Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Are You Better Off Than You Were Four Years Ago?

Me and my family? Hell no!

We’re lucky to bank anything after paying all the bills, but we do thank God I still have a job.

We sit here being eaten alive by higher gas and food prices, and Bernake's Obama-saving QE3 will just make it worse, yet there are plenty of people still ready to pull the lever for this dismal failure of a president.

Why are we all feeling poorer? Because we are!
According to an analysis of Census Bureau data by Sentier Research, median household income has fallen more during the three-year recovery, 4.8 percent, than it did during the 18-month recession, 2.6 percent.
As one of the researchers told Bloomberg, “Almost every group is worse off than it was three years ago, and some groups had very large declines in income. We’re in an unprecedented period of economic stagnation.”(Pethokoukis – Better off? Not in this Reality)
Here’s what else President Obama has brought us:

* Unemployment over 8% for 42 consecutive months
* GDP growing at less than half the rate of previous recoveries
* There are fewer people working now than when Obama took office
* Poverty is up 24% and median income is down 8.1%
* Gas prices have doubled Under Obama’s reign
* The president tried to play dumb about it on Letterman, but he's increased the national debt by an unprecedented $6 trillion., bringing the grand total we owe to over $16 trillion.

And despite the coronation of a citizen of the world named Barack Hussein Obama, who supposedly understands the Muslim world...

...People in Muslim countries hate us now more than when Bush was in office

So, are we better off? Hell no. Time to fire the president and hire somebody new.

For more damning details of the Obama economic disaster, see James Pethokoukis' article, This economy could be so much better.


Constitutional Insurgent said...

I'm better off now than I was four years ago....by far. And I wasn't bad off to begin with.

But I certainly don't credit this Administration for that.

Since there is nearly unamimous agreement that a POTUS has around zero effect on gas prices, I do await the Romney plan on ho he will lower them.

Silverfiddle said...

CI: Since oil is a dollar-denominated commodity, devaluing the dollar drives its price up.

Also, putting all kinds of drilling opportunities off-limits affects close-proximity availability, which also affects prices.

But I don't think Romney has made gas prices part of his campaign pitch.

Now, what about the rest of it?

If this is success, I'd hate to see what an Obama failure looked like...

Mista Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mista Anonymous said...

It's been almost years since Obama became president and NO, I’m NOT better off than I was 4 years ago. I m makng less than I was then, My home value has fallen since then, and my wife is out of work. But I’d bet that Barrack and Michelle are a lot better now than they were then.
Look, here’s the story. I'm just sick and tired of our side taking the "High Road" and being Mr. Nice Guy. That path only takes us to defeat.

For example, Romney keeps talking about how Obama is really a “nice guy” who just doesn’t understand how the economy works because he has no private-sector experience.. NO Mr. Romney,
1) he is not a "Nice" guy.
2) if he keeps saying things like that then HE don't know how politics works!
Romney has to go on the attack and not play Mr. nice guy.he won’t win that way
He must speak about the Embassy attack, and in Biden’s “chains” comment , and on the failing economy, entitlement spending and on how Obama is dividing us.
Obama never been a "nice guy". He's been a liar, fraud, and a racist, a communist, conman, and tyrant, but never a nice. guy..
Politics can be an ugly game. Unfortunately, taking the high road doesn't win as many elections as getting down and getting on the attack.
Obama and his team of tyrants including Harry Reid has essentially called Romney a murderer, and a crook, and a felon,, Is taking the High Road going to negate that?
Reid, Pelosi, Axelrod and especially Obama are the most vicious, dirty, lying , stealing, thieving, thugs, and tin-horn Dictators that have ever existed in American Politics. You have to fight these people with everything you have,
with this Embassy cover-up and with Fast and Furious to start. That’s how you deal with thugs like them. If Romney makes this campaign purely about who's a better person....he loses. Period!

Ducky's here said...

I'm doing just fine and a Romney presidency would see me doing better.

So vote for Romney suckers.

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

Now THERE's an endorsement! Even complete IDIOTS will become better off under a Romney presidency!

Silverfiddle said...

Hey Duckster, I see your future Senator (Cigar Store Indian-Mass) says she's looking forward to working with Republican Senator Dick Lugar, who won't be there when she gets there.

