Don’t be fooled: Working Americans are worse off under Trump

[theHawk]

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of the advisory firm Sonecon and a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. He was President Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs.

Despite robust economic numbers during the Trump presidency, the American public has seemed curiously unmoved by such good news as thelowest U.S. unemployment level in nearly half a century. Its enthusiasm might have been dampened by this underappreciated economic reality: The typical working American's earnings, when properly measured, have declined during the Trump administration.

As any White House would, the president's economic team touts positive earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that suggest rising wages and salaries. But the figures are misleading. They focus not on how much an average working person earns but on the "average earnings" of all employed people. In times of rising inequality, employees at the top pull up "average" earnings. Shift to the bureau's earnings data for an average or "median" working person, and most of those claimed gains disappear. Another catch: The data used by the White House doesn't account for inflation. Adjust the median earnings data for inflation, and the illusion of progress evaporates.

Let's examine how much these technical sleights of hand distort what's happening to people's earnings. Using the White House's preferred data,average earnings rose from $894.06 in January 2017 to $937.02 in August 2018. That suggests impressive gains of $42.96 weekly over the 20-month period and $30.02 weekly over the past year. But what about median earnings rather than average earnings — that is, earnings of those in the middle of the distribution?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a different database for that view, and its quarter-by-quarter numbers show a very different picture. Median weekly earnings of all workers rose from $865 in the first quarter of 2017 to $876 in the quarter ending June 30, 2018. The typical working American's earnings increased $11 weekly over 18 months, barely more than one-quarter of the economic progress touted by the White House.

Even that modest gain is not very meaningful. The significance of what people earn lies in what they can do with their earnings, and inflation eats away at what any of us can purchase or save. As a result, serious earnings analysis is always framed in inflation-adjusted, or "real," terms. From January 2017 to June 2018, inflation totaled 3.77 percent, while the $11 increase in unadjusted weekly earnings over those 18 months represented gains of 1.27 percent.

To determine how much the real earnings of a typical working American fell during that period, simply adjust the $876 in median weekly earnings in the quarter ending June 30, 2018, for the 3.32 percent inflation that occurred in the 18 months from the first quarter of 2017 to that date. The result: $876 in June 2018 had the same value as $848.20 in January 2017. In real terms, the weekly earnings of a typical working American fell $16.80, or 1.9 percent, during Donald Trump's first 18 months as president.

More: Don’t be fooled: Working Americans are worse off under Trump

Yes, working Americans are worse off under Trump. Median weekly earnings increased more under President Obama. Trump's economic bragging is mostly smoke and mirrors. Oh, and what about the deficit and national debt? Trump just made the rich richer. No wonder Republicans aren't touting the big tax cuts for the upcoming elections.

This coming from the same regressive shit stains that bragged about the Hussein’s unemployment numbers when his biggest employment gains were bartenders and baristas.

 

[DustyInfinity]

Why don't we ask Jack Welch about Obama's economic numbers. They were more cooked than Thanksgiving dinner.

 

[DustyInfinity]

I'm not doing better, and you can't make me. Give all your money to Chuck and Nancy.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Sorry you are worse off. Wonder why? I'm NOT.

Good for you. It's not about me - I'm comfortably retired. It's about working Americans.

So you admit you have absolutely no clue what its like to be a working American under Trump yet you believe what you read from a highly biased news source?

How about this? When you're actually employed under Trump, then you can comment about what it's like to be employed under Trump.

Being employed while Trump is POTUS is exactly the same as being employed while anyone else was POTUS. Why is it that so many people rely on the POTUS to make their employment situation better?

Did you get that new "good paying job" because of Trump or because of your own hard work and skills?

 

[DustyInfinity]

You must admit that higher regulation and taxes made it so a lot less people were hiring. The president did have a lot to do with that. Thank goodness our corporate rates are competitive with the rest of the world now. Hard work is the key, but president Trump sure increased many people's odds.

 

[Vel]

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of the advisory firm Sonecon and a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. He was President Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs.

Despite robust economic numbers during the Trump presidency, the American public has seemed curiously unmoved by such good news as thelowest U.S. unemployment level in nearly half a century. Its enthusiasm might have been dampened by this underappreciated economic reality: The typical working American's earnings, when properly measured, have declined during the Trump administration.

