iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Income Inequality Worse Under Obama Than George W. Bush

The Huffington Post  |  By Posted: 04/11/2012 6:19 pm Updated: 04/11/2012 6:19 pm

Income Inequality

President Obama may talk a big game about economic fairness, but his record on the issue doesn't quite match up.

There are lots of reasons to think so -- and we'll touch on several in just a minute -- but the most recent comes from Matt Stoller, blogging at Naked Capitalism, who points us toward a recent bit of number-crunching from Emmanuel Saez, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

Saez, who's known for his work on the income gap, has highlighted a surprising and discouraging fact: during the post-recession period of 2009 and 2010, the rich snagged a greater share of total income growth than they did during the boom years of 2002 to 2007.

In other words, inequality has been even more pronounced under Obama than it was under George W. Bush.

This news may not come as a shock if you're one of the many Americans who lost their job during the recession and couldn't find another that paid as well. It also might not surprise you if you're one of the 46 million people living in poverty -- a record number, as it happens -- or among the millions of Americans who can get by week to week, but would be ruined by a single financial emergency.

You might likewise not be surprised if you already knew that some household-goods companies are catering to this new reality by quietly neglecting their mid-price product lines, focusing instead on their high-end and budget offerings, since wages are diverging so much. Or if you knew that the U.S. ranks closer to China, Serbia and Rwanda than any other country in the developed world when it comes to income inequality.

On the other hand, if you've been listening to Obama decry the wealth gap on the campaign trail, and talk about the need to impose higher tax rates on millionaires, well, then you might be a little surprised.

It was only a few months ago that the Congressional Budget Office released a report illustrating how the very richest Americans have pulled away from the rest of society in the past 30 years.

But that report used data that was only complete through 2007. Saez's calculations go through 2010, suggesting that White House rhetoric or no, the trends of the past three decades haven't started to reverse themselves.

Here's how Saez's math breaks down, for the curious: In the 2009-2010 period, a time of modest economic growth, the top 1 percent of U.S. earners captured 93 percent of all the income growth in the country.

Got that? Now compare it to how the mega-rich made out during the Bush upswing years of 2002 to 2007. During that time, the top 1 percent of earners captured just 65 percent of all the income growth.

That means the rising tide has lifted fewer boats during the Obama years -- and the ones it's lifted have been mostly yachts.

FOLLOW BUSINESS

President Obama may talk a big game about economic fairness, but his record on the issue doesn't quite match up. There are lots of reasons to think so -- and we'll touch on several in just a minute...
President Obama may talk a big game about economic fairness, but his record on the issue doesn't quite match up. There are lots of reasons to think so -- and we'll touch on several in just a minute...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,862
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (31 total)
  1 of 7  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
lunarsnare 03:49 AM on 04/12/2012
Equalization always moves a society downward, never upward  

Americans on average are much richer than any other developed nations
American middle class by European standards would be considered rich.
American working class is European middle class.

However the European destitute are housed, kept on monthly life support and socially merged with the European working poor into one  Read More...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
moutonnoir
iconoclastic demagoguery
07:59 PM on 09/04/2012
This is really depressing stuff... Its a lot worse than the article makes it sound.

WE, the 90% ish of americans share like 9% of GDP and pay like 70% of taxes...

It is what it is.. But it wasnt always this way.. The idylic 1950's of TP lore was a time of 70-80% top income tax brackets for the richest....
photo
RubyMontana
When did money become a four-letter-word?
10:52 AM on 12/14/2012
You do not pay 90% of taxes. NO ONE group does.
1% pay about 40%. 25% pay about 50% and 47% pay none at all.
This is for Federal taxes, only.
09:10 PM on 02/07/2013
Yes, federal INCOME taxes, mind you. You conveniently neglect the broad extent of regressive taxes in this country.
12:20 PM on 02/08/2013
"Notions don't count.
Cash does.
Ask Washington."

