Under Obama, only the richest 10 percent saw incomes rise

[Naxere]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-years-while-/

But hey, unemployment's down and the market's up, right?

Under President Obama, the richest 10 percent were the only income group of Americans to see their median incomes rise, according to a survey released this week by the Federal Reserve.

The Fed data covered the years 2010-2013, during which period Mr. Obama constantly campaigned against income inequality and won re-election by painting his Republican rival as a tool of Wall Street plutocrats.

“Data from the 2013 [Survey of Consumer Finances] confirm that the shares of income and wealth held by affluent families are at modern historically high levels,” the report said in noting that the median income fell for every 10-percent grouping except the most affluent 10 percent.

I found this bit interesting:

The report comes just a week after AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the union group would not endorse any more Democrats that following President Obama’s economic policy.

“We will call in and question all of the candidates,” he said. “One of our biggest concerns is who is the candidate’s economic team, because if the present economic team doesn’t change, you are going get the same results."

[0ptimo]

inb4 "it's the republican's fault"

[Independent voter]

Isn't that because the economy suffered a lot from the housing crash back in the 2000's and we've yet to fully recover?

I think so.

[Stormspellz]

Talk about biased talking points, Yes the rich recovered much faster then the rest of country, this is not "news". This is more congress failing then presidential.

[Deleted]

Getting really tired of opening biased threads...

[Naxere]

Talk about biased talking points, Yes the rich recovered much faster then the rest of country, this is not "news". This is more congress failing then presidential.

Then why campaign on it as if you have any influence over what happens? Because it's what low-information Democratic voters like to hear?

- - - Updated - - -

Getting really tired of opening biased threads....

How is data from the Federal Reserve biased?

[Shamike2447]

How is data from the Federal Reserve biased?

The article and thread title is blatantly biased.


I like how it says "Under Obama," as if he is a king and doesn't share equal power with 2 other branches of government.

Besides the fact the this Congress being the least productive in the history of the country, let's just blame the black guy.

[Gheld]

Except you know... those same years were governed by a republican house, and the house is the primary driving force behind domestic policy.

[Hyve]

Wasn't it the republicans who recently just shot down a bill to raise the Minimum Wage though?

[SpcGuts]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-years-while-/

But hey, unemployment's down and the market's up, right?



I found this bit interesting:

Sensational!

Here are some more quotes from the report!

The improvements in economic activity along with changes in house and corporate equity prices combined to effectively stabilize average and median family net worth (wealth) between 2010 and 2013 after both measures fell dramatically between 2007 and 2010.

Overall, debt obligations fell between 2010 and 2013: Median debt declined 20 percent, and mean debt decreased 13 percent for families with debt.

The fraction of families with payment-to-income ratios greater than 40 percent declined below the level seen in 2001.

[owbu]

If you want to actually change something in your country, maybe its time to do more than elect a guy with very limited power every 4 years and then start blaming everything that happens or does not happen on him. A society does not change based on that one guy on top. Its not his job to change your way of thinking. You have to do that yourself

[Cronch]

Then why campaign on it as if you have any influence over what happens? Because it's what low-information Democratic voters like to hear?

Actually yeah pretty much. Take out the party restriction though, because the vast majority if Americans, regardless of political affiliation, greatly overestimate just how much power the president actually has. Both sides campaign for lowest-common-denominator votes because that's the only thing that works, especially given the atrocious voter turnout rates.

[SpcGuts]

Actually yeah pretty much. Take out the party restriction though, because the vast majority if Americans, regardless of political affiliation, greatly overestimate just how much power the president actually has. Both sides campaign for lowest-common-denominator votes because that's the only thing that works, especially given the atrocious voter turnout rates.

But Obama's reckless spending continues to push us against the debt ceiling!!

[Jaxi]

Maybe under bush and Reagan only the richest 1% got richer?

Actually, everyone got richer under Reagan. In all family Quintiles there were growths in income, and during a period of deflation.

[Cronch]

But Obama's reckless spending continues to push us against the debt ceiling!!

Obummer the socialist communist lib'ral nutso

Seriously though I have my share of disagreements with his policies, but the level of desperation some people have to see him completely fail is just ridiculous. It's like the fringe right-wing has turned into self-parody.

[Pitkanen]

The market is up, and the top 10% holds almost the entire wealth of the market. Take into account that the fed has been pushing people into over-valueing stock by keeping the interest rate on savings/bank bonds below inflation... and it makes a lot of sense.

We have 30 years of tax policies that has lead to "money begets money" cycle being overpowered compared to "work earns money". But legislation is required to kill those policies, and you can't pass legislation with the tea house signing off. Which they won't.

Democratic presidents are 90% delegated to foreign policy and selecting judicial/executive branch nominees until 2020. And not eliminating the 3 programs that Rick Perry would completely eliminate (if he can remember what they were).

[Bolson13]

So all that cheap money that went into investments in the past years has not trickled down yet? It basically stayed in the pockets of big corporations that probably put robots in Detroit (or Chinese and Indians) to work?

But all of those 10% will sure pay the largest percentage of that (before the crisis sub 40%) almost 80% debt to GDP right? Or does everybody share that part equally?

[Deleted]

- - - Updated - - -



How is data from the Federal Reserve biased?

One word : CONTEXT. For example, you've recently got the republicans who just refused to sign on to a bill raising the minimum wage. Don't pin a problem on one person when other storms are flinging poop about.

Next you might as well say climate temperature has risen under obama.

[SpcGuts]

Actually, everyone got richer under Reagan. In all family Quintiles there were growths in income, and during a period of deflation.

Growth in income has increased every year.

Adjusted for inflation though, median income dropped during Reagan's first three years in office. Overall it increased about $5,000

During Bush Sr's term the median dropped almost $3000.

During Clinton's term it increased almost $6000.

Bush Jr.'s term it decreased almost $1500. (Housing bust and the start of the financial crisis)

It continued to decrease under Obama until 2011 when it started to increase again.

None of these numbers really matter though because median income is not tied directly to the Presidents.

- - - Updated - - -

Obummer the socialist communist lib'ral nutso

Seriously though I have my share of disagreements with his policies, but the level of desperation some people have to see him completely fail is just ridiculous. It's like the fringe right-wing has turned into self-parody.

Exactly. The best part is if you point out their mistakes in reasoning. They assume you completely support all of Obama's policies and call you a "libtard." If only they knew I was actually a socialist and feel that Obama's half hearted social reforms are not enough (ACA v. NHS).

[kevins]

Talk about biased talking points, Yes the rich recovered much faster then the rest of country, this is not "news". This is more congress failing then presidential.

The SPIN Starts in 3...2...1...