As any White House would, the president's economic team touts positive earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that suggest rising wages and salaries. But the figures are misleading. They focus not on how much an average working person earns but on the "average earnings" of all employed people. In times of rising inequality, employees at the top pull up "average" earnings. Shift to the bureau's earnings data for an average or "median" working person, and most of those claimed gains disappear. Another catch: The data used by the White House doesn't account for inflation. Adjust the median earnings data for inflation, and the illusion of progress evaporates.

Let's examine how much these technical sleights of hand distort what's happening to people's earnings. Using the White House's preferred data,average earnings rose from $894.06 in January 2017 to $937.02 in August 2018. That suggests impressive gains of $42.96 weekly over the 20-month period and $30.02 weekly over the past year. But what about median earnings rather than average earnings — that is, earnings of those in the middle of the distribution?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a different database for that view, and its quarter-by-quarter numbers show a very different picture. Median weekly earnings of all workers rose from $865 in the first quarter of 2017 to $876 in the quarter ending June 30, 2018. The typical working American's earnings increased $11 weekly over 18 months, barely more than one-quarter of the economic progress touted by the White House.

Even that modest gain is not very meaningful. The significance of what people earn lies in what they can do with their earnings, and inflation eats away at what any of us can purchase or save. As a result, serious earnings analysis is always framed in inflation-adjusted, or "real," terms. From January 2017 to June 2018, inflation totaled 3.77 percent, while the $11 increase in unadjusted weekly earnings over those 18 months represented gains of 1.27 percent.

To determine how much the real earnings of a typical working American fell during that period, simply adjust the $876 in median weekly earnings in the quarter ending June 30, 2018, for the 3.32 percent inflation that occurred in the 18 months from the first quarter of 2017 to that date. The result: $876 in June 2018 had the same value as $848.20 in January 2017. In real terms, the weekly earnings of a typical working American fell $16.80, or 1.9 percent, during Donald Trump's first 18 months as president.

More: Don’t be fooled: Working Americans are worse off under Trump

Yes, working Americans are worse off under Trump. Median weekly earnings increased more under President Obama. Trump's economic bragging is mostly smoke and mirrors. Oh, and what about the deficit and national debt? Trump just made the rich richer. No wonder Republicans aren't touting the big tax cuts for the upcoming elections.

Believe the democrats. That extra money in your wallet is just a figment of your imagination.

Well, I look forward to Republicans campaigning on that for the midterms.

They probably won't need too. They have plenty of video of democrats attacking due process.

 

[Claudette]

Sorry you are worse off. Wonder why? I'm NOT.

I agree. I'm much better off.

Shittingbull is probably on welfare so nothing has changed for her. LOL

 

[Skull Pilot]

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of the advisory firm Sonecon and a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. He was President Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs.

Despite robust economic numbers during the Trump presidency, the American public has seemed curiously unmoved by such good news as thelowest U.S. unemployment level in nearly half a century. Its enthusiasm might have been dampened by this underappreciated economic reality: The typical working American's earnings, when properly measured, have declined during the Trump administration.

As any White House would, the president's economic team touts positive earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that suggest rising wages and salaries. But the figures are misleading. They focus not on how much an average working person earns but on the "average earnings" of all employed people. In times of rising inequality, employees at the top pull up "average" earnings. Shift to the bureau's earnings data for an average or "median" working person, and most of those claimed gains disappear. Another catch: The data used by the White House doesn't account for inflation. Adjust the median earnings data for inflation, and the illusion of progress evaporates.

Let's examine how much these technical sleights of hand distort what's happening to people's earnings. Using the White House's preferred data,average earnings rose from $894.06 in January 2017 to $937.02 in August 2018. That suggests impressive gains of $42.96 weekly over the 20-month period and $30.02 weekly over the past year. But what about median earnings rather than average earnings — that is, earnings of those in the middle of the distribution?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a different database for that view, and its quarter-by-quarter numbers show a very different picture. Median weekly earnings of all workers rose from $865 in the first quarter of 2017 to $876 in the quarter ending June 30, 2018. The typical working American's earnings increased $11 weekly over 18 months, barely more than one-quarter of the economic progress touted by the White House.

Even that modest gain is not very meaningful. The significance of what people earn lies in what they can do with their earnings, and inflation eats away at what any of us can purchase or save. As a result, serious earnings analysis is always framed in inflation-adjusted, or "real," terms. From January 2017 to June 2018, inflation totaled 3.77 percent, while the $11 increase in unadjusted weekly earnings over those 18 months represented gains of 1.27 percent.