Sorry, your point was lost in the muck of ambiguity.
09:44 PM on 08/19/2012
Seems like a racist article to me
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Groobiecat
Blogger of Lefteous Indignation
10:16 AM on 05/22/2012
Now THIS is what I'm talking about--validated much? Validated. Much.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?link=home_carousel%3Flink%3DMW-FB

You can't ascribe to Obama policies that began in 2008, starting with Fiscal Year 2009. Got it?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Groobiecat
Blogger of Lefteous Indignation
08:29 AM on 05/22/2012
This is an old post, but it bears responding to, because it's disingenuous nonsense.

You say income disparity increased under Obama in 2009. And he is responsible for that--how? How so? Obama's policies effectively have no impact in most of the year 2009; these are policies that are continued from 2008, under Bush. In fact, presidential actions and fiscal policies in 2009 can't be attributed to Obama much at all until the end of the fiscal year, which begins, as you know, on October 1, of each year. Now, Obama largely kept Bush's failed policies going, not because he favors the upper classes, but because he hasn't had much luck dealing with the tea party-based House of Reps. He has tried, repeatedly, to inject much-needed funds into an ailing system, but has been rejected by the cut and cut party. And that's somehow his fault? First, he inherited the worst economy in living memory and two intractable wars. Thanks Bush and republicans! And he's supposed to fix in a couple of years what it took to destroy over 8 years. Second, we're in a civil war. The right HATES Obama and want the economy to be destroyed to win the White House. This isn't conjecture. Got that?
02:40 PM on 09/20/2012
Thought O UH OH had a democratic house and senate the first two yrs of his term.Maybe. I am just making that up though.
photo
RubyMontana
When did money become a four-letter-word?
10:55 AM on 12/14/2012
A simple question. Is there ANYTHING that this administration has done that you would be willing to put his name on?
Or are we all living in Bush's world until the next election?
If that is the case, let _O_ "phone it in". That's all you seem to think he's done, anyway .....
08:28 PM on 12/14/2012
I am replying to a superuser on this site.
Someone who has a lot of opinion on everything but is pretty much wrong or inaccurate on all of it.
I have noted that a great many GOP bloggers and commenters are like dipsticks, covered in oil with their head in a dark place, and only useful when the level of oil needs checking.
Use your imagination to fill in the analogy and good luck to the superusers-
09:39 AM on 04/27/2012
“Here's how Saez's math breaks down, for the curious: In the 2009-2010 period, a time of modest economic growth, the top 1 percent of U.S. earners captured 93 percent of all the income growth in the country.”

“Got that? Now compare it to how the mega-rich made out during the Bush upswing years of 2002 to 2007. During that time, the top 1 percent of earners captured just 65 percent of all the income growth.”
----------------
And yet MSNBC continues it's propaganda war, and the parrot drone Obamabots follow blindly along drinking in the Kool Aide as the go....
05:29 PM on 08/11/2012
It is simple. He should have raise their taxes.
photo
RubyMontana
When did money become a four-letter-word?
10:57 AM on 12/14/2012
To what end?
Even Bernanake has admitted they do not have enough to tax to make even a dent. You want to tax the rich to feel good.
That's called envy. And greed.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert SF
02:54 AM on 04/26/2012
Well, three years into the Obama Administration, and in view of his friendliness toward Wall Street, who could possibly be surprised by higher economic inequality? In fact, Obama never mentioned the term "economic inequality" until after OWS came on the scene.
05:30 PM on 08/11/2012
Not true.
photo
RubyMontana
When did money become a four-letter-word?
10:57 AM on 12/14/2012
You need to do better than that.
Spanky231
Partisanship is overrated
03:12 PM on 04/14/2012
This is TOO funny. I just love listening to both sides talk about how great "their people" are and how different they are when in reality, there is very little difference between the two existing parties.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sal ear
Hey, how are you?
02:09 AM on 04/26/2012
Sadly, I'm afraid you are correct.
David Dem
End the War
05:12 PM on 04/13/2012
Since when are unions big government?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ConservaYoda
Your micro-bio did not meet our guidelines
09:10 AM on 04/16/2012
Since government became unionized.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OBroadhurst
My politics do not meet guidelines.
10:32 AM on 04/18/2012
Since never - but honest people know that.
12:00 PM on 04/13/2012
lt likely is true that the 1% have done better in the last three years, but that is a continuum of a worsening problem - maintained by the GOP elected reps to refuse to rescind the Bush tax cuts. Naturally the longer they are in place the more the 1% will get of all income.
While Obama was president in this time frame, Bush tax policies have continued due to support and maintenance by the GOP which has refused to end them on two occasions and would like to do so again.

