Median Household Incomes D O W N under Obama! I Do Mean D-O-W-N

[EconChick]

The libs are coming unglued because they know the OP is spot on.


LOL

 

[EconChick]

Hey Mac, the sources used in that video I just posted are all left wing:

MSNBC, W Post, and Biden's economist.

I recommend everyone play the short video....it explains it in very simple terms.


Mac - I've just trounced you once again, dude.

You really need to throw in the towel. Idiot.

As for Loner Loser, we've always known how hopeless you were on complex subjects.

Simple people like "very simple terms"; it's why conservatives rarely question dogma, doing so requires both research and thought - simply is easy.

See Wildman for an example.

LOL, dumbass....I gave the really hard version and Loser and Mac just couldn't grasp it. Not even close. Ooops.

 

[EconChick]

go get'em EconChick, you have posted some great info plus putting a couple of knuckle draggers on a rocky surface. .....

Yep, W, it's fun watching them tighten the noose around their own necks, LOL.

I noticed they're all afraid to watch that video from MSNBC and the W. Post that says the exact same thing as my OP.

LOL

 

[kaz]

Also, the chart in post 106 clearly shows that the upper income strata has enjoyed a significantly higher rate of increase than the lower strata for quite some time.

My guess is that IDB is just being IDB, which is partisan right. And, as we all know, partisans give cherry-picked information and data whenever possible in order to push their agenda. Both ends of the spectrum.

Hi Mac,

Your graph didn't contradict the discussion. First of all, it it based on nominal income, not real income. Second, it's based on mean income, not median income.

1) It's based based on nominal income not real income: Note that from 2006 to present the line has ticked up slightly in the graph for the middle percent. Nominal dollars erode in value with inflation. All my articles, and I believe econchicks, are based on real dollars, which means inflation adjusted. Your slight up tick would be a clear down tick in spending value if you add inflation.

2) You are showing mean income. The difference is for mean income that you take all salaries and divide them. With mean income, you take the 50 percentile person and look at their salary. Income is not a normal distribution, higher salaries pull the mean up more than low salaries bring them down. That's intuitive if you think about how a guy who makes $10,000,000 clearly would pull the average income up than a guy who makes $5,000 would pull it down.

The articles we (EconChick) and I are showing are not just right, they are mixed. None of the articles by liberals have contradicted them. They spin the data differently.

That the median income for the middle citizen has gone down under Obama is a clear and indisputable stat that the spending power of most Americans is going down. If the public understood that, it would be devastating for the Democrats no matter how much they try to pin it on Bush. Who left office six years ago.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The libs are coming unglued because they know the OP is spot on.


LOL

No, we're systematically proving you full of shit and your response is to give up and resort to personal attacks.

 

[kaz]

Also, since IDB is quite well-known in the industry for its political slant, I thought I would go to the source, Sentier Research. According to the IDB piece, the growth/loss figures are inflation-adjusted, not gross, and I can't find that data yet. This graph provided by Sentier looks similar to the pattern in post 106, above, with MHI increasing over the last few years (the red line).

Also, the chart in post 106 clearly shows that the upper income strata has enjoyed a significantly higher rate of increase than the lower strata for quite some time.

My guess is that IDB is just being IDB, which is partisan right. And, as we all know, partisans give cherry-picked information and data whenever possible in order to push their agenda. Both ends of the spectrum.

Anyone in finance or economics knows to consult and carefully analyze several sources before making an observation, claim or prediction. Unless, of course, their only goal is to simply push their political agenda without regard to honesty. In that case, they're less of an economist and more just another partisan pundit.

Source: Sentier Medians and the Household Income Index HII

We all know you're a fucking idiot, mac. You're a flaming liberal who claims you don't fall on one side or the other.

Your use of statistics is mindnumbingly ignorant.

I started as a liberal being indoctrinated by the same academic idiots you're indoctrinated by.

Except I broke away from the brainwashing.

You have not.

Your stats are laughable.

And stop telling us you're not a liberal.

YOU ARE DUDE, you ARE.

you literally said nothing

You literally don't know what the word literal means.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

 

[EconChick]

Also, the chart in post 106 clearly shows that the upper income strata has enjoyed a significantly higher rate of increase than the lower strata for quite some time.

My guess is that IDB is just being IDB, which is partisan right. And, as we all know, partisans give cherry-picked information and data whenever possible in order to push their agenda. Both ends of the spectrum.

Hi Mac,

Your graph didn't contradict the discussion. First of all, it it based on nominal income, not real income. Second, it's based on mean income, not median income.