After the debate, she said she thought Republican Henry Cabot Lodge was a wonderful man and that she looked forward to working with him on advancing the cause of "her people," which could either mean albino Cherokees or over-privileged Harvard professors. The context wasn't clear.

I'm looking forward to Massachusetts having two lampoonable senators again...

Ducky's here said...

Well if you were listening (I doubt you were) you would have heard Scott Brown give us an idea of his "thought".

If oil companies don't have a tax subsidy they would have to raise prices. Total bullshit that he probably extends to the drug industry, financials and others.
Scott Brown, bilking the suckers. Enjoy.

Did you here him support the war in Afghanistan? Terminal stupidity.

Scalia? Please.

Te Lugar answer is interesting. She could have been quicker and maybe named Olympia Snow but the Republicn party is virtually 100% knuckle draggers. You can't work with Republicans.

But get used to your standard of living declining. It's the Austrian Book of Common Prayer for the suckers.

Ducky's here said...

... of course, saying you'd bring Valentine back for another year was a much more serious gaffe than the Lugar answer.

Silverfiddle said...

Wow Ducky... And to think you were almost going to vote for that guy!

Pardon our guffaws...

Anonymous said...

" We’re in an unprecedented period of economic stagnation.”

Think Japan. How many lost decades have they racked up so far?

KP said...

My household income is down 30% since 2010. On top of that I pay more for gas and food and untilities and health care insurance.

As for people pointing toward the stock market as a success of the President? Recall, the stock market will continue to rise as the Fed continues to print nearly unlimited money (QE3). When the market does hit 15,000 your dollars won't be worth as much and the purchasing power will be diminished. The majority of the country in not invested in the stock market in any meaningful way. My bottom line didn't change when the market went from 15k to 7k and back to near 14k.

The Fed's focus on low interest rates is killing retirees who depend on returns of savings and investments for their income.

While Bernanke admits his policies are hurting retirees and folks with fixed income he justified his low-interest rate policy by saying it would spur the economy.

HEY!! The economy has slowed to crawl amid record deficits, record unemployment and declining wealth!!

Z said...

I don't know a single person who's doing BETTER recently... most of us have lost BIG value on our homes and are paying higher prices for everything AND facing losing the health care we know and love.

But I'm reeling from news this morning that the Obama thugs are offering to pay Lockheed Martin's legal bills if LM doesn't send pink slips to a lot of employees (I believe in Virginia) within the legal warning time defense employees are supposed to get before being fired... because those notices would go out before the election. Obama's trying to hide the fact people are going to be fired and will use our tax dollars to pay legal fees later, just to make sure more aren't aware of being unemployed before they VOTE. man


Les Carpenter said...

Actually NO. However, it isn't the fault of Obama or any other individual. Rather it is the result of working in a mature industry in which the DEMAND for its product has been declining over the past 10 years. The result of the digital age impacting game technology. That and the issue of global competitiveness.

Or as we say, it it what it is... the result of advancing technology and a shrinking world... so to speak...

KP said...

The hits just keep coming from Obamacare:

Medical device companies will be taxed 3.2% or about 5 billion dollars. Most of the devices are manufactured in America. That will probably change as the unintended consequence would be outsourcing or moving over seas. Nice.

Starting today, hospitals will be fined for re-admitting Medicare patients within 30 days of dismissal due to complications. This could create a certain level of chaos for hospitals, doctors and patients.

Bunkerville said...

KP is on to something. Just how anxious will hospitals be to re admit patients when they are already losing money on these patients. Better off? Pray you don't have to go to a hospital.

Jersey McJones said...

My wife and I were hit very hard by the collapse of the housing sector. Really, everyone has, whether they know it or not. While the Obama administration nothing to do with that, and the Democrats on the Hill carry far less responsibility than those on the other side of the aisle, we do wish the administration could find more executive ways to mitigate that disaster, as the House GOP simply doesn't care.

I'm not sure how much or even what Obama could do. The bubble burst and there's no getting the air back in it, let alone a sound reason to attempt to do so. However, it seems the directly responsible parties in and around that sector theoretically could be made to make some amends.

It's hard to see how a Romney administration would or could to anything to bring soundness to the housing sector or any of the related sectors around it.