If you hand someone a stick of dynamite with the fuse half burned, they will have it during the increasingly dangerous time up to explosion. Unless the fuse is cut off to stop the explosion then disaster will occur.

Use that analogy for the current tax inequality and you can see that when 1% has all the money we will begin servitude work for subsistence. Social programs will be cut and slavery of a sort will return. If you think this is nuts-just look at Athens and Rome-the best
government of their day deteriorated to monarch ruled by the wealthy and had personal servants at a rule.
Wake Up America!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OBroadhurst
My politics do not meet guidelines.
10:33 AM on 04/18/2012
You conveniently forget that our President also championed extension of those tax cuts.
03:47 PM on 05/02/2012
BS. The Republicans refused to extend unemployment benefits unless the Bush tax cuts were extended. The Republicans are the reason the unfair Bush tax policies are still in effect.
12:11 PM on 04/22/2012
You forget that Obama did not need congress or anyone else to end the Bush tax cuts. He could have simply not signed the extension in 2010. Why did he not you ask? If you look to who funded his Presidential campaign you will have your answer. He may say he is for the 99% but look who gets invited to the White House.
Wake Up Talleywhacker!
06:51 PM on 09/05/2012
The Republicans refused to extend unemployment benefits unless the tax cuts were bundled. End of story. I believe Obama made the wrong choice giving in precisely because of certain knowledge that tools like you and yours would come around now at election time, and claim Obama wanted to extend those cuts.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert SF
11:53 AM on 04/13/2012
This is a pretty nonsensical article that I'd expect to find on the kind of blog that still claims Obama is a Muslim. Is income inequality worse under Obama? Well, sure, why wouldn't it be? The 1% has been squeezing the 99% since the late 70s. It has never let up, so of course it gets worse and worse and worse.

It's not Obama vs. Bush. It's the wealthy vs. the rest of us.
12:54 PM on 04/13/2012
I agree with you but the President has not been as active in corecting these policies as he should. The example is the take all the money you want wall street with no stipulations but auto manufacturers which created a strong middle class with good paying jobs had several, including several concestions by labor. He has failed to move effectively ( and only acted because of protest ) to the fraudsters on wall street with an enemic staff to date has produced no inditements. We have to hold him acountable for his in-action but this does not mean we vote Romney either it means we need to put a sense of fear in are elected official that there will be consequences for there actions no matter what spin they try to sell us.
02:23 PM on 04/13/2012
Why don't we give Romney a try. At least he knows how to ressurect "failing" businesses and has turned them into prospering ones. I'm sure he'll use the same principles to get the middle class and impoverished working again. At least he knows how to create jobs and has been a proven success in the public sector. C'mon, O really doesn't know what he's doing....... Even if he did "try", he just doesn't know what to do.
12:29 PM on 10/18/2012
Under Reagan, all socio-economical classes saw their wealth grow by an average of 8%. This, after he inherited a troubled economy to which he described no blame. And as much as I dislike Clinton as a person, he did get some things right too. Disparity was flat under Bush. Obama is not a bad person. He has some skills, but being the POTUS is not one of them. The job has swallowed him up. He would make a good professor or small community organizer. In fact, he would probably excel in those roles.
11:19 AM on 04/13/2012
Dummy...WHAT DO YOU THINK TARP DID?...IT RESUSCITATED THE ONE PERCENT!!
Meanwhile, the lower classes suffered and are barely coming back, thanks to the President's policies.
05:01 PM on 08/23/2012
TARP resuscitated the one percent?????? So you would not have wanted the banks to be bailed out?? If the banks had not been bailed out, none of us could have imagined the damage to the US economy, the country, and the world economy. If the auto companies had not been bailed out, the damage would have crippled the US economy forever!!! Can you imagine us having to buy all of our cars and trucks from foreign companies?
photo
xpt2wndj
socialism sucks
09:42 AM on 04/13/2012
Nothing new, everything is worse after 3 1/2 years of Obama's failed policies and out right lies.
How ever the Dim lap dogs seem to think BO is doing a good job, whata joke.
01:06 PM on 04/13/2012
No are economic situation was caused by mainly republicans but with a lot of assistance from democrats over the last 40yrs. The failure has been the populous letting these thieves run havoc and middle class ( including union members) voting against everything that previous generations fought so hard to get. Complacency and greed has caused this while the foul people like your koch brothers have been creating an enviroment for exploiting the week and vulnerable. But they were to greedy and the winds of change are upon us weather the President is with us or not; Because, It's not his change we believe in its our.
08:23 AM on 04/13/2012
Don't forget the fallout from the Bush policies and the total indifferance of the GOP congress to make any meaning full suggestions or try to work with some of the Presidents ideas. Just once I would like to hear the whole story told exactly as it unfolded over the last 10-12 years. And I defy Mr Romney to do any better without help from both sides. This stalemate can go on forever at least until the country is back to the stone age, or we can admit the culpability on both sides and move on, but the idea that the President did not try is defenseless.
02:32 PM on 04/13/2012
At least Romney knows how to govern and run the country. He did an excellent job as MA governor and will be an excellent president. Let's give him a chance before O spends another 10 TRILLION experimenting on stupid ideas that can't work and are bringing our country under a massive debt for not only us, but our kids.