To determine how much the real earnings of a typical working American fell during that period, simply adjust the $876 in median weekly earnings in the quarter ending June 30, 2018, for the 3.32 percent inflation that occurred in the 18 months from the first quarter of 2017 to that date. The result: $876 in June 2018 had the same value as $848.20 in January 2017. In real terms, the weekly earnings of a typical working American fell $16.80, or 1.9 percent, during Donald Trump's first 18 months as president.

More: Don’t be fooled: Working Americans are worse off under Trump

Yes, working Americans are worse off under Trump. Median weekly earnings increased more under President Obama. Trump's economic bragging is mostly smoke and mirrors. Oh, and what about the deficit and national debt? Trump just made the rich richer. No wonder Republicans aren't touting the big tax cuts for the upcoming elections.

You do realize that Obama took office with something near to double digit unemployment percentages don't you?

Even with his anemic recovery it makes sense that when people who were unemployed and making ZERO finally got a job that the net gain in median income for the country would rise more than it would in an environment of much lower unemployment

 

[Oldstyle]

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of the advisory firm Sonecon and a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. He was President Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs.

Despite robust economic numbers during the Trump presidency, the American public has seemed curiously unmoved by such good news as thelowest U.S. unemployment level in nearly half a century. Its enthusiasm might have been dampened by this underappreciated economic reality: The typical working American's earnings, when properly measured, have declined during the Trump administration.

As any White House would, the president's economic team touts positive earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that suggest rising wages and salaries. But the figures are misleading. They focus not on how much an average working person earns but on the "average earnings" of all employed people. In times of rising inequality, employees at the top pull up "average" earnings. Shift to the bureau's earnings data for an average or "median" working person, and most of those claimed gains disappear. Another catch: The data used by the White House doesn't account for inflation. Adjust the median earnings data for inflation, and the illusion of progress evaporates.

Let's examine how much these technical sleights of hand distort what's happening to people's earnings. Using the White House's preferred data,average earnings rose from $894.06 in January 2017 to $937.02 in August 2018. That suggests impressive gains of $42.96 weekly over the 20-month period and $30.02 weekly over the past year. But what about median earnings rather than average earnings — that is, earnings of those in the middle of the distribution?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a different database for that view, and its quarter-by-quarter numbers show a very different picture. Median weekly earnings of all workers rose from $865 in the first quarter of 2017 to $876 in the quarter ending June 30, 2018. The typical working American's earnings increased $11 weekly over 18 months, barely more than one-quarter of the economic progress touted by the White House.

Even that modest gain is not very meaningful. The significance of what people earn lies in what they can do with their earnings, and inflation eats away at what any of us can purchase or save. As a result, serious earnings analysis is always framed in inflation-adjusted, or "real," terms. From January 2017 to June 2018, inflation totaled 3.77 percent, while the $11 increase in unadjusted weekly earnings over those 18 months represented gains of 1.27 percent.

To determine how much the real earnings of a typical working American fell during that period, simply adjust the $876 in median weekly earnings in the quarter ending June 30, 2018, for the 3.32 percent inflation that occurred in the 18 months from the first quarter of 2017 to that date. The result: $876 in June 2018 had the same value as $848.20 in January 2017. In real terms, the weekly earnings of a typical working American fell $16.80, or 1.9 percent, during Donald Trump's first 18 months as president.

More: Don’t be fooled: Working Americans are worse off under Trump

Yes, working Americans are worse off under Trump. Median weekly earnings increased more under President Obama. Trump's economic bragging is mostly smoke and mirrors. Oh, and what about the deficit and national debt? Trump just made the rich richer. No wonder Republicans aren't touting the big tax cuts for the upcoming elections.

Anyone want to take a guess as to whether Robert Shapiro was doing the same kind of analysis when Barack Obama was President? I'll bet that ole Bob didn't even question "Jobs Created or Saved"!

 

[deanrd]

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of the advisory firm Sonecon and a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. He was President Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs.

Despite robust economic numbers during the Trump presidency, the American public has seemed curiously unmoved by such good news as thelowest U.S. unemployment level in nearly half a century. Its enthusiasm might have been dampened by this underappreciated economic reality: The typical working American's earnings, when properly measured, have declined during the Trump administration.

As any White House would, the president's economic team touts positive earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that suggest rising wages and salaries. But the figures are misleading. They focus not on how much an average working person earns but on the "average earnings" of all employed people. In times of rising inequality, employees at the top pull up "average" earnings. Shift to the bureau's earnings data for an average or "median" working person, and most of those claimed gains disappear. Another catch: The data used by the White House doesn't account for inflation. Adjust the median earnings data for inflation, and the illusion of progress evaporates.

