5 Oct

Obama Economic Policies Exposed [Reader Post]

                                       

Democrat/liberal/progressive (a very pejorative term) readers, when reading the following facts, will say “See” without thinking about the consequences for their favorite economic policy-maker, President Barack Hussein Hubris “kill list” Obama. What are these facts? I thought y’all would never ask.

According to a September 12, 2012, Census Bureau report:

  • Changes in income for the lowest two quintiles were not statistically significant, meaning the decline in 2010 of 1 percent was relatively unchanged.
  • Income declined by about 1.5 percent for the middle and fourth quintiles.
  • Income increased 1.9 percent for the highest quintile. So only the highest income earners saw an increase in income.
  • Income inequality increased by 1.7 percent, from 0.469 to 0.477 between 2010 and 2011, according to the Gini index, a measure of household income inequality, with zero representing perfect income equality and 1 perfect inequality. This marks the first time the Gini index has increased since 1993. For perspective, the Gini index average during the Bush years was 0.465.

“See, only the rich saw an income increase, and income inequality rose as well,” the Democrat/liberal/progressives will loudly proclaim.

But these figures present a very real problem for Obama and his minions. These figures are the direct opposite of what Obama promised his economic policies would produce when he ran for president in 2008. Obama promised that he would build prosperity from the bottom up. In March 2008, at Cooper Union University in NYC, Obama said, “I’ve put forward a series of proposals that will foster economic growth from the bottom up.”

And in June 2008, in Raleigh, NC, Obama said, “… in America, our prosperity has always risen from the bottom-up,” and that we must choose between “… more of the same policies that have widened inequality, added to our debt,” or policies that “will restore balance to our economy; that will invest in the ingenuity and innovation of our people; that will fuel a bottom-up prosperity.”

Obama, in his 2009 budget, said his policies would bring about “… bottom-up growth that empowers hardworking families to climb the ladder of success.”

So, none of what Obama promised about bottom-up growth in 2008 and 2009 has happened. Again, for perspective, During the eight-year Ronald Reagan economic recovery from the Jimmy Carter mess, incomes for the bottom two quintiles rose by 14 percent, while those in the middle and upper income quintiles rose by 13 percent, and those in the top quintile saw an income increase of 22 percent. And, despite Obama’s promise that he would reduce income inequality, it has increased each year, as the Gini index attests, he has been in office. Further, UCBerkeley, economist Emmanuel Saez found that the top 1 percent of income earners made 93 percent of the income gains between 2009 and 2010. That income gain is much higher than the 65 percent during much of the Bush years (see Table 1, page 7).

But wait, as they shout on TV, there’s more. According to the same Census Bureau report cited above:

  • Median family household income fell by 1.7 percent to $62,273 in real terms (adjusted for inflation) between 2010 and 2011, the second year of decline.
  • Median household income was 8.1 percent lower in 2011 than in 2007.
  • Median household income was 8.9 percent lower in 2011 than in 1999.

Obama, and the economists he surrounds himself with, know this. Yet he continues to lie. In light of the campaign rhetoric, all we have to go on is what has actually happened during the past four years. You remember, the ones that Obama claims all economic problems were Bush’s fault, that his economic policies will correct, and that he needs four more years to finish. Yet, when the results of his policies are examined, he comes up wanting!

But that’s just my opinion.

This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Economy, Obamanomics, Politics, Taxes. Bookmark the permalink. Friday, October 5th, 2012 at 3:56 pm
| 730 views

7 Responses to Obama Economic Policies Exposed [Reader Post]

  1. UpChuck.Liberals says: 1

    Yep, trickle up poverty. Barry and Mooch care so much they’ll be worrying from their little $12mil digs on Oahu.

    ReplyReply
  2. Nan G says: 2

    By these facts we see that, whatever Obama says to the contrary, his policies have done the opposite!
    Obama whips up his rabble with his ”tax the rich,” ”spread the wealth around,” “fair share,” lines while his POLICIES secure more wealth for his already wealthy buddies.
    Truly Obama’s rabble are modern-day ”useful idiots.”

    ReplyReply
  3. Brother Bob says: 3

    Redistributing tax dollars to projects run by friends of the president, unnaturally low interest rates overinflating the stock market – typical leftist trickle down economics

    ReplyReply
  4. Warren Beatty
    thank for the INTERESTING POST,
    I like your web site too,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  5. Liberal1 (Objectivity) says: 5

    @Nan G: The problem with using emotive terms—instead of objective ones—is that they can be equally used by the opposition as an adequate description of those whom they oppose. For this reason, name-calling is never an adequate substitute for reasoning.

    ReplyReply
  6. retire05 says: 6

    @Liberal1 (Objectivity):

    Ah, Lib1, so good to see that you are still supporting the oil industry with your use of a foreign made product, your keyboard. Double whammy! You support Big Oil and foreign labor all in one post. And the nice part about your useless and pointless posts? The more you use your keyboard, the faster it will wear out and the sooner you will have to purchase another foreign made computer.

    All the stock holders of Exxon thank you.

    ReplyReply
  7. Nan G says: 7

    When the unemployment number dropped to 7.8% from 8.1% people were suspicious.
    But then it became clear what’s going on.
    Part-time work is replacing full-time work because of ObamaCare.
    Over 800,000 part-time workers were added last month.
    Olive Gardens, Red Lobsters and LongHorn Steakhouses have all stopped offering full-time work to employees.*
    These staffing changes are “just one of the many things we are evaluating to help us address the cost implications health care reform will have on our business.”
    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-darden-part-time-workers-20121007,0,1505128.story

    Companies can face fines of up to $3,000 for each full-time employee who turns to an exchange — an online marketplace — for insurance.

    Restaurants, are just going to ensure nobody gets scheduled more than 30 hours a week.

    * Darden is the parent company of all those chains and some others.
    Darden has 185,000 employees.
    Now that Darden is going with part-time, it may LOOK like employment ticked up as they hire MORE part-time workers.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>