Census Bureau reported today average wages declined for the third consecutive year.

[Bill]

The nation’s median household income grew modestly in 2006, the Census Bureau reported yesterday, even as the percentage of people without health insurance hit a high.

Report From the Census Bureau (census.gov)Experts said the rise in income was mainly a reflection of an increase in the number of family members entering the workplace or working longer hours. Average wages for men and women actually declined for the third consecutive year.

“There’s lots of evidence that more people are working,” said Jared Bernstein, a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal policy group in Washington. “The important theme going on here is a labor market that’s definitely offering people more work and more hours, but at lower wages.”

from that corporatist rag, the NYT, be thankful if you don't have an account...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/29/us/29census.html?ex=1346040000&en=f44009a7576b04db&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

[Jennifer]

Unemployment also went down for the 5th consecutive year. GDP has been up near 4% for a very long time, consecutively as well (Trivia Question, last time America had 4% sustained annual GDP was when? That's right, Reagan! Clinton was at 2% annually)

Also interesting to note, we've only recently had a very late coming, expected market correction. Otherwise, the market has gone consistently up since 2002. Another amazing feat.


So to recap:

Income is slightly down, for once.
Unemployment is down
GDP is up
Market is up (from the day Bush took over anyway)


A little deflation in lower wages might be good. Ridiculous the price of goods today! I, honestly, blame Ethanol for the price of goods. If corn wasn't so bloody expensive then the price of all food products would be lower, the price of fuel at the pump would be lower, thus the expenses fo doing business would be lower and people would be able to make their money go farther and businesses could afford to pay more.

[mwillman]

Hell why not just enslave all of us then no one would be unemployed.

[Krome]

GDP is easy to increase by lowering taxes to the rich who fund you and giving nothing back to the poor in society to help them maintain a decent way of life.

[Krome]

With lower taxes education etc gets hit hard as their is no money there for the future. What is there for the future American generations will be a massive debt that Bush has created with China (Who have big nuclear weapons) and will want it repaid. Never in the history of mankind has a country been in debt to the extent that America is in.

[kres24GT]

As the Dems and Reps continue to rule the poor and big business will benefit, the middle class will not. Since almost none of you are willing to do vote these guys out for someone who will stick up for the middle class, why bitch about it?

[Linkster]

I hate to burst any bubbles here but GDP first off that was released today was just a quarterly number - you have to wait till all 4 quarters are in to get the annual number - and this is just an estimate - it always gets corrected (usually downward) later in the year
For those that think there is a difference in what president is in office - it makes no difference what so ever - its regulated by the treasury and omb - not the president

and for factual numbers lets look at what the real GDP has been for the last 16 years:
1991 - (-.2)
1992 - 3.3
1993 - 2.7
1994 - 4.0
1995 - 2.5
1996 - 3.7
1997 - 4.5
1998 - 4.2
1999 - 4.5
2000 - 3.7
2001 - 0.8
2002 - 1.6
2003 - 2.5
2004 - 3.6
2005 - 3.1
2006 - 2.9

Seems that someones assertion that GDP was doing poorly during certain presidents tenures was false (Clinton had 4 years of 4 or better GDP)

Of course it makes no difference since its just a little number that by itself means nothing and is regulated these days to try to be between 3.5 and 4.0
and to try for 20% every five years - that has been the goal since the 1960s

Now if you want to talk real economics - do some comparing of debt with these GDPs - although I probably shouldnt since politics has nothing whatsoever to with economics other than to show who spends uncontrollably and who is tight with the taxpayers money
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/debt_gdp.png - shows nicely a graphical representation of how since Bush has taken office the debt that was finally leveling off, took a bad turn and has spiralled out of control - and that is because the deficit that was finally erased and made into a surplus under Clinton was destroyed one year after Bush took office with spending that hasnt been seen since the Reagan years

[Moby]

(Trivia Question, last time America had 4% sustained annual GDP was when? That's right, Reagan! Clinton was at 2% annually)
http://dcjunkies.com/showthread.php?t=1338

Jennifer, I know that the TV and radio commentators can spout out false information because people can't verify the information or don't care to.

Clinton had an average of over 4% in his 8 years. That's higher then Reagan, George H and George W. No. Dubya has not acheived a single year at 4%.

