When Clinton was Prez, and the economy was "roaring," did it work for you?

[begin_within]

Did you get your "fair share" of that "robust economy?"

If we get a Democratic president in 2008, and the economy starts going again, will it work for you, will you get your fair share of that bonanza?

Or will it be just like it was in the Clinton era - a robust economy, but all the money flowing to the top?

[Cocoa]

1. it worked for me

[ArkDem]

2. They laughingly refer to this effect on Wall Street:

Bears make money. Bulls make money. Pigs get slaughtered.

It's sickening.

[DS1]

3. Wow, it worked for me alright

:crazy:

[meegbear]

4. Prime example ...

Software - Out of work October 1991. I didn't get a job until May 1993! Starting salary $16K. Over the next 10 years, changed a couple jobs and by October 2002 I was making $70+K. Lost my job in November 2002. Working now at $38K but still paying $70K bills.

Bush I - out of work
Clinton - working, money
Bush II - out of work

QED.

[tridim]

That sounds familiar

I peaked in salary at $85k in 1999. I lost my cushy job in 2000 and have been on a steady salary decline (with occasional unemployment) since. I now make less than $30k and I have to work twice as hard.

[smirkymonkey]

61. Same here....

My highest salary range was during the Clinton years and I got bonuses as well. I have been downwardly mobile pretty much since Bush took office (actually, October 2001 - post Sept 11th economy in NYC) and I am still struggling to keep up with rising costs.

The biggest difference is that I had a lot of hope during the Clinton years, I thought there was no place to go but up. What bothers me so much about this administration is that my hope is being diminshed on a daily basis.

[demnan]

5. I sure did!

I was in such demand that I got a job offer every other year with a 20 k raise for about 5 years. In my current job I was persuaded to stay with an additional raise that matched the job offer.

That was my last good raise, and that was Fall of 2000.

I've been hanging on here (but the contract is up in 2005 October). All the managers have their heads up their asses and can't find work for me. So I will probably take a $30 K pay cut when I have to go out and find a job again.

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Nice Right Wing Talking Points, Bob

Quotation marks over fair share and robust economy. Your math is obviously wrong too, since real wages went up under Clinton more than any president since Eisenhower.

But, you keep trying. Eventually you'll stumble onto the truth.
The Professor

[begin_within]

7. Duh.... where did the money go to, during the "boom years" of Clinton?

[ProfessorGAC]

10. I Just Told You

Read carefully. You'll figure it out.
The Professor

[begin_within]

13. A slight increase for the working class but where did the BULK of it go to

[ProfessorGAC]

18. An Increase Is An Increase, Bob

Under Reagan: Nada
Under 41: Nada
Under 43: Nada
Under Nixon: Nada
Under Ford: Nada

In any capital economy, the larger share of money ALWAYS flows up. But, if real wages are increasing, in any amount, and inflation is low, quality of life and standard of living go up.

I don't know about you, but i don't expect any politician to make me rich. That's my job! My financial security is my responsibility, i just don't want idiot politicians screwing up my hard work. (Like Reagan, 41 and 43 almost did.)

The point you're trying to make is tautological. However, if the largest number of people possible experience an increase in quality of life, that's an economic structure i can support.

So, if you're asking are you and i going to get rich if a dem is elected in 2008, the answer is "Of Course Not". But, then i don't expect that either.
The Professor

[begin_within]

28. Gephard referred to the Clinton era gains as "valet parking"

[ProfessorGAC]

29. Richie Is Not An Economist

He doesn't know what he's talking about.
The Professor

[begin_within]

30. Clinton gave the ruling class far more though: NAFTA, deregulation, etc.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

36. He also gave the working folks a pay increase

listen to the Professor-you may learn something.

[Redleg]

46. Yes, the real wage did increase during Clinton but the share of wealth

held by the wealthiest increased substantially. And now the Rethugs are trying to put even more economic risk on the backs of workers.

Sure- we know that capitalists gain the most in a capitalist system. Some of us are just pissed that they gained so much relative to what regular working people gained. It's a matter of equity. Look at how much the compensation of top executives grew over the last 20 years and compare that with the much smaller increase in compensation for wage earners.

