Why Pres. Bush is having difficulty getting positive response for his rosy outlook on the economic forecast:

1.      Economic Overview without the Rose Garden Tinted Glasses by Center for American Progress

2.      The Joyless Economy by Paul Krugman

 

Economy: Out of Touch  Today, President Bush will travel to North Carolina to tout an economy the White House says is "cooking along" with "strong and sustained economic growth." Ordinary Americans do not share the president's enthusiasm: 63 percent of Americans characterize the economy as "bad," "very bad," or "terrible," and "by 58 to 36 percent people say economic conditions are getting worse, not better." The divide is understandable. For the beneficiaries of President Bush's economic policies -- major corporations and wealthy Americans -- times are booming. Inflation-adjusted corporate profits have risen more than 50 percent since the last quarter of 2001. But the basic test of an administration is not whether it can merely improve the lot of the comfortable and well-off; it's whether growth and opportunity can be spread throughout an economy. As public opinion numbers show, President Bush has not passed this test. Middle and working-class Americans are frustrated with the economy for the simple fact that it's not working for them. Despite positive job and GDP indicators, most families are losing economic ground -- losing purchasing power, stretching stagnant wages, and piling up debt.

MAKING LESS MONEY: Real wages have declined heavily this year, and have remained stagnant both since the end of the recession and since Bush took office. In other words, the average American worker hasn't had a raise above inflation since President Bush took office. Inflation-adjusted hourly wages were about as high last October as in March 2001. Inflation-adjusted weekly earnings in October were 0.7 percent lower than in March 2001. Labor Department figures released Friday show wages continued to be flat or even lower than at the start of the business cycle in November. Hourly wages for production, non-supervisory workers - the vast majority of workers - rose by just 0.2 percent, while weekly earnings actually fell by 0.1 percent, before the effects of inflation are even taken into account.

FALLING INTO THE DEBT TRAP: With spending growth outstripping disposable income, personal savings rates have plummeted. In August, the personal savings rate dropped to negative 2.2 percent, a level not seen since the Great Depression, and remained negative for the fourth straight month in October. As a result, households are now spending a record 13.6 percent of their disposable income to service their outstanding debt. In the third quarter of 2005, all banks reported that the ratio of consumer loans that were in default, including credit card debt, rose to over 3 percent for the first time in more than two years. And as we continue to borrow to finance the debts of the government and American consumers, the current account deficit has ballooned - on pace for a record $800 billion this year - requiring us to borrow $3 billion per business day to finance our spending excess. President Bush's job record is still too weak to allow middle-class families to escape the debt trap. Without stronger, prolonged, broad-based employment growth and a clear turnaround in wages, millions of Americans will continue to struggle under a mountain of debt amassed over the past few years.

'MISERY INDEX' HITS TWELVE-YEAR HIGH: "If you ask the classic Ronald Reagan question, 'Are you better off now than you were four years ago?' a large number of Americans are in fact not better off," says Michael Mussa, a member of Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers from 1986 to 1988. Bloomberg News notes that Mussa's assessment "is reflected in the 'misery index,' a combination of the rates of unemployment and inflation, which reached a 12-year high of 9.8 in September as energy prices escalated." That is higher than the 7.8 level when President Bush took office and "higher than the average of 8.7 during the past two decades."

TALKING TAX RELIEF: President Bush will also be speaking about taxes today, partly because even many conservatives are now balking at more tax cuts for the rich. (The Economist magazine says this development heralds the end of the "era of irresponsibility.") President Bush's idea of tax relief is demonstrated by his backing of the immoral House budget plan to cut $50 billion from Medicaid, food stamps and student loans while spending tens of billions of dollars on tax cuts for people earning over $1 million per year. There's a way to reform the tax code that's consistent with progressive values. The Center for American Progress released a plan earlier this year to restore fairness, simplicity, and opportunity to the tax system. To restore fairness, the Center proposes taxing wage and investment income at the same rate, reducing the share employees pay into the regressive payroll tax, and increasing the take-home pay for working families. To simplify the tax code, the Center's plan would reduce the number of tax brackets to three, close corporate and individual tax loopholes, and eliminate the AMT. By restoring fiscal discipline and offering increased incentives to save, the plan would implement a progressive growth strategy while making the tax system less complex.

