Median Income Down $6500 If Biden Wins

[esmith]

According to the WSJ and others (WSJ full article unavailable unless you subscribe) by 2030 the median household income will be $6500 less. In addition full time equivalent employment per person will be reduced by about 3 percent. Also spending per household by will be reduced by 7 percent which also indicates GDP will have a $2.6 trillion in GDP.
The Biden campaign and other discredit this idea, saying they will not increase taxes on the middle class. What they blatantly fail to disclose is that the new laws and regulations they will introduce will have a drastic effect on businesses, both large and small, which will cause economic issues, and their stance on fossil fuel will cause a drastic rise in the cost of petroleum products, gasoline and diesel for one .
Opinion | The Cost of Bidenomics (partial article)
An Analysis Of Vice President Biden’s Economic Agenda: The Long Run Impacts Of Its Regulation, Taxes, And Spending
Biden's economic plan could crush nation's recovery from coronavirus pandemic, conservative economists say

Of course no "MSM" sources since they are in his camp.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Its not hard to see the writing on the wall.

The middle class always loses with these people.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

So its a difficult choice for Americans, between a rock and a hard head?

 

[bobhikes]

Predicting the future is rather hard, also changes can be made along the way. Staying the path is never the answer.

 

[tytlyf]

Its not hard to see the writing on the wall.

The middle class always loses with these people.

I disagree. The opinion is also shaped by your information sources. I prefer data. Republicans don't support the middle class. (But they'll tell you they do =))

Studies: Democratic politicians represent middle-class voters. GOP politicians don’t.

 

[Nakosis]

According to the WSJ and others (WSJ full article unavailable unless you subscribe) by 2030 the median household income will be $6500 less. In addition full time equivalent employment per person will be reduced by about 3 percent. Also spending per household by will be reduced by 7 percent which also indicates GDP will have a $2.6 trillion in GDP.
The Biden campaign and other discredit this idea, saying they will not increase taxes on the middle class. What they blatantly fail to disclose is that the new laws and regulations they will introduce will have a drastic effect on businesses, both large and small, which will cause economic issues, and their stance on fossil fuel will cause a drastic rise in the cost of petroleum products, gasoline and diesel for one .
Opinion | The Cost of Bidenomics (partial article)
An Analysis Of Vice President Biden’s Economic Agenda: The Long Run Impacts Of Its Regulation, Taxes, And Spending
Biden's economic plan could crush nation's recovery from coronavirus pandemic, conservative economists say

Of course no "MSM" sources since they are in his camp.

Just my opinion, economic prediction is difficult and generally not reliable.

Things happen that no one sees coming, like Covid 19. Maybe some scientific breakthrough which will revolutionize some industry etc...

Not personally a fan of Biden but I don't think these economic predictions to be much of a selling point.

 

[Quintessence]

I have no idea what your acronyms are, but I don't find economic arguments persuasive because I don't vote based on that issue. I vote based on something far, far greater than the economy and that's the ecology upon which human economies utterly depend.

We could have been making smart transitions decades ago to more sustainable models, but didn't. Both parties are to blame for that, but Republicans in particular have a terrible record on the environment and it's the major reason why I never vote for them if their position has anything to do with stewardship. Economic hardship will increase regardless of who is in charge because ecological damage is so widespread and pervasive across the world. Resources aren't infinite and the cancer philosophy of perpetual economic growth is not sustainable and cannot be maintained, period. At least the Democrats are willing to actually consider the necessary transitions to sustainable models.

 

[tytlyf]

I have no idea what your acronyms are, but I don't find economic arguments persuasive because I don't vote based on that issue. I vote based on something far, far greater than the economy and that's the ecology upon which human economies utterly depend.

We could have been making smart transitions decades ago to more sustainable models, but didn't. Both parties are to blame for that, but Republicans in particular have a terrible record on the environment and it's the major reason why I never vote for them if their position has anything to do with stewardship. Economic hardship will increase regardless of who is in charge because ecological damage is so widespread and pervasive across the world. Resources aren't infinite and the cancer philosophy of perpetual economic growth is not sustainable and cannot be maintained, period. At least the Democrats are willing to actually consider the necessary transitions to sustainable models.