The House is likely to remain in the hands of a GOP suffering unprecedented ineptitude, and political cynicism and callousness. The Senate, thankfully, looks like it will retain a Democratic majority. While the courts are solidly in the hands of Republicans and will be for some time to come.

So, a Romney presidency would only further tilt the country to the GOP, and that GOP has a lot of literal and metaphorical blood on it's hands, and shows no sign of maturing, let alone contrition.

The silly, vacuous, out-of-context question, "are you better off than you were four years ago," is not a question an intelligent voter would ask.

Rather we should look at the balance of political powers in our nation and see the only intelligent choice is to keep Obama for another four years. His administration is not to blame for any of this in the first place, and they have made things better than they were, in the consumer credit market, student loans, healthcare, and more.

A single four year term can not undo the damage done over many years. He needs more time, and so do we. The last thing we should do is revert to the same bunch of crooked "conservative" idiots who allowed all this to happen in the first place.


skudrunner said...


The information I have is 2.3% but when your goal is to lower healthcare, why tax it more? I guess the left believes that taxes are not passed on and result in higher prices, ie oil companies.

There is also a medicare tax going into effect of 3.5% on real estate sales.

Someone has to pay for those 10% who had no insurance and it will be the 90% who did.

No matter who gets elected taxes will go up. Maybe we should just make it fair and raise taxes for everyone.

Ducky's here said...

Don't blame Bush entirely, Steve although he was an impressive jerk. This is something that has its roots in Saint Ronnie Raygun and works its way through Clintoon to Chucklenuts and Obummer is administering a coup de grace.

Here we have people talking about a drop in their standard of living and begging for a return to the days of St. Raygun. He'll lower taxes. Now mind you, he raised the social security tax and made social security taxable. So he ain't going to lower taxes for these suckers but they just keep right on stepping up to the 3 card monte stand.

Romney was boasting about his profits at Bain and asked a questioner where he thought those profits went, implying they get back into the economy.
The correct answer would be equity bubbles like the housing bubble.
Decent folks like Jersey took a hit and the banksters were made whole.

Now we can watch the debate turn to health insurance and the marks are absolutely guaranteed to complain about everything except the 20% that the antitrust exempted insurers take in vigorish.

"By now you know
It's not going to stop
It's not going to stop
It's not going to stop
'Til you wise up"

Ducky's here said...

Silverfiddle, I voted for Brown against the abysmal Martha Coakley.

I have a deep hatred for blue dog Dems which includes Fauxcahontas but Brown revealed himself as nothing more than another screed up neocon knuckle dragger last night.
With Warren you may at least by a little time for the marks to finally crack wise to how they are being shafted.

Ducky's here said...

KP, I'm not entirely sold on the medical equipment tax but let's take a look at it.

A very high percentage of costs are equipment and drug company profits. They enjoy tremendous advantages and subsidies so why is it inappropriate to reclaim a portion of those profits.

I won't say I agree with the tax but I do want to put out an argument that moves us beyond the trained parrots chanting out of The Austrian Book of Common Prayer.

Ducky's here said...

@skudrunner - I guess the left believes that taxes are not passed on and result in higher prices, ie oil companies.

Let's assume that the oil companies operate with a fiduciary responsibility to share holders in a competitive market place.
If they raise prices in response to taxation without losing share then:

1. Does the market operate with competitive pricing (in this case no but your mileage may vary).

2. If they can simply raise prices why don't they fulfill that fiduciary responsibility and just raise them?

Ducky's here said...

... oh, skudrunner, the additional 3.8% is only applied to gains that are over the current capital gains threshold.

Maintaining that it is a tax on all real estate sales is an example of how the fringe right blows smoke.

KP said...

@Ducky, I am not against all tax increases, so I see your point. I understand America needs to raise revenue as well as cut spending.

What I was getting at are the unintended consequences of raising tax on manufacturors and or excessive tax on corporations that may move over seas or outsource jobs.

Our nation is heading down the path of California. California has lost 3.4 million tax payors in the last twenty years and hundreds of companies who simply move to tax friendly states or expand elsewhere (Intel, Wendys and then Campbell Soup this past week) to name three.

Sacramento's delusional Assembley and Governor seem to believe that California is only one massive tax increase away from being fixed.

