Replies

You mentioned the public’s low perception of the strength of the economy... I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that wages for blue collar workers have gone down over the last 10-15 years? I know as the wife of a machinist we were (for God knows what reason) making more money when Clinton was in office than we are now, and I don’t understand that at all...

I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that wages for blue collar workers have gone down over the last 10-15 years?

Mine (as a "blue collar worker") have skyrocketed in the last 7 years!

Perhaps I should join a union and REALLY shoot for the stars eh?

One's wages earned are a personal thing and one makes what one is willing to work for.

The opportunity is there.

"I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that wages for blue collar workers have gone down over the last 10-15 years? I know as the wife of a machinist we were (for God knows what reason) making more money when Clinton was in office than we are now, and I don’t understand that at all..."

You are using anecdotal evidence to make a point, one which is patently untrue since real wages have increased during the relevant periods in the Bush and Clinton Admin's.

********************************************************* "In terms of equivalent starting points, it makes sense to compare 1993-1996 with 2003-2006 — two cyclically similar periods of equal duration.

Growth of real gross domestic product (GDP) in those periods was identical, at 3.23 percent a year. That's a tie. Nearly all other measures favor the past four years over Clinton's first term. Unemployment was 5.3 percent from 2003 to 2006, but 6 percent from 1993 to 1996. Sperling mentioned business investment to avoid mentioning housing investment. Yet business fixed investment was 10.9 percent of GDP from 2003 to 2006, compared with 9.2 percent of GDP from 1993 to 1996.

When it comes to inflation, Bush faced a huge increase in worldwide oil prices, but Clinton did not. In the consumer price index that excludes energy prices, inflation averaged 2.1 percent in the past four years, down from 2.9 percent in 1993-96.

When calculating real incomes, however, nominal increases in wage and benefits are reduced by total inflation, including higher energy prices. This would seem to put the past four years at a big disadvantage, given the spike in energy prices. Yet it turns out that "wage growth" in the first Clinton term was nothing to brag about. Even after including benefits, real compensation per hour fell by 0.5 percent in 1993, by 0.4 percent in 1994 and by another 0.3 percent in 1995. Real hourly wages and benefits increased by 1.2 percent a year from 2003 to 2006, but fell by 0.1 percent a year from 1993 to 1996.