 

Source: American Progress Dec. 05, 2005

The Joyless Economy
Commentary by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, Monday 05 December 2005

Falling gasoline prices have led to some improvement in consumer confidence over the past few weeks. But the public remains deeply unhappy about the state of the economy. According to the latest Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans rate the economy as only fair or poor, and by 58 to 36 percent people say economic conditions are getting worse, not better.

Yet by some measures, the economy is doing reasonably well. In particular, gross domestic product is rising at a pretty fast clip. So why aren't people pleased with the economy's performance?  Like everything these days, this is a political as well as factual question. The Bush administration seems genuinely puzzled that it isn't getting more credit for what it thinks is a booming economy. So let me be helpful here and explain what's going on.

I could point out that the economic numbers, especially the job numbers, aren't as good as the Bush people imagine. President Bush made an appearance in the Rose Garden to hail the latest jobs report, yet a gain of 215,000 jobs would have been considered nothing special - in fact, a bit subpar - during the Clinton years. And because the average workweek shrank a bit, the total number of hours worked actually fell last month.

But the main explanation for economic discontent is that it's hard to convince people that the economy is booming when they themselves have yet to see any benefits from the supposed boom. Over the last few years G.D.P. growth has been reasonably good, and corporate profits have soared. But that growth has failed to trickle down to most Americans.

Back in August the Census bureau released family income data for 2004. The report, which was overshadowed by Hurricane Katrina, showed a remarkable disconnect between overall economic growth and the economic fortunes of most American families.

It should have been a good year for American families: the economy grew 4.2 percent, its best performance since 1999. Yet most families actually lost economic ground. Real median household income - the income of households in the middle of the income distribution, adjusted for inflation - fell for the fifth year in a row. And one key source of economic insecurity got worse, as the number of Americans without health insurance continued to rise.

We don't have comparable data for 2005 yet, but it's pretty clear that the results will be similar. G.D.P. growth has remained solid, but most families are probably losing ground as their earnings fail to keep up with inflation.

Behind the disconnect between economic growth and family incomes lies the extremely lopsided nature of the economic recovery that officially began in late 2001. The growth in corporate profits has, as I said, been spectacular. Even after adjusting for inflation, profits have risen more than 50 percent since the last quarter of 2001. But real wage and salary income is up less than 7 percent.

There are some wealthy Americans who derive a large share of their income from dividends and capital gains on stocks, and therefore benefit more or less directly from soaring profits. But these people constitute a small minority. For everyone else the sluggish growth in wages is the real story. And much of the wage and salary growth that did take place happened at the high end, in the form of rising payments to executives and other elite employees. Average hourly earnings of nonsupervisory workers, adjusted for inflation, are lower now than when the recovery began.

So there you have it. Americans don't feel good about the economy because it hasn't been good for them. Never mind the G.D.P. numbers: most people are falling behind.

It's much harder to explain why. The disconnect between G.D.P. growth and the economic fortunes of most American families can't be dismissed as a normal occurrence. Wages and median family income often lag behind profits in the early stages of an economic expansion, but not this far behind, and not for so long. Nor, I should say, is there any easy way to place more than a small fraction of the blame on Bush administration policies. At this point the joylessness of the economic expansion for most Americans is a mystery.

What's clear, however, is that advisers who believe that Mr. Bush can repair his political standing by making speeches telling the public how well the economy is doing have misunderstood the situation. The problem isn't that people don't understand how good things are. It's that they know, from personal experience, that things really aren't that good

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/120505K.shtml

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to