[begin_within]

52. Spare me the patronizing - if anyone thinks the Clinton era was a boon to

working class and middle class people in the U.S., they are the ones that need to learn something.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[notadmblnd]

63. I could show you my tax returns bob

and the steady decline of my income since 43.

[amazona]

8. it worked great for me

Up to the time I never had anything except debt. In the new economy I was able to make some money, pay off my debts, and even have some savings -- good thing too, I haven't earned more than four figures a year since 2000.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

[LSparkle]

9. I don't know how but it sure did work for me

I was absolutely flat broke in '91 and by '94 I was buying a new car, moving to a better apartment, and my bills were under control. I don't know what it is with the BFEE, but every time one of them gets into the WH, I go into the toilet financially. (My life actually got WORSE under 41 than it had been under Ronnie Raygun.) I'm counting the days until 11/08.

[begin_within]

11. My point is: the money still flows to the top, no matter who is in office.

[SmokingJacket]

49. Perhaps... but it trickles down with the Democrats, and sticks in the

rich guy's pockets with Repubs.

I'm not an economist -- just calling it as I've seen it over the last twenty years or so.

[Medical Speaking]

12. Yes it did

Made more money when Clinton was Prez than I am under this dickhead we call Dumb.

[Triana]

14. It worked for me!

God how I miss the days when one could actually find a decent job that wasn't some contract crap that pays 20-40% less with no bennies, PTO, insurance, retirement, nothing.

[BlueInRed]

15. Yes, but I wished it had been 5 years earlier, it would

have helped me a lot more then!!!

[ihaveaquestion]

16. No, it didn't work well for me.

I was living in upstate NY which was slightly depressed economically even during the 90's. I could have moved to make a higher salary, but I stayed so I could raise my kids in a small town. OTOH, the economy worked well enough for me to keep me working - it's much worse now. My job was eliminated in 2001 along with 100's of others and I moved to Tampa to find work.

[begin_within]

17. Do Dems think that just getting a Dem in the White House and the economy

is going to solve the real, long-term problems of the middle class?
It's the economic apparatus itself which is destroying the middle class!

[ProfessorGAC]

19. Could You Point Me To Any Datasets That Support This Contention?

I'd like to see these data and build some predictive models. If they are supportive, i'll include your name on the my next published paper in the economic journals.
The Professor

[tridim]

20. Getting a Dem in the WH gives people hope

Something this country hasn't had since 2000. At LEAST the Dems work for the middle class, as apposed to BushCo who works ONLY for the top 2%. Can you really not see that?

[WildClarySage]

55. It also gives the working poor something tangible to hold on to

such as ChIPS programs, money for public assistance programs (not just sops to fundie faith programs) and policies that promote a stronger work environment that favors workers' ability to choose between employment opportunities instead of having to take what jobs come along.

[notadmblnd]

21. Yeah it worked for me

then bush became president, husband got sick, filed bankruptcy, husband died, I lost my job. A complete and total 360 in 4 year.

[Az_lefty]

22. worked for me, lets do it again.....

:toast:

[bluestateguy]

23. I was in high school and college

And I entered graduate school in 1998, so I was not in my peak earning years just yet. I can say this, however, his Lifetime Learning Tax Credit has saved me thousands of dollars over the last few years. Were it not for that tax credit some years I would have had to pay at tax time.

[CTyankee]

25. You bet it worked

I went back to school and got my Master's and since my spouse was out of work I qualified for the tax credit Clinton created. I also worked in fundraising and was super successful in getting those big gifts of appreciated securities that the rich give away to help with their taxes. When Bush wrecked the stock market, lots of those gifts went away and I nearly lost my job. I've retired since then but those Clinton days enabled me to finish grad work (at age 63), do many improvements on my house that will pay off later when I sell it, and retire with a higher Social Security benefit because I was paid so well. Plus, my organization did so well I had numerous other material benefits. Also, the world was a better place and that's worth alot.

