General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWill the right shut up now that the U.S. budget deficit is at an eight-year low?
If you listen to right wing media, you're under the impression that the budget deficit has been on an ever-increasing path that is bankrupting America. If you listen to most of the "liberal" traditional mainstream media, you'll believe this lie is true. Why? The virtual silence and lack of pushback when right wing hacks visit their networks trumpeting this lie lead viewers to believe the lies are true.
Here is the reality: Under president Obama, the deficit has been on a declining slope virtually every year.
The graph confirms this.
Steven Benen at MaddowBlog reports the following:
Keep in mind, in the Obama era, the deficit has shrunk by $1 trillion. Thats trillion, with a t. As a percentage of the economy, the deficit is now down to just 2.5%, which is below the average of the past half-century, and down from 9.8% when the president took office.
Revisiting our coverage from several months ago, I looked for press releases from the Obama is turning us into Greece! crowd, eager to see them celebrate President Obamas striking record on deficit reduction, but so far, nothing has turned up. Maybe theyre busy.
And in practical terms, thats a shame. The vast majority of Americans are absolutely certainthanks to deceptive Republican rhetoric and unfortunate news coveragethat the deficit has soared in the Obama era. Late last year, a Bloomberg Politics poll found that 73% of the public believes the deficit has gotten bigger over the last six years.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/16/1433402/-Will-the-Right-shut-up-now-U-S-Budget-Deficit-is-at-8-year-low
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)unblock
(52,126 posts)republican logic is simple!
deficits mean no spending by democrats,
no deficits mean tax cuts by republican!
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)?la=en
"Shapiro_Growth in Median Household Income by Age
Shapiro then looks at income growth by age for the past five presidents and finds that the largest average annual gains in median household income occurred during the Clinton and Reagan administrations, with a clear edge to Clinton. As figure 2 illustrates, young people in the Reagan and Clinton years saw their incomes grow right into middle age. The contrast with the Bush and Obama years is stark. Under those two presidencies income growth is lower for young people, small for those entering middle age and negative for those in the 45-49 year age group. No wonder our recent politics has been so bitter. As William Galston notes in another Brookings paper, Economic stagnation means a continuation of gridlocked, zero-sum politics and a turn away from the spirit of generosity that only a people confident of its future can sustain.
UCmeNdc
(9,600 posts)The weak wage growth since 1979 for all but those with the highest wages is the result of intentional policy decisionsincluding globalization, deregulation, weaker unions, and lower labor standards such as a weaker minimum wagethat have undercut job quality for low- and middle-wage workers. These policies have all been portrayed to the public as giving American consumers goods and services at lower prices. Whatever the impact on prices, these policies have lowered the earnings power of low- and middle-wage workers such that their real wages severely lag productivity growth. Macroeconomic policies have often added to the forces disempowering the vast majority of workers by tolerating (or causing) unnecessarily high unemployment rates to forestall (often hypothetical) increases in inflation or interest rates.
To generate wage growth, we need to rapidly lower unemployment, which in the current moment can only be reliably accomplished through expansionary fiscal policyparticularly large-scale ongoing public investments and the reestablishment of state and local public services that were cut in the Great Recession and its aftermath. The priority has to be jobs now, rather than any deficit reduction (which under current conditions will sap demand for goods and services and slow job growth).
On top of lowering unemployment, policy should also aim to restore the bargaining power of low- and middle-wage workers. This means aggressively increasing the minimum wage so that it eventually grows to half the average workers wage. It means reestablishing the right to collective bargaining for higher wages and addressing workplace concerns. It means not allowing immigration policy to be dictated by employers desire to bring in guestworkers lacking basic labor market protections in order to undercut wages in both high-wage and low-wage occupations. Instead, guestworkers should have full rights to the same labor market protections as resident workers, and such programs should be allowed only to relieve rigorously documented episodes of genuine labor shortages. It means establishing citizenship for undocumented workers who are currently vulnerable to exploitation. It means taking executive action to ensure that federal dollars are not spent employing people in jobs with poverty-level wages. Overall, it means paying attention to job quality and wage growth as the key priorities in economic policymaking and as mechanisms for economic growth and economic security for the vast majority.
http://www.epi.org/publication/a-decade-of-flat-wages-the-key-barrier-to-shared-prosperity-and-a-rising-middle-class/
UCmeNdc
(9,600 posts)This papers key findings include:
According to every major data source, the vast majority of U.S. workersincluding white-collar and blue-collar workers and those with and without a college degreehave endured more than a decade of wage stagnation. Wage growth has significantly underperformed productivity growth regardless of occupation, gender, race/ethnicity, or education level.
During the Great Recession and its aftermath (i.e., between 2007 and 2012), wages fell for the entire bottom 70 percent of the wage distribution, despite productivity growth of 7.7 percent.
Weak wage growth predates the Great Recession. Between 2000 and 2007, the median worker saw wage growth of just 2.6 percent, despite productivity growth of 16.0 percent, while the 20th percentile worker saw wage growth of just 1.0 percent and the 80th percentile worker saw wage growth of just 4.6 percent.
The weak wage growth over 20002007, combined with the wage losses for most workers from 2007 to 2012, mean that between 2000 and 2012, wages were flat or declined for the entire bottom 60 percent of the wage distribution (despite productivity growing by nearly 25 percent over this period).
Wage growth in the very early part of the 20002012 period, between 2000 and 2002, was still being bolstered by momentum from the strong wage growth of the late 1990s. Between 2002 and 2012, wages were stagnant or declined for the entire bottom 70 percent of the wage distribution. In other words, the vast majority of wage earners have already experienced a lost decade, one where real wages were either flat or in decline.
This lost decade for wages comes on the heels of decades of inadequate wage growth. For virtually the entire period since 1979 (with the one exception being the strong wage growth of the late 1990s), wage growth for most workers has been weak. The median worker saw an increase of just 5.0 percent between 1979 and 2012, despite productivity growth of 74.5 percentwhile the 20th percentile worker saw wage erosion of 0.4 percent and the 80th percentile worker saw wage growth of just 17.5 percent.
http://www.epi.org/publication/a-decade-of-flat-wages-the-key-barrier-to-shared-prosperity-and-a-rising-middle-class/
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)After all they are the source of all prosperity!
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)The stupid minions who only care about saving foetuses, not real kids, will buy anything, and I mean anything, they're selling.
Wounded Bear
(58,605 posts)They are complaining about the debt now, that debt is still rising. Which is true, but can't really be changed until we overcome the massive deficits from Bush.
The average RW mind is a little too dense to tell the difference between deficit and debt, so it works great for them. Lowering deficits is no longer meaningful to the sheeple, now we get to complain about the debt.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)like health co-ops, student loans or other iniitiative...
Don't worry, folks, Obama is reducing the deficit!
davekriss
(4,616 posts)Facts are facts, but the American economy ALWAYS does better under a Democratic president than a Republican. Why is this not well known?
Dirty Socialist
(3,252 posts)"Deficits don't matter."
- Dick Cheney Before He Dicks You
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)Nothing says clueless like celebrating the removal of much needed money from the economy. It's clear the deficit reduction cheerleaders, including the author cited at the link, have zero familiarity with the aggregate demand curve first described by Keynes.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Lying is what republicans do and what the plutocracy-owned mass media does to help republicans.