Trivia Question. What President in the past 20 years showed the best growth rates and lowest spending increases? That's right, Clinton!


You can't make an economic case using the actual facts sweetheart.

[Maj.Stress]

Ridiculous the price of goods today! I, honestly, blame Ethanol for the price of goods. If corn wasn't so bloody expensive then the price of all food products would be lower, the price of fuel at the pump would be lower, thus the expenses fo doing business would be lower and people would be able to make their money go farther and businesses could afford to pay more.
I think you need to do a little more research before you blame anything on ethanol. A lot of corn is grown for the feeding of livestock. What is the main by product of ethanol production? Livestock feed.

I don't think it's the production of ethanol. It's corporate greed and the excuses they make to increase prices and their profits.

[moonman]

The reason prices are high is that money is worth less.

[Bill]

Trivia Question. What President in the past 20 years showed the best growth rates and lowest spending increases? That's right, Clinton!


Yes, but you can make the argument that Clinton was really a republican.

Pro-business, pro-freetrade, effectively neutral to probusiness on the environment and especially energy, pro-military-intervention, etc etc.

Offhand, I can't think of anything Clinton is famous for that is specifically democrat.

[Bill]

I don't think it's the production of ethanol. It's corporate greed and the excuses they make to increase prices and their profits.

Well, if you're gonna say that, it's incumbent on you to explain why all the food and agriculture experts are saying that the increased pressure of corn from subsidized ethanol IS the cause of higher prices up and down the food supply, worldwide.

And stuff like the drop of worldwide stored grain from a average 151 day supply to the current average of a 53 day supply.

[Linkster]

Bill - I would totally agree on the point about Clinton and republican values and thats what worries me the most about the wife
The main point to consider is that what has happened starting with Reagan, is that both parties have shifted to the right on the middle - the democrats are where the republican party used to be and the republicans are just a little further right pandering to the religious base

[Moby]

Ridiculous the price of goods today! I, honestly, blame Ethanol for the price of goods. If corn wasn't so bloody expensive then the price of all food products would be lower, the price of fuel at the pump would be lower, thus the expenses fo doing business would be lower and people would be able to make their money go farther and businesses could afford to pay more.
I didn't even read that far because the top part was so full of crap.

You're a troll. No one that can read would post something so silly on the Internet where people can verify facts. They would say that on a Fox News panel or talk radio show but not where people can do any fact checking.

[Bill]

I didn't even read that far because the top part was so full of crap.

You're a troll. No one that can read would post something so silly on the Internet where people can verify facts. They would say that on a Fox News panel or talk radio show but not where people can do any fact checking.

I think she's an op.

Writing structure tells an interesting tale.

Possibly just a willing repeater with some writing skill, tho. The fox/radio rhetoric is pretty easy to appropriate as ones own actual thought. The advantage of grossly simplistic talking points. No need to think, just repeat.

Effective strategy.

[disrupter]

I would offer this as evidence we are being shepherded into becoming just another 3rd world country.

Oligarchs at the pinnacle have no problem giving this a strong push, but when we let it happen, without resistance, or objection, we have no one but ourselves to blame.

The fabulously towering rich at the top & vast hordes of desperately poor who will do anything for a bit of bread or coin spread like a flat infinite plain in all directions. Reproducing rapidly & undermining any quantifiable value to what they can produce, creating their own devaluing competition.

[moonman]

I would offer this as evidence we are being shepherded into becoming just another 3rd world country.

Oligarchs at the pinnacle have no problem giving this a strong push, but when we let it happen, without resistance, or objection, we have no one but ourselves to blame.

The fabulously towering rich at the top & vast hordes of desperately poor who will do anything for a bit of bread or coin spread like a flat infinite plain in all directions. Reproducing rapidly & undermining any quantifiable value to what they can produce, creating their own devaluing competition.

On that we agree. Economic bias in the system has grown like an unchecked cancer. We have become an oligarchy.

[disrupter]

and worse than that is that the American public has been convincingly sold this warrantless bill-of-goods by the commercial, corporate media.

We are supposed to roll over & play dead like good little sheepies.

Exercise your intellects, challenge all non-evidentiary economic assertions.

These oligarchs are nothing more than convincing liars.