[kiraboo]

24. I doubt that dems believe a democrat republican will

be able to clean up bush's mess in only eight years. Also I don't believe personal income is the only issue dems care about... it certainly isn't my only priority. And finally, yes, we did very well during the Clinton years. In fact there was a distinct surge in construction, home improvement, job availability etc. etc. up here in good old Bangor, which hadn't shown any signs of growth in years.

[ComerPerro]

26. Lets see, bob

Growth where everyone gets richer, or loss and wartime where somehow the rich are still getting richer...

[Iggytop]

27. I have

Been working right threw all these guys.. I do computer stuff so There is always alot of work. And I teach. But the President hasn't hired me one time yet ;-) But The internet years were great to be in the stock market. I don't know how much politics had to do with it though... The economy seems to be picking up again now. At least in my neck of the woods.

[Quakerfriend]

When Clinton was in office we were awash in money

My hubbie was making 324K in '99 as a tech guy. That's with the stock options we got. In 2003, he was getting laid off after missing the cut 3x. I will always remember the night he sat across from me at the dinner table and told me about outsourcing and what it meant for our future. He was going to be looking at making maybe 60K, if he was lucky. We decided we could go no lower than 45K.

I can remember in the mid-90's talking stocks at the dinner table...Made 25K today on such-and-such etc, etc. Almost every night we had something positive to talk about on the financial side of life.

One night at a party my hubbie told a college friend to buy a certain stock and the guy put everything he had into it and became a millionaire in less than 6 months! He and his family were really strugling before that!

We had the ability to give to others in the family and see them get a leg up.

Those were the glory days. I have to say it was a lot of fun!

[MsTryska]

31. actually i got a helluva share during the Clinton era.

I was getting laid off every couple years, but i'd get a new job in a matte rof days, plus higher pay.


I actually quadrupled my salary in that time frame.


suffice to say since 2000 it's been receding back to more "appropriate" levels.



can't beat 86 cents/gallon for regular unleaded either.


*sigh*

i miss the Clinton years.

[NV Whino]

32. You bet I did.

It took me a couple of years to dig out of debt and bankruptcy from Reagan and Bush one, but once out I was able to buy a new car and keep out of debt. Also, my paintings were selling well because everyone had more money to spend. Haven't sold a damned thing since George moved into the White House.

[troubleinwinter]

33. Yes, we did....

My husband builds wineries. The entire building industry in our area was booming, particularly high-end 'specialty wineries'. Sure, the winery owners tend to be wealthy people, but there was so much work, you had to compete to get carpenters and other construction subcontractors to work for you. It was hard to find workers, there was so much work.

About a year and a half ago, two thirds of the construction companies here had cut waaaaay back, or have just gone out altogether. Several of the healthiest companies are cut to 25% of their previous size, and are holding on by a thread.

You see, even the wealthy people are concerned about what is going on, and are sitting it out. Remember that their CUSTOMERS for a bottle of wine have lost their jobs. Under Clinton, people were buying.

Food prices have gone through the roof. We don't eat much meat at all anymore, and it is not for health reasons. I spend much more time grocery shopping, trying to find things we can afford.

Our income had been climbing and promising under Clinton. It has been at a standstill under Bush. Our health care costs more, our food costs more, prospects are shakey.


...Oh... by the way... nice work. 90 posts in three days. Shows dedication.

[Quakerfriend]

37. How true,

"promising under Clinton."

Yes, it seemed that dreams were attainable then. But, now we are just trying to ride out *cos. disastrous policies.

Interestingly enough, I no longer fear anything related to a 'terrorist attack'. It's this cabal, and their destruction of our beautiful country, I fear the most!!

And, I feel utterly sympathetic to the innocent people of Iraq and the rest of the world who fear for their very existence.

[tom_paine]

34. Yeah, it worked for me, but if I knew then what I know now

I wouldn't be so sleepily complacent as I was then when it seemed the System was strong and healthy.

Most of the bad shit accelerated under Poppy Augustus (Reign: 1983-1992) and Tiberius Bunnypants* (Reign: 2001-?), such as wealth disparity, media consolidation and the Infoganda Revolution, still continued under the Last President of the Old USA, Bill Clinton (served: 1993-2001) ONLY SLOWER.