It's getting harder to blame Republicans in California as they are an endangered species (Obama leads by 24 points).

If voters approve Prop. 30 in Nov, California's top income-tax rates will be the highest in the nation by 20-30%.

Also, Prop. 98 mandates that 40 percent of the general fund goes to K-14 education. I understand Schooling is critical, yet California's leaders have been resistant to imposing the real reforms that will improve schools as they run afoul of the powerful California Teachers Association.

Back to our national problems; when it comes to raising taxes on manufacturing or maintaining the highest corporate tax rate in the world it is helpful to consider what unintended consequences might follow.

Jersey McJones said...

KP, the "rate" may be high, but the effective corporate tax rate is low-to-average by comparison with our international competitors.


KP said...

@JMJ I appreciate that. It sure would be nice to clean up the tax code so everyone is speaking a common language.

Silverfiddle said...

@ Jersey: "Rather we should look at the balance of political powers in our nation and see the only intelligent choice is to keep Obama for another four years."


Oh. man... Thanks for stopping by, Jersey. I love your humor, man...

And you have the temerity to call me "silly, vacuous, out-of-context!"

You're off in lala land, or should I say Obamessiah land, where the hopium smoke billows, the Obamaphones are free, and we can just keep spending money forever...

ocnstiggs said...

I myself am better off. The bottom dropped out for my business in the summer of 2008 and we had 5 quarters of negative cash flow. Since then business has been slowly improving, and this year we're beginning to see improvement in some of our international markets which have been almost dead for the last few years.

For my employees overall I would have to say they are slightly worse off. My account managers are doing better, but we haven't been able to give any raises and only two bonuses over the last 4 years to the salaried employees. They may have a little more money in their paycheck because of the SS tax reduction, but prices have also continued to go up slowly in the meantime.

Silverfiddle said...

ocnstiggs and CI: I am glad to hear some good stories out there!

Unfortunately, you guys are in a small minority.

Unknown said...

I don’t understand this notion among leftists that everyone deserves smooth sailing, forever and ever, and if the seas get too choppy, then they deserve government coming up with a plan to save them from the tempest.

Life is a risk. What should distinguish success from failure is not what government can do for and to us, but rather what we can do for ourselves. I am sick and tired of hearing how people maxed out their credit cards, and lost their jobs, and now can only afford an occasional tattoo ….

I’d rather hear about how people started raising small gardens in the back yard, how they started canning vegetables again, and how they decided to make do with adequate transportation rather than spending a gazillion dollars on a foreign made BMW that the bank is getting ready to repossess.

Ducky has reminded us on several occasions how pathetic we are as a people. He’s right about that. Maybe we don’t deserve more than leftist crumbs.

Hack said...

"But, but! Bush was the one that really started all that! Why don't you just give him a chance...no one could fix Bush's mess in only 4 years!"

FreeThinke said...

I can't pretend to have red every word of everyone's remarks, but no one seems to have this:

Not only are virtually all of us worth a great deal less than we were four years -- the potential price I might get for my home is down SIXTY-PERCENT from what it was in 2007-2008. The value of my portfolio is down a mere TWENTY-PERCENT. I'm one of the lucky ones.

Most investors have lost 40-60% of what they had prior to The pre-election Crash in 2008.

Talk about an October Surprise! ACH DU LIEBER!

On the [supposedly] bright side: Obama supporters may comfort themselves and maintain their high level of smugness because the DOW JONES INDUSTRIAL AVERAGE has just about DOUBLED since Sambo took office.

What most of us either don't know, honestly forget -- or conveniently overlook -- is that thanks to Quantitative Easing [Gubmintese for FLOODING the ECONOMY with government-generated COUNTERFEIT CURRENCY], the dollars we DO still have are worth a great deal LESS than they were in 2008.

The dollar has suffered a significant loss in PURCHASING POWER.

In fact this is nothing new. Since the establishment of the Federal Reserve 99 years ago, the value of today's dollar is worth no more than FIVE PERCENT of what it was in 1913. In other words a DOLLAR today will buy you what a NICKEL would have then.

The Pennsylvania Dutch have a quaint expression that covers the situation nicely:

"The farther ahead we go, the behinder we get."