I hear RW media tell people the gas is going to explode in prices if Biden is elected (Obama gas prices as reasoning). But the reason the prices are so low now is because there isn't demand.
Gas prices are based on demand. I would think if someone is a fan of lowering gas prices, they would be in favor of more electric vehicles, tougher MPG standards, etc.
The lower the demand for gas, the lower the prices go. Electric vehicles will reduce gas prices, not increase. Win win for everyone. And you can still drive around your gas-guzzling pickup truck. Amazing!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

According to the WSJ and others (WSJ full article unavailable unless you subscribe) by 2030 the median household income will be $6500 less. In addition full time equivalent employment per person will be reduced by about 3 percent. Also spending per household by will be reduced by 7 percent which also indicates GDP will have a $2.6 trillion in GDP.
The Biden campaign and other discredit this idea, saying they will not increase taxes on the middle class. What they blatantly fail to disclose is that the new laws and regulations they will introduce will have a drastic effect on businesses, both large and small, which will cause economic issues, and their stance on fossil fuel will cause a drastic rise in the cost of petroleum products, gasoline and diesel for one .
Opinion | The Cost of Bidenomics (partial article)
An Analysis Of Vice President Biden’s Economic Agenda: The Long Run Impacts Of Its Regulation, Taxes, And Spending
Biden's economic plan could crush nation's recovery from coronavirus pandemic, conservative economists say

Of course no "MSM" sources since they are in his camp.

So, what do you explain of the continual vast growth of the rich and continual decline of the middle class? Such as, even under Obama the vast swaths of economic gains and benefits went straight to the top. Others started working two jobs. That fits the trend that has been going on since the 70s, kicked up in overdrive under Reagan, and continues under Trump. And, lets not forget, we see these Conservative economic predictions fail quite a bit. Like, the relation between jobs and taxes. They myths about who creates jobs. The fantasies about money being a great motivator. The delusions about inherent competition over cooperation being how humans best function. How Democrats are going to destroy everything financial which is going to make everything else worse. Or, according to a Conservative opinion I read last night, the drug-addled trip that believes someone making $400,000 is middle class.

 

[exchemist]

According to the WSJ and others (WSJ full article unavailable unless you subscribe) by 2030 the median household income will be $6500 less. In addition full time equivalent employment per person will be reduced by about 3 percent. Also spending per household by will be reduced by 7 percent which also indicates GDP will have a $2.6 trillion in GDP.
The Biden campaign and other discredit this idea, saying they will not increase taxes on the middle class. What they blatantly fail to disclose is that the new laws and regulations they will introduce will have a drastic effect on businesses, both large and small, which will cause economic issues, and their stance on fossil fuel will cause a drastic rise in the cost of petroleum products, gasoline and diesel for one .
Opinion | The Cost of Bidenomics (partial article)
An Analysis Of Vice President Biden’s Economic Agenda: The Long Run Impacts Of Its Regulation, Taxes, And Spending
Biden's economic plan could crush nation's recovery from coronavirus pandemic, conservative economists say

Of course no "MSM" sources since they are in his camp.

The economic costs of the coronavirus will have to be paid for, whoever is in power. But it makes little sense to take the Murdoch press at face value, so close to an election.

What seems to me for sure is that the people at the top have to pay a lot more tax. And they can, and it will have negligible impact on economic growth.

 

[Tambourine]

"Conservative economists say that people should vote Conservative", a well known conservative newspaper reports

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Such economic predictions typically ignore anything that isn't in their economic sights. For example, it's true that policies seeking to ameliorate climate change and ecological damage may cost everybody something (that cost certainly gets included in the prediction). But what is ignored is things like what happens if no action on those files is taken: sure, the costs won't be there, and you may be wealthier, but that won't do you a lot of good if the global climate is collapsing around you, and the world -- not just the west -- goes up in flames.

Costs, at the end of the day, are just the amount we are willing to pay for some desired end. I may be willing to part with a lot more than that $6,500 for a car, or a beautiful piano or painting that I really want. And I may also be willing to part with that $6,500 if it is buying a healthy planet for future generations of humans to live on.

 

[metis]

The editorial board should not be confused with the actual news reporting in the WSJ. As far as news reporting is concerned, they're actually quite objective; but as far as the editorial board is concerned, they're "Murdock".

As far as the OP is concerned, it's just the latter. (((yawn)))

 

[metis]

BTW, any serious economist will tell ya that getting money into the hands of the average Joe & Mary Citizen generates the best bang for the buck because that money will be spent sooner, especially locally. OTOH, getting the money to Daddy & Mommy Bigbucks is less apt to be spent locally and may not get spent domestically at all [foreign investments and/or tax shelters].

Joe wants to spend it more with the former, and the Donald wants to spend it more with the latter [like airlines to get people to his resorts].

 

[Quetzal]

Its not hard to see the writing on the wall.

The middle class always loses with these people.

This isn't true. The middle class is actually growing stronger, as a whole, regardless of who is in the White House. Additionally, poverty is continuing to decline. Now this graphic is from 2016, so it isn't quite up to date, but the trend is pretty obvious.

