Matthew Yglesias » The Bush Boom

Aug 26th, 2008 at 11:17 am

The Bush Boom

In 1999, at the peak of the Clinton-era economic upswing, median household income in the United States was measured by the Census Bureau at $50,641. By 2000, it had sunk slightly to $50,557. From 2001-2005 that figure continued to slide downward. That was followed by two years of continued upswing meaning that, according to the new data released today, Bush-era incomes peaked in 2007 at $50,233 before the current wave of economic problems. I guess this is the kind of thing Mark Warner doesn’t want to talk about.

Comments
38

Filed under: Economy, Political Strategy,

38 Responses to “The Bush Boom”

Marshall Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Ugh, the linked article is cringe-inducing. Unless Warner actually does criticize Republican economics aggressively, in which case clothing it in the expectation of friendliness is savvy I guess.

More likely Warner is not only going to give a pointless and counter-productive speech, but he’s going to ruin whatever impact that might have by announcing it in advance, thereby giving every Republican from here to St. Paul the opportunity to criticize him for political posturing in a competitive Virginia Senate race.

Why are Democrats so pathetic? Why?
Aaron S. Veenstra Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:27 am
competitive Virginia Senate race.

You might want to refamiliarize yourself with what that word means.
Marshall Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:33 am
(2): I have no idea what you’re getting at.
Kurzbein Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:33 am
I think this is the difference between what I may want as a Democrat and what’s required in a national campaign.

On the other issue, the decline from 1999 to 2007 is less than 1%. Yes, it went down, but it didn’t drop precipitously.
br Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Marshall,

Here’s the current aggregate of polls in the Virginia Senate race. There’s nothing competitive about this race at all. Warner’s up 59 to 34.
DBX Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Why in the name of God is Warner the keynote?

He’s 25 points up in the polls.

His state is one of the few that is not getting economically hammered and so isn’t typical.

He wants to hone his message for his state rather than the country at large.

His message simply does not square with what the Democrats need to do to Mccain or indeed what the Obama campaign has been doing to McCain since the Biden announcement.

Did they book him, like, nine months ago or what? Do they respond to circumstances at all? I don’t even expect proactivity any more, just awareness.
Marshall Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:44 am
I was forecasting how Republican operatives will spin Warner’s speech, given they know what he will say in advance. I was not making a positive statement about the state of the Virginia Senate race. If you think there’s a correspondence between Republican spin and the truth, you have been asleep for a long time.
Ano Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Isn’t a big part of the story here that more of households’ compensation is being eaten up by health insurance? I’d bet that real median household compensation (including health benefits) has gone up over that time, even taking into account the reduction in the availability of employer health insurance.

Real median household compensation (pay and benefits) would be a better figure to look at. It might still tell a dismal story, but it might not.
Bahrad Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I thought the McCain master plan was to attack Obama and rally his base before the convention, and then at the convention he was going to re-present himself as a centrist maverick. So, if Obama’s speakers relentlessly attack the Republicans this week, they’d be totally outflanked next week. Of course, Obama loses no matter what he does… whether it’s a conservative or liberal talking about him. At least conservatives attack him to beat him, while liberals are just filled with angst.
Evinfuilt Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
#8 Yes its amazing to watch as household income goes down our spending on health care goes up, and due to the energy state right now inflation is looking strong.

So even if its only a 1% drop, when combined with all other factors it shows really how bad the last 7 years have been.
Jack Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that, yes, since Warner is way up in the polls in VA, but Obama isn’t, this is mostly about trying to help Obama win VA in the general.
Kenny B. Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
to 6: Because Obama wants to win Virginia, and the backing of a popular Virginian will help him do that.
Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Jack:
Will Warner get points in VA for showing just how out of touch Republicans are? How incomes have not gone up during Bush’s eight years? Isn’t that something that will play well in Appalachia? If Warner is as milquetoast as some of us believe tonight, he’ll be a pretty weak front runner for 2016.
NHCt Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Warner’s wussiness will put even more pressure on Hillary to rip McCain’s face off. Warner could eat a child on stage and he’d still win his senate race. Couldn’t they have chosen Sherod Brown or someone who has a clue that the GOP has raked this country over the coals? To think I was secretly hoping Warner would agree to the VP slot. Good grief.
ben Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I would love to see that data. This is interesting because average income levels tell witnessed a slightly different pattern over the past decade. I think median income is more relevant but others are citing average income levels. It would be interesting to see exactly how the distribution changed over time.
Do you know where the data can be accessed, Matt? Where did you get the figures?
Bahrad Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
It’s good to know that trying to unite the country and actually govern it and change it in a positive direction is now called “wussiness” by Democrats. The Rove-ists have won.
Njorl Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
I think some of you are way off. The economic populism message should be an easy one to get through. It is something that can be hammered home by any speaker, in any commercial or on Sunday morning talk shows by any Democratic or liberal guest. That message damn well better get through without Warner’s help.

Warner opens up a different avenue of attack. He is a successful Democrat that lifetime Republicans vote for. He is there to tell Republicans it is all right to vote Democratic. He is there to say, “Barack Obama is a lot like me and Republicans vote for me.”
howard Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
ben, averages are useful for telling us how often someone gets a hit; they aren’t useful for income. the classic example is that a-rod (annual salary: $25M) walks into a bar with 24 jobless individuals. average annual salary in the room: $1M.

amount of useful information that average provides? zero.

median is definitely the number you want to look at: it tells you where the precise midpoint in terms of actuals lies (i.e., if you have five people earning $30K, $40K, $50K, $60K, $25M, the median is $50K (the midpoint), while the average of that series is $5,036,000).

if you go to matthew’s 10:27 comment, you’ll find the data source.

Ano, health-care coverage is counted in household compensation, not household income. that said, the gold standard in discussing the status of health insurance is the annual kaiser study (most recent edition, from 2007, here: http://www.kff.org/insurance/7672/index.cfm). if you dig into it, you’ll discover, as you’ve surmised, that fewer people have health-care coverage and their out-of-pockets are higher.

despite the fact that fewer people are covered and the out-of-pockets are higher, nonetheless, the cost to businesses has also gone up, and so dishonest right-wingers will point to the household compensation line (fundamentally, income + health-care) as increasing and blithely assure us that everything is fine.
Luke Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
To those who think it hasn’t dropped, the cost of gas is 4 times what it was in 2000, as is the price of milk.

Also, think of the depreciation of the dollar over this time–if we’d been paid in euros, then breaking even would be fine.

If income has stayed the same, I would imagine that median purchasing power is about half of what it was in 2000.
rea Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
This is interesting because average income levels tell witnessed a slightly different pattern over the past decade. I think median income is more relevant but others are citing average income levels.

When Bill Gates is one of 30 customers in a bar, the average bar customer is a billionaire. Just sayin’ . . .
howard Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
rea, for the record, that’s a net worth issue, not an income issue, which is why i used a-rod at 1:41!
JonF Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Re: To those who think it hasn’t dropped, the cost of gas is 4 times what it was in 2000, as is the price of milk.

where do you live? I’d say three times as much for gas– 3.49 vs 1.19– and milk has gone up about 25%. (I recall it being $1.49 per half gallon a few years back; now I’m paying $1.89 per half gallon).
viagra Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:54 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
tramadol Says:
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:23 am
tramadol
It is the coolest site,keep so!
brand viagra Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:29 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
buy cheap viagra
cheap viagra Says:
April 9th, 2009 at 6:51 am
Very interesting site, Hope it will always be alive! viagra

Matt Yglesias

The Bush Boom

38 Responses to “The Bush Boom”

Blogroll