CSM: Why a strong economy is no GOP asset

[question everything]

The Christian Science Monitor - csmonitor.com

from the April 21, 2006 edition -

Why a strong economy is no GOP asset
Republicans have struggled to get credit for low unemployment and steady growth.

By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON - Of all the problems Republicans face heading into the fall political season, one of the most exasperating is the economy.

In many ways, they say, these are the best of times: Unemployment is at 4.7 percent, lower than the averages of the 1970s, '80s, and '90s. The economy is showing strong, consistent growth, without significant inflation. And the stock market is roaring along.

Yet many Americans just aren't impressed. A majority tell pollsters they trust the Democrats more than the GOP to handle the economy. When asked in an open-ended question which is the most important problem facing the country today, respondents to a recent CBS News poll named "economy/jobs" second after the Iraq war - and ahead of immigration, terrorism, and healthcare.

"First, there's general concern about globalization and its effect on American manufacturing jobs," says GOP pollster Whit Ayres. "We see low unemployment, but the headlines are dominated by the thousands being laid off by General Motors and Ford." Underlying that, he adds, is concern about healthcare and being able to afford and keep health insurance if something happens to one's job. The latest run-up in gasoline prices also doesn't help the Republican-led government in Washington, even if there's little it can do in the short term about that.

(snip)

In a recent speech in Chicago, Senator Clinton focused on the middle class, arguing that "tax cuts are not the cure-all for everything that ails the American economy." Secretary Rubin, in his newly launched initiative called the Hamilton Project, has centered concerns on growing income inequality in the US.

(snip)

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0421/p01s02-usec.html

[napi21]

1. It's becaause the economy is GREAT for only a FEW!!!

Unemployment as a % is low, but many, many people have lost their jobs, only to have to take much lower paying ones instead! Wages are really dropping instead of rising as far as purchasing power goes. And even if you can keep your job, many still have to worry if they will be able to continue to afford health care, as more and more of the costs are pushed onto the employee!

How hard is all that to understand????

[leftofthedial]

5. unemployment is not low. they just changed how they count it.

actual unemployment, that is, the percentage of the work force that doesn't have a job, rather than some contrived estimated statistic used for propaganda, is in the mid teens if not higher. And that doesn't count those who are grossly underemployed now or who are working multiple jobs.

median incomes have dropped.

health care costs and fuel costs eat a much larger share of incomes

the economy is good only if you are super rich or are satisfied working for low wages and poor or no benefits.

[ThoughtCriminal]

2. Without significant inflation?

Sure, because energy and food are no longer included in the calculation. The numbers that are being floated to support the "Strong economy" are detached from reality. The propaganda does not match what almost everyone is experiencing.

[Erika]

3. If you have enough $ to own stocks, you're happy

and make above $75,000 a year. That's the group benefiting from W's economy.

How many of us own stocks and make $75,000 or more a year?

[joeprogressive]

4. Some economist needs to demonstrate in some easy to understand

chart that the average American is hurting. If you look at the individual household income pie chart, the wedges for utilities, transportation (gas prices), and health care have significantly increased while savings has decreased. Personal debt is at an all time high.

Even some in the upper class have fared worse under Bush than Clinton when you factor in those rising costs coupled with an anemic stock market. Notice the pundits like Cavuto will say % gains in the past 24 months in the market. When you calculate a $10,000 investment made the day Bush came into office until today, that money has only grown to about $10,500-$11,000 in S&P stocks. That is pitiful and would have grown faster in a savings account.

[depakid]

6. The numbers don't reflect reality

for a very simple reason.

These statistics ARE NOT valid measures of what people are led to believe that they measure.

Even people who write articles like this just don't get it.