Let's examine how much these technical sleights of hand distort what's happening to people's earnings. Using the White House's preferred data,average earnings rose from $894.06 in January 2017 to $937.02 in August 2018. That suggests impressive gains of $42.96 weekly over the 20-month period and $30.02 weekly over the past year. But what about median earnings rather than average earnings — that is, earnings of those in the middle of the distribution?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a different database for that view, and its quarter-by-quarter numbers show a very different picture. Median weekly earnings of all workers rose from $865 in the first quarter of 2017 to $876 in the quarter ending June 30, 2018. The typical working American's earnings increased $11 weekly over 18 months, barely more than one-quarter of the economic progress touted by the White House.

Even that modest gain is not very meaningful. The significance of what people earn lies in what they can do with their earnings, and inflation eats away at what any of us can purchase or save. As a result, serious earnings analysis is always framed in inflation-adjusted, or "real," terms. From January 2017 to June 2018, inflation totaled 3.77 percent, while the $11 increase in unadjusted weekly earnings over those 18 months represented gains of 1.27 percent.

To determine how much the real earnings of a typical working American fell during that period, simply adjust the $876 in median weekly earnings in the quarter ending June 30, 2018, for the 3.32 percent inflation that occurred in the 18 months from the first quarter of 2017 to that date. The result: $876 in June 2018 had the same value as $848.20 in January 2017. In real terms, the weekly earnings of a typical working American fell $16.80, or 1.9 percent, during Donald Trump's first 18 months as president.

More: Don’t be fooled: Working Americans are worse off under Trump

Median weekly earnings increased more under President Obama. Trump's economic bragging is all smoke and mirrors. Oh, and what about the deficit and national debt?

So more baby boomers are retiring big deal everyone knows it skews the stats


.

Grasping at straws much?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Obama's economy was artificially supported by QE and zero % rates almost the whole way through. That is not his fault by the way. But, come on. Things are cruising along pretty nicely right now. When Obama is even taking credit for it, you know it is better.

Any fool can stimulate the economy with major tax cuts - but Trump overheated the economy at a time when it wasn't needed. The Obama economy was cruising along at a reasonable and steady upward pace since the Great Bush Recession. I hope I'm wrong, but I think there will be a big price to pay - including our current budget deficit and national debt.

So you saying Obama was a super fool? His tax cuts and janets 85 billion a month pumped in that now we have to pay interest on ..


.

 

[Wyatt earp]

`
Such stats NEVER mention "benefits." Insurance, vacation, holidays, etc. So what if you make a few bucks more when it's all consumed by medical costs, rent/mortgage, utility payments, vehicle costs, etc. This so called better trump economy is a lie for gullible people.

Translation~ Obama care was a faliure, voting for democrats in blue States with their high taxes was a faliure, green energy is a failure.

.

 

[BookShaka]

Robert J. Shapiro is the chairman of the advisory firm Sonecon and a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. He was President Bill Clinton’s undersecretary of commerce for economic affairs.

Despite robust economic numbers during the Trump presidency, the American public has seemed curiously unmoved by such good news as thelowest U.S. unemployment level in nearly half a century. Its enthusiasm might have been dampened by this underappreciated economic reality: The typical working American's earnings, when properly measured, have declined during the Trump administration.

As any White House would, the president's economic team touts positive earnings data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that suggest rising wages and salaries. But the figures are misleading. They focus not on how much an average working person earns but on the "average earnings" of all employed people. In times of rising inequality, employees at the top pull up "average" earnings. Shift to the bureau's earnings data for an average or "median" working person, and most of those claimed gains disappear. Another catch: The data used by the White House doesn't account for inflation. Adjust the median earnings data for inflation, and the illusion of progress evaporates.

Let's examine how much these technical sleights of hand distort what's happening to people's earnings. Using the White House's preferred data,average earnings rose from $894.06 in January 2017 to $937.02 in August 2018. That suggests impressive gains of $42.96 weekly over the 20-month period and $30.02 weekly over the past year. But what about median earnings rather than average earnings — that is, earnings of those in the middle of the distribution?

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a different database for that view, and its quarter-by-quarter numbers show a very different picture. Median weekly earnings of all workers rose from $865 in the first quarter of 2017 to $876 in the quarter ending June 30, 2018. The typical working American's earnings increased $11 weekly over 18 months, barely more than one-quarter of the economic progress touted by the White House.