Source: The Middle Class is Shrinking Because Many People are Getting Richer - Marginal REVOLUTION

 

[metis]

Additionally, poverty is continuing to decline.

And this is true internationally as well as a byproduct of having a global economy, whereas dire poverty is now down to 10% but, unfortunately, now growing because of climate change that's affecting weather patterns, many for the worse.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

According to the WSJ and others (WSJ full article unavailable unless you subscribe) by 2030 the median household income will be $6500 less. In addition full time equivalent employment per person will be reduced by about 3 percent. Also spending per household by will be reduced by 7 percent which also indicates GDP will have a $2.6 trillion in GDP.
The Biden campaign and other discredit this idea, saying they will not increase taxes on the middle class. What they blatantly fail to disclose is that the new laws and regulations they will introduce will have a drastic effect on businesses, both large and small, which will cause economic issues, and their stance on fossil fuel will cause a drastic rise in the cost of petroleum products, gasoline and diesel for one .
Opinion | The Cost of Bidenomics (partial article)
An Analysis Of Vice President Biden’s Economic Agenda: The Long Run Impacts Of Its Regulation, Taxes, And Spending
Biden's economic plan could crush nation's recovery from coronavirus pandemic, conservative economists say

Of course no "MSM" sources since they are in his camp.

I'm old enough to remember when the WSJ Opinion pages were saying that Obamacare would cost jobs and ruin the economy.

Somehow when Trump took office in 2017, unemployment was at a record low and the stock market was at record highs.

By the way, speaking of things that will hurt GDP: COVID-19 will cost our economy many trillions of dollars. Trump literally has no plan to safely and effectively reopen the economy. Biden does. It involves mobilizing a large number of contact tracers and using clear guidance to bring back consumer confidence. Read about it here:
The Biden Plan for an Effective Re-Opening that Jumpstarts the Economy | Joe Biden for President: Official Campaign Website

We can debate the merits of Biden's plan, but, it seems pretty common-sense to me. There is nothing radical about it. Trump's plan is to just put "Open" signs on all businesses and hope for the best. For Trump to not even have a plan is astonishing.

 

[Mindmaster]

According to the WSJ and others (WSJ full article unavailable unless you subscribe) by 2030 the median household income will be $6500 less. In addition full time equivalent employment per person will be reduced by about 3 percent. Also spending per household by will be reduced by 7 percent which also indicates GDP will have a $2.6 trillion in GDP.

I sort of disagree with but, I should quantify why....

If we're going to the numbers due to the way inflation works + average salary raises. (rounding a bit here for simplicity) in 10 years time:

Salaries will raise 20%, so the persons working will go from 50kish median to 70k median. (Around 2% a year.)

inflation will raise at about 3.2% per year, so a 32% decrease in the value of money.

That means roundabout a 12% decrease in 'buying power' of income or a '6k' effective reduction in buying power. BUUUUUUT.....

This is averages, and it doesn't reflect the fed or other governmental agencies doing anything about it. We've had 10 year periods where it's been much lower or the currency even deflated and went the other way. This is a worse case scenario where people do nothing about it, but there are ways to combat this like limiting the currency supply, controlling interest rates to increase demand for the currency, or even reclaiming currency from international banks / holders and taking it out of circulation that way.

The do-nothing scenario is unlikely and despite the apparent loss of buying power experienced at the consumer end. For example, goods often get cheaper proportionately due to competition and effectiveness in manufacturing. That's not really counted here...

 

[Watchmen]

I disagree. The opinion is also shaped by your information sources. I prefer data. Republicans don't support the middle class. (But they'll tell you they do =))

View attachment 44301 View attachment 44302 View attachment 44303 View attachment 44304 View attachment 44305 View attachment 44306
Studies: Democratic politicians represent middle-class voters. GOP politicians don’t.

False. The economy was booming before COVID thanks to Trump. His policies improved life for the middle class in many ways.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

False. The economy was booming before COVID thanks to Trump. His policies improved life for the middle class in many ways.

Trump inherited a booming economy.

Unemployment was so low during Obama’s eighth year in office, that Trump claimed without evidence (as per his custom) that the Labor Bureau figures were fake. Immediately after taking office, Trump bragged about how low those same unemployment figures were.

Like everything else Trump inherited, he managed it poorly.

He will be the first President since Hoover to lose jobs during his term. And he has no plan to reopen the economy safely and effectively. Unfortunately our country can’t just deny reality until we go through bankruptcy like his many other businesses - we need an actual plan.

Source: United States Unemployment Rate | 1948-2020 Data | 2021-2022 Forecast | Calendar