1) It's based based on nominal income not real income: Note that from 2006 to present the line has ticked up slightly in the graph for the middle percent. Nominal dollars erode in value with inflation. All my articles, and I believe econchicks, are based on real dollars, which means inflation adjusted. Your slight up tick would be a clear down tick in spending value if you add inflation.

2) You are showing mean income. The difference is for mean income that you take all salaries and divide them. With mean income, you take the 50 percentile person and look at their salary. Income is not a normal distribution, higher salaries pull the mean up more than low salaries bring them down. That's intuitive if you think about how a guy who makes $10,000,000 clearly would pull the average income up than a guy who makes $5,000 would pull it down.

The articles we (EconChick) and I are showing are not just right, they are mixed. None of the articles by liberals have contradicted them. They spin the data differently.

That the median income for the middle citizen has gone down under Obama is a clear and indisputable stat that the spending power of most Americans is going down. If the public understood that, it would be devastating for the Democrats no matter how much they try to pin it on Bush. Who left office six years ago.

Thank you, Kaz. You have more patience with him then I do. Of all the graphs to pull out, I couldn't figure out why he pulled out "MEAN" graphic. Surely a stock broker knows the difference between mean and median.

 

[EconChick]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

LOL, your desperation is hilarious. Dude, the reason I studied economics was because I came from a blue collar family. Desperado here.....LOL

 

[NYcarbineer]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

LOL, your desperation is hilarious. Dude, the reason I studied economics was because I came from a blue collar family. Desperado here.....LOL

So what. I come from a blue collar family and I've studied economics.

Now that we're even on that score, how about you stick to your own topic?

 

[kaz]

Also, the chart in post 106 clearly shows that the upper income strata has enjoyed a significantly higher rate of increase than the lower strata for quite some time.

My guess is that IDB is just being IDB, which is partisan right. And, as we all know, partisans give cherry-picked information and data whenever possible in order to push their agenda. Both ends of the spectrum.

Hi Mac,

Your graph didn't contradict the discussion. First of all, it it based on nominal income, not real income. Second, it's based on mean income, not median income.

1) It's based based on nominal income not real income: Note that from 2006 to present the line has ticked up slightly in the graph for the middle percent. Nominal dollars erode in value with inflation. All my articles, and I believe econchicks, are based on real dollars, which means inflation adjusted. Your slight up tick would be a clear down tick in spending value if you add inflation.

2) You are showing mean income. The difference is for mean income that you take all salaries and divide them. With mean income, you take the 50 percentile person and look at their salary. Income is not a normal distribution, higher salaries pull the mean up more than low salaries bring them down. That's intuitive if you think about how a guy who makes $10,000,000 clearly would pull the average income up than a guy who makes $5,000 would pull it down.

The articles we (EconChick) and I are showing are not just right, they are mixed. None of the articles by liberals have contradicted them. They spin the data differently.

That the median income for the middle citizen has gone down under Obama is a clear and indisputable stat that the spending power of most Americans is going down. If the public understood that, it would be devastating for the Democrats no matter how much they try to pin it on Bush. Who left office six years ago.

Thank you, Kaz. You have more patience with him then I do. Of all the graphs to pull out, I couldn't figure out why he pulled out "MEAN" graphic. Surely a stock broker knows the difference between mean and median.

Is he really a stock broker? Wow, he better know the difference.

 

[EconChick]

The libs are coming unglued because they know the OP is spot on.


LOL

No, we're systematically proving you full of shit and your response is to give up and resort to personal attacks.

LOL, you need to lay off the crack.

Kaz and I have given about ten sources by now - from both the left and right - that prove the OP.

As for personal attacks, as I always say, I don't start them but I sure will finish them with both barrels. Talk to your Princess, Loner Loser, about starting the personal attacks.

I'll play in every level, high or low.

You libs are being TROUNCED. It sucks to be a lib.

 

[EconChick]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

LOL, your desperation is hilarious. Dude, the reason I studied economics was because I came from a blue collar family. Desperado here.....LOL

So what. I come from a blue collar family and I've studied economics.

Now that we're even on that score, how about you stick to your own topic?

You have a master's degree in economics and moving through your doctorate in it?

Liar. You're an idiot AND a liar.

Your desperation is cracking me up.

Everyone knows the OP is correct. LOL

 

[NYcarbineer]

The libs are coming unglued because they know the OP is spot on.


LOL

No, we're systematically proving you full of shit and your response is to give up and resort to personal attacks.

LOL, you need to lay off the crack.

Kaz and I have given about ten sources by now - from both the left and right - that prove the OP.

