government sold land at just $1 an acre in the 1790s. But there was a catch.
Congress needed a way to raise funds to support the fledgling government after the costly American Revolutionary War. The Land Ordinance Act of 1785 raised those funds through land sales. The acreage was cheap. However, buyers had to purchase a minimum of 640 acres and had to pay in cash or military land warrants.
Before 1800, the average wage for laborers—such as hod-carriers, mortar-mixers, diggers, and choppers—was $65 a year, “with food and, perhaps, lodging,” estimated historian John Bach McMaster in his book “A History of the People of the United States, From the Revolution to the Civil War.”
Wages varied by occupation and state. Women at a cotton factory in New York were paid around $104, Henry Wansey reported in his traveling journal, published in 1796 as “An excursion to the United States of North America, in the summer of 1794.” Salaries of seamen were from $240 to $288.
Clergy’s salaries were higher. A Connecticut clergyman could earn 100 pounds—about $475 in 1794, according to Wansey’s journal.
Farmers harvest potatoes in an unknown location in the United States, in this file photo from the 1930s. Before 1880, the American workforce was rooted in agriculture, but by 2000 the proportaion of farm-related workers had fallen to less than 1 percent of the workforce. Stringer/Files-ACME/AFP via Getty Images
Before 1880, the American workforce was rooted in agriculture. Nearly 30 percent of working adults aged 16 and older were farmers, and an additional 20 percent or more worked as laborers.
By 2000, the number of farm-related workers had dropped to less than 1 percent of the workforce. Instead, professional roles grew to command over 20 percent of American jobs, followed closely by office and administrative occupations at more than 15 percent.
No matter how much the job market changed, the difficulty of translating that income into property ownership has remained a permanent financial hurdle.
While a buyer in the 1790s might have paid almost 10 years wages’ for land, a modern buyer may pay over six years’ salary for a home.
Houses line sidewalks in the Manhattan Beach neighborhood of Brooklyn, N.Y., circa 1945. Formerly occupied by the U.S. Coast Guard, the properties were turned over to veterans to ease the city’s post-war housing shortage. The national homeownership rate rose to 55 percent by 1950. European/FPG/Archive Photos/Getty Images
A closer look at the 1790s housing market reveals that while a basic roof was within reach for some, luxury estates demanded an astronomical premium.
A log house in Hamburg, Pennsylvania—with four rooms on a floor, including doors, windows, wainscoting, and locks—cost roughly $200, Wansey observed in his travels.
A New York villa on 80 acres of improved land was listed for around $19,000 in 1794, according to Wansey.
That was a fortune compared to laborers’ wages.
Then as now, the steep premium on New York real estate also extended to the rental market. “House rent is very dear,” Wansey said in 1794 from New York City. “One hundred and fifty pounds sterling is a common rent for storekeepers and tradesmen to give.”
That yearly rent was equivalent to more than $600 in 1794, or around $18,000 today.
Causes of Death
In 1811, tuberculosis (23.5 percent), diarrhea (6 percent), pneumonia (5 percent), and stillbirths (5 percent) dominated the causes of mortality among 942 deceased Boston residents, according to an abstract reprinted in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2012.
Teething, worms, and drinking cold water were also found to kill, according to the study.
In the early 20th century, tuberculosis was still a leading cause of death in the United States, along with pneumonia and influenza.
By 2010, influenza remained on the list but heart disease, cancer, and other chronic conditions assumed more dominant roles.
Circulatory diseases accounted for the largest number of excess U.S. deaths—the number of deaths over the estimated number based on historical trends—from 1999 to 2022, according to a study of more than 63.5 million deaths published in May in JAMA Network Open. The nation’s death rate fell in 2025 to its lowest point on record, according to CDC data. The leading causes of death in 2025 were heart disease, cancer, and unintentional injuries.
Over two-and-a-half centuries, the American population has lived longer.
In the late 1700s, the life expectancy was around 35 to 40 years old, according to historical estimates. Today, the average American life expectancy is about 79 years, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Average life expectancy in the 18th and 19th centuries was heavily influenced by high infant and childhood mortality rates. Infections such as dysentery, diphtheria, scarlet fever and pneumonia killed many babies and children.
Over the nation’s history, advances in technology, sanitation, food safety, and medicine, including the discovery of antibiotics in the 20th century, reduced infant mortality—the death of an infant before its first birthday—dramatically.
Mothers and their babies gather at a health station for feeding babies with bottled milk, on Madison Street, New York City, circa 1930. Infant mortality—which claimed about 100 babies per 1,000 births in 1915, fell throughout the 20th century to 5.4 infant deaths per 1,000 births in 2025, due to advances in medicine and other factors. Keystone View Company/FPG/Archive Photos/Getty Images
A lack of data on births and infant deaths in the 19th century United States makes it hard to gauge infant mortality, although by some historical estimates, up to 20 percent of infants died in the first year of life in the 19th century United States.
By 1915, when U.S. Census Bureau annual data on the subject was first available, the infant mortality rate in the United States was 100 per 1,000 live births.
