Last Friday, in an effort to boost his mid-thirties ratings in the opinion polls, Bush changed the subject from the war in Iraq to the economy at home:
Thanks to good, old-fashioned American hard work and productivity, innovation, and sound economic policies of cutting taxes and restraining spending, our economy continues to gain strength and momentum.
Our economy added 215,000 jobs for the month of November. We’ve added nearly 4.5 million new jobs in the last two-and-a-half years. Third-quarter growth of this year was 4.3 percent. That’s in spite of the fact that we had hurricanes and high gasoline prices. The unemployment rate is 5 percent. And that’s lower than the average for the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.
We have every reason to be optimistic about our economic future. I mean, when you think about the news that’s come in, the jobs report, the recent report on strong economic growth, low inflation, strong productivity, lower gasoline prices, a strong housing market, increases in consumer confidence and business investment, our economic horizon is as bright as it’s been in a long time.
The foundation for growth is strong. It’s based upon low taxes and restrained government spending, legal reform, incentives for saving and investment.
Did I read that first sentence correctly? “Restraining spending?” Is he serious? If you are wondering why I find that statement so incredulous, you need to go here and take a look at the graph at the bottom of the post.
Paul Krugman responded to most of Bush’s other claims in his Monday column:
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?
…
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.
…
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.
…
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.
Reminds me of a Bush quote from Fahrenheit 9/11: “What an impressive crowd: the haves, and the have-mores. Some people call you the elite, I call you my base.”























Sorry I’m a bit late with my posts, B.
If there’s one thing that I find gobsmacking it’s that some people are falling for the nonsense that the economy is in good shape and getting better. Nobody asks: At what cost? Well how about the fact that Bush’s economic policy philosophy amounts to good old fashioned deficit spending. I seem to remember that’s what the old Labour Party in the UK used as their economic model.
It is the height of cynicism and irresponsibility on the part of this administration and its GOP enablers in Congress to preside over huge and mounting trade and fiscal deficits for short-term gain when the long-term consequences for the country (when Bush himself is safely out of office) will be horrendous.
You and Krugman hit the nail on the head, as usual.