The chart below from the Economic Policy Institute compares the current economic expansion with averages from five other economic expansions since World War II.

Notice the massive purple tower on the right, just above the phrase "corporate profits?" EPI attributes this to Bush's tax cuts:
In short, the current recovery looks weak on all measures except profit growth. As a policy lesson, the large tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, which have had ample time to affect the economy by now, have failed to deliver economic performance that even matches up to the past average.
I haven't seen the source data or methods of the study, so as with any statistical information, it's probably wise to take the results with a grain of salt. But the chart reflects what many people, even without a strong background in economics, intuitively know: The tax cuts do very little to help the middle class. I think that's a major reason why news reports about economic growth don't resonate with many Americans, but John Edwards' "two Americas" message does.
Want even more bad news? Take a look at the graph to the right illustrating the divergence between median wage growth and overall economic growth since the expansion began.
Only recently has the administration steered away from its rhetoric about the booming economy and acknowledged that "some of our citizens worry about the fact that our dynamic economy is leaving working people behind. ...Income inequality is real."
Kevin Drum thinks this isn't necessarily a change of heart, but rather a change of message... a new spin on things. It's a cynical analysis, but not entirely unrealistic or unexpected. The approach mirrors the way the administration handled the justification for Iraq. People aren't buying the WMD claims? We'll try selling an Iraq-Al Qaeda connection to them. People don't believe us when we say tax cuts are helping them economically? Time for a new marketing approach.
Now the onus is on the Democratic Congress and presidential candidates to explain to voters how they're going to do it differently.
|