This is what comes of permitting knaves, fools, thieves, charlatans and evil geniuses to control our lives.

The political process functions on a FARCICAL level. All the sound and fury we hear on radio, television and toss around the blogosphere is nothing but an exercise in FUTILITY.

I keep looking for a silver lining in one of the clouds that make up the lowering sky, but every time I check the sky looks blacker and blacker.

No WONDER everyone is in such a nasty mood!

~ FreeThinke

ocnstiggs said...

Silverfiddle ... of course "better off", is not the same as "doing great", and I'm still significantly short of the kind of business I was doing in 2006 and 2007.

But I will also say that the 2008 crash or whatever you want to call it was the worst I've seen in my business field in 30 years. I'm in manufacturing automation and in the past our business has often actually picked up during declines as companies reduce their work force and then try to increase productivity of their remaining staff by adding automation. But 2008 was SEVERE, and we took a big hit right along with everyone else.

Bunkerville said...

The medical device companies will simply move off shore. Will anyone catch on? Companies do not have to remain here. Get it?

Ducky's here said...

Freethinker, Sambo?

That's just mean.

Liberalmann said...

Freethinker arguments are so thin in his lunatic, Beckian diatribes that even he knows he's spewing bullshit.

So, he has to reach the lowest denominators of the wingnuts (aka. the dumbfucks)who will believe this kind of crap if there's a racist epithet thrown in there as red meat.

Liberalmann said...

We're ALL better off:

Obama prevented a depression, saved Banks, saved the auto industry, created more jobs in his first two years than Bush did in eight years. Had the GOP not filibustered in record numbers all the jobs bills the Dems proposed, unemployment would be much lower. If the GOP hadn't laid off millions of jobs in the public sector (Police, Teachers, Fire Fighters) our unemployment rate would be lower. The GOP won the House on 2010 on the jobs issue yet they haven't proposed a single bill.

Bush increased our debt by over $5 trillion with the items he kept off the budget and unpaid for; the two wars (one was illegal), Medicaid Part D, and tax breaks for the wealthy. Obama put them in the budget. That's how the GOP can now lie and say it's his fault!

Obama Killed Osama, desecrated Al Queda, led a coalition that killed Khadaffi, reformed student loans, increased TAP/Pell grants for students, slowed immigration, put more money into border security than Bush and deported more illegals than Bush, signed the Lilly Ledbetter law granting equal pay for women, credit card reform, ended 'Don't Ask Don't Tell,' Provided many tax incentives and breaks for small businesses and DID NOT raise taxes on the middle class.

But the biggest; passed Health Care Reform after over 100 of trying. Insurance companies can't drop you or deny you coverage and the CBO says it will save us billions over time. Do we really want to go back to a time where you have to hold a Spaghetti Dinner at the local VFV Lodge to pay for a family member's treatments so you don't have to sell your house?

Finntann said...

Oops liberalmann.... you posted that identical rant on here before. It was idiotic then and it is idiotic now. Must be confusing with all the cutting and pasting eh?

Half of the crap you spew is unprovable fantasy "he prevented a depression", obviously, we didn't have a depression ergo he must have prevented it.

Was that before or after he prevented the martian invasion?

I could go on, but it's pointless.

Silverfiddle said...

Liberalmaniac does us a service by putting brainless liberalism on display. His cut and past propaganda in service to his messiah is hilarious.

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ducky's here said...

@Freethinkr - Most investors have lost 40-60% of what they had prior to The pre-election Crash in 2008.


Who the bleep is managing your portfolio?

Ducky's here said...

n fact this is nothing new. Since the establishment of the Federal Reserve 99 years ago, the value of today's dollar is worth no more than FIVE PERCENT of what it was in 1913. In other words a DOLLAR today will buy you what a NICKEL would have then.

What has the increase in productivity been?

FreeThinke said...

Here's what I actually said, Canardo. Obviously you misread it when you carelessly scanned my comment in search of something to mock and misrepresent with malice aforethought:

"Not only are virtually all of us worth a great deal less than we were four years -- the potential price I might get for my home is down SIXTY-PERCENT from what it was in 2007-2008. The value of my portfolio, however, is down a mere TWENTY-PERCENT. I'm one of the lucky ones.

Most investors I know have lost 40-60% of what they had prior to the Pre-Election Crash in 2008."