Even that modest gain is not very meaningful. The significance of what people earn lies in what they can do with their earnings, and inflation eats away at what any of us can purchase or save. As a result, serious earnings analysis is always framed in inflation-adjusted, or "real," terms. From January 2017 to June 2018, inflation totaled 3.77 percent, while the $11 increase in unadjusted weekly earnings over those 18 months represented gains of 1.27 percent.

To determine how much the real earnings of a typical working American fell during that period, simply adjust the $876 in median weekly earnings in the quarter ending June 30, 2018, for the 3.32 percent inflation that occurred in the 18 months from the first quarter of 2017 to that date. The result: $876 in June 2018 had the same value as $848.20 in January 2017. In real terms, the weekly earnings of a typical working American fell $16.80, or 1.9 percent, during Donald Trump's first 18 months as president.

More: Don’t be fooled: Working Americans are worse off under Trump

Yes, working Americans are worse off under Trump. Median weekly earnings increased more under President Obama. Trump's economic bragging is mostly smoke and mirrors. Oh, and what about the deficit and national debt? Trump just made the rich richer. No wonder Republicans aren't touting the big tax cuts for the upcoming elections.

Lemme guess... you champion socialism?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Sorry you are worse off. Wonder why? I'm NOT.

Good for you. It's not about me - I'm comfortably retired. It's about working Americans.

So you admit you have absolutely no clue what its like to be a working American under Trump yet you believe what you read from a highly biased news source?

How about this? When you're actually employed under Trump, then you can comment about what it's like to be employed under Trump.

Being employed while Trump is POTUS is exactly the same as being employed while anyone else was POTUS. Why is it that so many people rely on the POTUS to make their employment situation better?

Did you get that new "good paying job" because of Trump or because of your own hard work and skills?

The cotton pickers in South Carolina got better jobs because of Republicans


No?

 

[Erinwltr]

Sorry you are worse off. Wonder why? I'm NOT.

Good for you. It's not about me - I'm comfortably retired. It's about working Americans.

Exactly

Yes, exactly.

Glad you figured out how wrong you are. Remember not to believe every slanted word you read, no matter how much you desire it to fit your agenda.

I have no idea what you're talking about, so I'll end communication with you. Go bait someone else. Bye...

Yeah, what was that all about.

 

[blastoff]

All those stupid people thinking because they got a good job and salary increases they are better off. How dare they? They are only as well off as Democrats tell them how well or worse off they are.

Plus, life was a lot easier when they didn’t have the added burden of lugging all those bread crumbs around every day.

 

[jc456]

 

[DrLove]

You know which working people are ESPECIALLY worse off under Trump?
His supporters
And LoL!
Voters Hate Trump More Than They Like This Economy

 

[SavannahMann]

The low unemployment will result in higher wages as employers have to sweeten the deal to get the employees they need. Supply and demand.

Well, Trump could also do another trillion dollar tax cut - or just print more money.

Trump told Gary Cohn to 'print money' to lower the national debt, according to Bob Woodward's book

Um. You do realize that was literally what the Obama economic recovery plan was don’t you?

 

[pinqy]

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a different database for that view, and its quarter-by-quarter numbers show a very different picture. Median weekly earnings of all workers rose from $865 in the first quarter of 2017 to $876 in the quarter ending June 30, 2018. The typical working American's earnings increased $11 weekly over 18 months, barely more than one-quarter of the economic progress touted by the White House.

What Mr. Shapiro fails to mention is that the earnings series he mentions is extremely unreliable. It comes from the Current Population Survey, which is a household survey and allows secondary reporting. A few problems here:

• People consider income data very sensitive, so questions on income are not asked every month, and that portion of the survey has a high non-response rate, requiring imputation of missing data.
• People don't always know their exact income and often give approximations.
• For the CPS, one person responds for every person in the household, and it's even less likely the respondent will know the exact salaries of everyone in his/her family
• The Census workers collecting the data must enter what they are told, even if they know it is wrong. For example a respondent is asked about her son's income: "Oh, he makes minimum wage...$7/hour." Even though the Census worked knows that minimum wage is $7.25, he still has to record it as $7 and it cannot be corrected.

Because of all that I would not recommend using income data from the CPS unless there is no other available data. Sometimes, such as for comparing races, ages, marital statuses, etc, there is no choice. But if there is a choice, always go with data from company payrolls