As for personal attacks, as I always say, I don't start them but I sure will finish them with both barrels. Talk to your Princess, Loner Loser, about starting the personal attacks.

I'll play in every level, high or low.

You libs are being TROUNCED. It sucks to be a lib.

Sources that prove what? That median incomes are down? I don't dispute that.

But productivity is up. GDP per capita is up. Do you understand the significance? Yes or no.

 

[EconChick]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

LOL, your desperation is hilarious. Dude, the reason I studied economics was because I came from a blue collar family. Desperado here.....LOL

So what. I come from a blue collar family and I've studied economics.

Now that we're even on that score, how about you stick to your own topic?

No, you're not even with me, Carbondolt. Not one.

That's why I trounce you in every debate we get in.

So did you watch the MSNBC video? Biden's economist? Quoted by the W Post????????/

LOL

You're desperate dude. You can lie about the OP all you want....the overwhelming evidence has been provided in this thread. LOL

 

[EconChick]

The libs are coming unglued because they know the OP is spot on.


LOL

No, we're systematically proving you full of shit and your response is to give up and resort to personal attacks.

LOL, you need to lay off the crack.

Kaz and I have given about ten sources by now - from both the left and right - that prove the OP.

As for personal attacks, as I always say, I don't start them but I sure will finish them with both barrels. Talk to your Princess, Loner Loser, about starting the personal attacks.

I'll play in every level, high or low.

You libs are being TROUNCED. It sucks to be a lib.

Sources that prove what? That median incomes are down? I don't dispute that.

But productivity is up. GDP per capita is up. Do you understand the significance? Yes or no.

This thread's about median incomes being down. Do you understand that????????????????????????

 

[NYcarbineer]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

LOL, your desperation is hilarious. Dude, the reason I studied economics was because I came from a blue collar family. Desperado here.....LOL

So what. I come from a blue collar family and I've studied economics.

Now that we're even on that score, how about you stick to your own topic?

You have a master's degree in economics and moving through your doctorate in it?

Liar. You're an idiot AND a liar.

Your desperation is cracking me up.

Everyone knows the OP is correct. LOL

Ironically you have demonstrated no evidence, in the substance of your posts, that you have a master's degree in economics.

If you did your posts would be so devoid of substantive insight.

 

[EconChick]

The libs are coming unglued because they know the OP is spot on.


LOL

No, we're systematically proving you full of shit and your response is to give up and resort to personal attacks.

LOL, you need to lay off the crack.

Kaz and I have given about ten sources by now - from both the left and right - that prove the OP.

As for personal attacks, as I always say, I don't start them but I sure will finish them with both barrels. Talk to your Princess, Loner Loser, about starting the personal attacks.

I'll play in every level, high or low.

You libs are being TROUNCED. It sucks to be a lib.

Sources that prove what? That median incomes are down? I don't dispute that.

But productivity is up. GDP per capita is up. Do you understand the significance? Yes or no.

Really? You think productivity translates into what goes into people's pockets when median incomes are down????????

You really are desperate.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

LOL, your desperation is hilarious. Dude, the reason I studied economics was because I came from a blue collar family. Desperado here.....LOL

So what. I come from a blue collar family and I've studied economics.

Now that we're even on that score, how about you stick to your own topic?

No, you're not even with me, Carbondolt. Not one.

That's why I trounce you in every debate we get in.

So did you watch the MSNBC video? Biden's economist? Quoted by the W Post????????/

LOL

You're desperate dude. You can lie about the OP all you want....the overwhelming evidence has been provided in this thread. LOL

That I've reduced you to hysterical tantrums is evidence enough of how much smarter than you I am.

Sorry, but you asked for it.

 

[EconChick]

The conservative desire to destroy unionism in this country, and some of the success they've had:

You conservatives should quit pretending that lower median incomes is something you oppose.

LOL, your desperation is hilarious. Dude, the reason I studied economics was because I came from a blue collar family. Desperado here.....LOL

So what. I come from a blue collar family and I've studied economics.

Now that we're even on that score, how about you stick to your own topic?

You have a master's degree in economics and moving through your doctorate in it?

Liar. You're an idiot AND a liar.

Your desperation is cracking me up.

Everyone knows the OP is correct. LOL

Ironically you have demonstrated no evidence, in the substance of your posts, that you have a master's degree in economics.

If you did your posts would be so devoid of substantive insight.

'

LOL. Like I always say, I have $2000 to give to the USMB kitty if I'm wrong if you want to bet $2000 to back your accusation up.

Of course you dumbass libs ALWAYS run from that bet.