I’ve been talking about this constantly in recent weeks Obama’s lavish budgetCongressman Dave Camp a timid tax reform plan, and Washington’s corrupt cronyism.
I have to expand on all these topics – and more – in an interview with Professor Glenn Reynolds, better known as Instapundit.
If there was an overall theme, it was that President Obama’s statist agenda is not helping the country.
Other than my hair looking weird, I think it was a good interview.
However, there is an issue that I probably should have considered when assessing the President’s performance. If you look at Census Bureau data based on median household income (adjusted for inflation), we can see that the median American earns less under Obama. And this is true regardless of whether you exploit 2008 or 2009 as your base year.
Let me now offer three caveats to this data: two that lend a hand Obama and one that is less favorable.
1. First, if you look at the Census Bureau’s historical data, you’ll see that median household income is a lagging indicator. This means that incomes will not improve during the first year or two of the economic recovery.
In other words, you could reasonably argue that Obama inherited bad numbers.
2. Second, average household income is an incomplete measure of living standards. If you look at the data, you’ll see that the average income in 2012 (the most recent year available) is lower than the year Reagan left office.
I am huge fan of Reaganso I’m tempted to say the country has lost ground since he left office, but that would be an exaggeration. We undoubtedly have a higher standard of living today, despite the Census Bureau’s data.
3. But I’m not excusing Obama. My third and final caveat is that average numbers don’t tell the whole story. If you look at Census Bureau numbers for various income groupsyou’ll find that the only group that enjoyed higher real incomes during the Obama years are…drumroll please…the prosperous!
You read correctly. The bottom 20 percent have lower incomes. The three middle-income quintiles lost ground. Even the top 20 percent have lower median incomes. The only group that has an advantage is the top 5 percent.
In other words, Obama can exploit many rhetoric of class struggle pretend to be on the side of ordinary people.
But his policy (PETAL, Cylinderetc.) were extremely beneficial to the cronyists and the people who created them The Washington metropolitan area is so prosperous.
Here are some of what Senator Portman of Ohio said he had to say about the topic.
It’s been five years since experts declared the recession was over, but millions of Americans feel like it never ended. We are living through the weakest economic recovery since World War II, and many people are struggling to make ends meet. Unemployment remains consistently high; the number of long-term unemployed people is currently at record levels. But these statistics only tell half the story. Eleven million Americans were so discouraged that they stopped looking for work altogether. Poverty rates have risen, wages have fallen, and the average family now takes home $4,000 less than it did just five years ago.
Just in case you doubt Portman’s comments, here’s a chart I created using data from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
It shows every economic recovery since the end of World War II. The red line is Obamanomics.
Hmmm… that’s almost enough to make me think that maybe we should try it free market and petite government Instead.
PS This cartoon by Gary Varvel is a good summary of Obama’s economic policies.
I also like Varvel address Obamacareand here’s another one from his cartoons on Obamanomics.
As you can see, Varvel is the best at exposing the DC spending cuts scam sequestration cartoon and this cartoon about deficit reduction. This cartoon about Bernie Madoff and Social Securityit’s at the top of my list though.