In 2025, the infant mortality rate dropped to an all time low of 5.4 infant deaths per 1,000, according to the CDC.
Maternal mortality rates also plummeted. In 1900, the maternal mortality rate in the United States was about 850 women per 100,000 births, according to the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. In 2026, that number stands at just 17.9 deaths per 100,000 births, according to the CDC.
Heat Dome Threatens America’s 250th Birthday As Power Grid Crisis Continues
A massive heat dome continues to threaten the eastern half of the US, with the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast at the epicenter of the sweltering conditions.
The summer heat is already disrupting July 4 celebrations and World Cup matches, while pushing the nation’s largest power grid toward crisis mode later this afternoon for the third consecutive day.
The annual Independence Day Parade in Washington, DC, set for later today was canceled “due to extreme heat,” organizers said in an overnight memo.
Cooling demand will surge again later today, just as PJM faces a record load. The grid that serves 67 million people across 13 states has held up so far because of the Trump administration’s emergency orders requiring fossil-fuel power plants to run at full capacity. This comes as disastrous climate socialist policies have neutered parts of the grid that collided with a data center boom.
A soul-crushing “Heat Dome” will build across the Eastern United States 🇺🇸into Independence Day weekend🎆70 million population at least 100°F
“On July 2, PJM’s peak instantaneous load was approximately 162,700 megawatts between 5 and 6 p.m., according to preliminary figures, but that figure was suppressed by the use of demand response programs,” PJM told members and stakeholders in an operations update. “The peak load is likely to have surpassed the all-time PJM record.”
The website GridStatus has shown throughout this week that the main power mix that has saved PJM from total collapse has been a combination of natural gas, nuclear, and coal. At the same time, unreliable solar and wind have together contributed only a mid- to high-single-digit percentage of total power generation.
Temperatures are expected to climb into triple-digit territory on Saturday, with relief on the way.
Forecasts show average temperatures across the region plunging below the 30-year average of around 70F next week, offering a brief break from the heat dome. However, that may not last long, as the latest two-week outlook points to another potential heat dome after the midpoint of the month.
Climate change in the 1930s? Someone tell the climate socialists.
These are not heat indices, but actual temperatures. Let that put some perspective on how bad the 1930s were. Only 6 states have had their record highs set since 2000 pic.twitter.com/t9SnPInKXS
— The American Storm (@BigJoeBastardi) July 4, 2026
Bryan Jackson, a forecaster at the US Weather Prediction Center, told Bloomberg what’s next for the Mid-Atlantic region: “We are going to go from a period of intense heat to what should be quite a few stormy days. The heat will be down but the storm chances will be way up.”
Russia Planning Provocation Against Poland To Test NATO Resolve, US Reportedly Warned
The Telegraph along with various Eastern European media outlets, including Polish national sources, are reporting that United States passed Warsaw a warning based on intelligence that Moscow is considering an armed provocation against Poland to “test NATO’s resolve”.
Provocation scenarios are said to potentially include drone attacks on critical infrastructure such as power plants, or else testing airspace by simulating a large-scale air attack to try and force Poland to prematurely activate its air defenses.
An official within President Karol Nawrocki’s administration said the US “systematically informs Poland about ever-new Russian plans for a conventional attack on NATO’s eastern flank, from which Poland is by no means excluded.” These reports are rife with wild speculation, however, and thus could be standard wartime propaganda.
A “hybrid attack” on the border region, possibly involving Belarusian armed forces, is considered to be the most serious possibly scenario, according to the reports.
It would be portrayed as an ‘accidental’ incursion:
Moscow could portray such an incursion as accidental, claiming troops crossed the border because of a GPS failure or entered Poland to retrieve a malfunctioning helicopter, according to the report.
Russia could then seek negotiations rather than a military response, betting that the United States would pressure Poland not to open fire on Russian or Belarusian personnel.
The Telegraph lays out a potential motive in the following:
Russia would count on the fact that, instead of opening fire on Russian or Belarusian soldiers in such a situation, Poland would be forced by the US to negotiate with Russia or Belarus rather than respond forcefully, Polish sources told Onet.
A scenario in which the Russians would withdraw from Poland as a result of those negotiations, rather than because they were forced to do so by military means, would be seen as a win from Moscow’s perspective.
An end to Western support for Ukraine could even be a central Russian demand of such talks in return for withdrawal from Poland.
Given the reporting on all of this ultimately originated in Polish media, and cited sources close to the presidency, there’s also the likelihood that it is pure propaganda – aimed at dialing up Western pressure and ‘readiness’ with an eye on Moscow.
Poland is meanwhile busy with ongoing plans to complete a new set of anti-drone fortifications along its eastern borders, part of a broader EU and NATO push for a protective ‘drone wall’ in defense of European airspace.
There’s been much speculation that ‘Union State’ Belarus could play a key role in future Russian maneuvers targeting Poland.
This planning began in earnest in 2025 after repeat aerial spillover incidents related to the Ukraine war – at various times errant drones, missiles, interceptors – and also even warplanes – have breached Baltic and Eastern European nations’ airspace. Often, however, these incidents arise from off-course Ukrainian drones.