And of course I didn't tell you about the 65K I spent on major home improvements since the crash or the 85K I sank into an investment property last summer, did I?

I'm doing extremely well considering what we're up against with a Marxist Maniac in the White House and an immoral, imbecilic electorate who'd sell their infant daughter's virginity to a dirty old man for the promise of a bigger gubmint handout -- or a bottle of rotgut.

As for my being "mean" regarding Obastard, I only wish I had the power to be one helluva lot meaner. What he's doing to this country shouldn't happen to a rabid dog on the rampage.

~ FT

Finntann said...

I don't know what market you're playing, but your loss numbers (20-40-60)seem a bit unrealistic for a properly managed portfolio.

My growth funds suffered a 52% loss from October 07 to Feb 09, but from that low in Feb 09 have gone up 129%. Overall, from October 07 - up a little over 14%. Might not be the greatest but it's better than a CD.

But, coincidentally, I started moving money out of growth funds in Jan 08 when it was down 14%. By cutting my losses then I walked away with a 17% gain.

What was the key signal (aside from the housing crisis) to start moving money around? The inauguration of our current president.

Overall from Jan 08, up 33%.

From a long term historical perspective an 8.25% annual rate of return is not terribly bad.

In the eight years I've owned by home my property value has increased 48% (and yes, I've had it recently appraised) with no capital improvements. Put into perspective that is a 6% annual rate of return, which while slightly below the historic 7% rate also isn't terribly bad.

Now my real estate performance (as all are) is locality driven, so I can't take credit for that.

But if you're down 20/40/60%, I'd say find another broker.


jez said...

Would you ever expect to be richer now than you were (or rather, appeared to be) at the end of a recent credit boom?

In 2007, credit was distorting the market. You had a lot of wealth on paper, but that was an illusion. In 2008, 2 decades' worth of chickens all came home to roost. No Cnut, Democrat or Republican, could turn that tide around in 4 years.

Silverfiddle said...

In 2007, credit was distorting the market. You had a lot of wealth on paper, but that was an illusion.


I'm not saying Obama should have brought back the good (bad) old days of a false economy, but his policies have stifled honest efforts at building real things and providing real services.

FreeThinke said...

More positive proof that either people CANNOT read with comprehension -- or simply do not BOTHER -- in their rabid lust to find excuses to exercise their penchant for incessant denigration and defamation.

~ FT

Les Carpenter said...

"... his policies have stifled honest efforts at building real things and providing real services."

I'm not at all sure precisely what those efforts are (where).

Since the oligarchs, all too willing to accept the status qou and take goodies from the government(s) they control continue to run things from behind the curtain methinks FreeThinke is right.

The more things change the more they stay the same...

Finntann said...

@More positive proof that either people CANNOT read with comprehension -- or simply do not BOTHER

OH I don't know "The value of my portfolio, however, is down a mere TWENTY-PERCENT." and "Most investors I know have lost 40-60% of what they had prior to the Pre-Election Crash in 2008."
" seems pretty clear.

My point is not to denigrate or defame you. I use my own portfolio as an example to illustrate that it is possible to make money in this market. My point, is at this stage in the game, unless your portfolio consists entirely of real estate, it should not be down anywhere near 20, 40, or 60%.

The Dow's peak before the crash was 14164 and it closed today at 13494. Something all the liberal asshats that spew here ought to consider...

If this President is for the middle class, the poor, the downtrodden... how come the market's recovered but the economy hasn't?

What does that tell you about who he's looking out for?

@JEZ: "Would you ever expect to be richer now than you were (or rather, appeared to be) at the end of a recent credit boom?"

No, I wouldn't... which is why I state that an 8.25% return is not terribly bad, given the long term historical perspective for both the market and real estate is 7%.

Seriously though, I've earned 14% in growth stocks alone between 2007 and today. Not spectacular, but not a loss either. If anyone is down 20/40/60%, they need to take a serious look at whomever is managing their portfolio.


MathewK said...

It's the funny thing about leftwing presidents and prime ministers, they come into power promising prosperity and unicorns, when they're done fixing all that wasn't broken and trying to make reality bend to their fantasies, we the people are always left poorer, in debt or worse, stuck in a war of some sort.