In retrospect, the seeds of destruction were already sown.

And you don't have to worry about what will happen if a Demorcrat gains the Imperial Throne of Amerika.

There is as much chance of that as a Jew being named German ReichsChancellor in 1939.

It's that solidly rigged, IMHO, if not that obviously.

[shrike]

35. Hell yeah, it worked for me

I struggled under Reagan and Bush I. Only when Clinton got in the office was I able to finally get ahead in life. As mad as I get with Clinton at times, I'll always be grateful to him for that.

Now that Bush II is ensconced once again, my income will probably continue to drop -- just as it did every year during his first term.

[MADem]

38. Boy, did I ever

Life was good for me, for all of my loved ones, all of my friends.

Now I hear more hard luck stories than I have since the malaise of the 70s. The ones who are "doing well" are those who are hanging on by their fingernails, and not taking TOO many hits because the money isn't going as far as it used to. Local taxes are up, fees are up, everything save paychecks is up, up, up.

If we get a Dem in 08, things will get better, because our PRIORITIES will shift from the "sit on your ass and collect interest" crowd to those who actually DO the work. Without a robust hard working middle class, we're headed to hell in a handbasket.

[area51]

39. It worked for me.

I used to be working in a profession I love: tech (Unix/Linux).

[mnmoderatedem]

40. Oh but it wasn't Clinton!

Of course it was not because of Clinton that we had a strong economy then; it was the rebublican controlled congress that was responsible. Then when the early 2000s recession hit, despite still being a rebuke congress, it was a "Clinton Recession".

You now the drill...

[Cleita]

41. Actually, it did.

We were able to increase our retirement nest egg considerably, Of course since the Srub, the nest egg has exponentially decreased.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

42. It worked for me-here's an example

1991: out of grad school, in debt up to my eyeballs, working three jobs (retail/waitressing/bartending) to make ends meet.

late 1993: first entry-level high tech sales job, paying 25K/year plus commission.

1993-2000: worked at two companies, getting promotions and salary increases. Made six figures from 1997-2001. Sales started to slow in late 2001 (after 9-11), despite the fact that I sell SECURITY software.

June 2002: first layoff, out of work for six months. Took job at much lower salary. Sales were tough-companies didn't have budgets to spend on software, even if you could prove hard ROI.

July 2003: out of work until Oct. 2003, when I had to take an even lower salary.

July 2004: sales job paying better money than 2002-2003, but certainly nowhere near 1990s levels. Sales are still sluggish, because IT budgets have been low for years.

[Redleg]

47. It's an anecdote. You were involved in the tech industry which

did quite well relative to other industries. Although your own experience is important to you, one must look at aggregate values in order to understand what really happened. Times were pretty good under Clinton. The median real wage increased a bit and fewer people were unemployed compared to now.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

50. I also had money to invest, and could contribute to a 401K

now I have very little income to invest, and I had to cash in a 401K to survive unemployment. my local taxes have skyrocketed.

My companies weren't necessarily helped or harmed by the tech bubble (they were security companies-steady not flashy dot coms). I know people in other industries who had a similar experience with downsizing, unemployment, and being hired back at much lower wages.

[Redleg]

64. Yes, things were better in those days. I'm still waiting for Bush's

"tax cuts" to jump start the economy. LOL

[leftofthedial]

43. it worked for me

since the coup of 2000, I've taken a 50%+ salary hit, lost almost all my savings, spent lengthy time unemployed and/or underemployed and had my life turned upside down.

I'm on the front lines of the class war the repukes are waging against the middle class.

[hfojvt]

44. did not trickle down to me, except invisibly

I was probably helped by the increases in the minimum wage. I had my own business and worked another low-paying and/or no benefits job to make ends meet. I closed the business in 1998 and then worked temp jobs in Iowa where the Democratic governor was worried about a future labor shortage. Then I got a job in Missouri in August of 2001 but was fired in March 2002. Enjoyed a summer of unemployment (no sarcasm, it was like a paid vacation) until I got a great part-time job in August. Since last June I have finally been working full time with benefits. I am now in the lower middle class, but hoping to save enough money to work part-time again.

