The lost decade
Sep. 21st, 2009 12:43 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfsTake a look at Figure 2 on the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities latest report. Look closely: the highest median income for the middle class was in 2000. Don't look at 2008, look at 2007.
During the supposed high-flying Bush years, when we were "awash" with cash, when we were "flush" with money, when the country was supposedly going gangbusters (even though a lot of that money didn't "really" exist), the data show that the median income for Americans was still never as high as the last year of the Clinton presidency.
Financially, we never went anywhere as a country during the Bush era. And yet, we're all painfully aware that the rich became significantly more rich in that time.
This is not capitalism as it is classically understood. The rising tide only lifted a few, privileged boats: the rest of us sank. A lot.
During the supposed high-flying Bush years, when we were "awash" with cash, when we were "flush" with money, when the country was supposedly going gangbusters (even though a lot of that money didn't "really" exist), the data show that the median income for Americans was still never as high as the last year of the Clinton presidency.
Financially, we never went anywhere as a country during the Bush era. And yet, we're all painfully aware that the rich became significantly more rich in that time.
This is not capitalism as it is classically understood. The rising tide only lifted a few, privileged boats: the rest of us sank. A lot.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-09-22 02:49 am (UTC)I'm willing to be convinced that you have a valid point. What evidence can you offer?