Here is a quote from Obama in 2006:
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America 's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

That was 6 trillion dollars ago, on HIS WATCH alone. Scary!
04:10 PM on 04/13/2012
I don't trust Romney to work for the average middle and lower middle class. He will work for his interests and his counterparts and we will be lost in the shuffle. Obama is the better choice for me as a working class person. Romney won't even admit his healthcare program is a model for the country, I do not trust him. I wish I could but thank you for your response and there is some validity in your message.
photo
Alux
Pull the Wool Over Your Own Eyes!
05:08 AM on 04/13/2012
Alexander Eichler, author of this article, must be a wrecker, saboteur, hooligan, kulak, Trotskyite spy, enemy of the state and counter-revolutionary to write such lies about the Dear Great Leader who thinks only about the welfare of the working class.

Well, not just the welfare of the working class, but getting re-elected too. And how awful are those Republicans. And how the millionaires and billionaires are not taxed enough. And golf. And where the family can take the next vacation. And where his daughters might go for their next private school class trip. And where to have the next $100,000 a plate fundraiser . . . with ordinary working class people. Oh, and how he can't wait to hit the links this weekend.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
blurredmolly
Ipswich, Mass. 1641
06:45 AM on 04/13/2012
you should have saved your keystrokes.
photo
Alux
Pull the Wool Over Your Own Eyes!
10:08 AM on 04/13/2012
You shouldn't be dissing the President, Bagger!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ocenbrz
Atheist by choice.
02:04 AM on 04/13/2012
This is no surprise. The Republicans have been torturing us for some time now. Especially since not only did we elect a Democrat but an African-American one at that. Though I really doubt most of the very wealthy American's care too much for what color our President is. What they care about is what can they squeeze out of him. They did the same thing under both the Carter and the Clinton Administration. But Clinton, like Obama made it a huge point of keeping in touch with the American people. Yes, things are tough but if we can just get through to half-time, we will win the game.

Sadly, it has been the poor, the retired, those in work areas that are not substantial to our everyday lives that are being hit the hardest. I would say, where were you when you were on top? Cashing those big paychecks and giving a pittance back. We don't really care about you because when we needed you to care about us, you just weren't there for us. When times get hard, it is the companies that do more that survive. Sadly though, those who overextend their credit. took out those home equity loans are the ones I feel badly for. But they didn't feel so bad throwing around that borrowed money either during the Bush years. Just like these wars, eventually, the payment comes due.
photo
Alux
Pull the Wool Over Your Own Eyes!
04:58 AM on 04/13/2012
I am not sure I am following you. Are you saying it is all the fault of Bush and the Pubs?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
blurredmolly
Ipswich, Mass. 1641
06:45 AM on 04/13/2012
it's all Reagan's fault.