[Blue_In_AK]

45. It worked for me. I was in good shape. n/t

[SmokingJacket]

48. It worked for me, relatively speaking.

I wasn't one of those people rolling in investment dough, but I found it easy to pick up work when I needed to. I teach college writing, and in the 90's I turned down jobs all the time -- there were so many. I also got all kinds of freelance work. It was a real trickle-down economy: when the universities' endowments got big, they hired lots of extra people. NOW -- endowments have shrunk, and no one's hiring. The local colleges have hiring freezes!

Also -- I keep my savings in CD's (certificates of deposit, not music) because I'm a pessimist and need to NOT lose money, even if I make hardly any interest. Back in the 90s CD's made 6 or 7 percent as a minimum. Now they're no more than 2 percent. (Better than what happened to my parents, though: they finally got into the stock market in 1999. OUCH!!!)

AND... taxes were lower. Because of lowered interest rates, there's been a housing boom, and our house is now assessed at almost THREE TIMES what we paid for it. So we're paying taxes on an expensive house, though we bought a cheap house. But it's not like we could sell this house for a cheaper one, because there aren't any.

And because of state budget problems, state and local taxes have all more than made up for any decrease we might have received from the federal gov.

ON EDIT: I forgot health insurance! Back in those days we had it. Now we have a totally awful, expensive, for-emergencies-only high deductible policy.

[KoKo]

51. Yes....but I had been through Nixon's "wage price freezes," Carter's Oil

crisis and the rest of it. Reagan and Poppy's dismantling of the regulations put in after the Great Depression allowed me to do better in some ways and Clinton was great. But, it was all fake and we will be suffering from the "deregulation" for decades, imho. For those younger who got sucked into the dot.com boom...I think maybe the 90's weren't so great.

It's an interesting post. And the "generational DU'ers" should really go off on this. HOW DO PRESIDENTS AFFECT OUR LIFESTYLE...

They do, indeed affect it. The tone of this ASSHOLE is just about ruining the country...and I go back aways.. He's DULL and he doesn't inspire entreprenuership..innovation...environmental inspiration, or even folks being able to get along with each other.

Bush Spawn is the only President who inspires nothing but "HATE & DIVISION, imho. Except for his cronies with the multiple houses and condo's and lifestyles befitting Kings in another age. While he and Laura pretend to be "Ma & Pa Kettle" with "down home dinners, eating taco's and Cheeze It's" while their Texas "Boots & Hat's Crowd" bellies up to the bar, wears the fur coats and drives the Hummers and life is good for them.

[tabasco]

53. Damn straight it worked for me !

Jobs everywhere !

[mdmc]

54. yes

[Mend]

56. Yes, definitely worked for us and our family

everyone employed, low college tuitions, optimistic, spending, eating out, donating to charities....we were happy and generous and trying to make it better for everyone in the world.

[gollygee]

58. Worked for me

I had companies competing over me. I got a great job with a great salary and great benefits. Then, when we had to hire workers, it was the same. We had to compete to get people to work for us, and therefore people got good salaries and were treated well.

Dunno what you're talking about.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

59. If your assertion is correct, then explain how the number of people living

below the poverty level actually went DOWN during Clinton and went back UP by 2002.

[cmd]

60. It helped, but

I was teaching in a rural school district that had limited funds. The residents were building huge homes, over stretching their resources and not wanting to add to their tax bills. I had a pay freeze during that time and 2 -3% raises other years. Still it was better than the 80's.

[Xithras]

62. Made me quite wealthy

Stupidly, however, I dumped most of my money into my retirement funds and most of those took an incredible beating during the deflation. I'm still "comfortable" (my net worth is still around 1 mil, mostly thanks to some land purchases I made), but I'm only worth about 1/4 of what I was back in 2000 (Enron and Worldcom hit me HARD).

FWIW, I grew up in an extremely poor household, and am still the wealthiest person in my extended family. It was the "Clinton Economy" that put me here.