Sometimes it’s hard to determine whether politicians live in an alternative, fictional world or simply lie without compunction to advance or protect themselves and/or their particular party. Because, the two story's below present a picture suggesting that Democrat rhetoric might have been dreamt up by Lewis Carroll, author of Alice in Wonderland.
Yesterday, CBS/DC Philadelphia reported that Vice President Biden spoke at the the House Democratic Caucus retreat in Philadelphia, saying, “To state the obvious, the past six years have been really, really hard for this country.”
“And they’ve been really tough for our party,” he went on, “Just ask [former DCCC chair] Steve [Israel]. They’ve been really tough for our party. But together – and together — we made some really, really tough decisions — decisions that weren’t at all popular, hard to explain.” Then he added that Democratic policies have been successful where Republican positions have failed.
“What we know is that middle-class economics works,” he said. “That’s pretty rare where you have two visions, a vigorous debate, and then you test who’s right. And the record shows that we were right.”
The president followed, adding, “I’m not giving up the last two years, standing on the sideline. There is no economic measure by which we are not better off,” urging that Democrats must tell that story.
Earlier, NY Representative, Steve Israel said House Democrats are “absolutely unified on three essential messages going forward. And it’s middle class, middle class and middle class.
Israel acknowledged that Democrats talked a lot about the middle class in last fall’s elections. But world calamities distracted voters, he said, and Democrats failed to show that their economic policies would directly benefit working-class families.”
Now, just four days earlier, January 26th, in the bastion of liberalism and publication of record for the Democrat party, the hallowed New York Times, Alicia Parlapiano, Robert Gebeloff, and Shan Carter collaborated on an article titled; “The Shrinking American Middle Class.”
The authors state that, “Since 2000, the middle class has been shrinking for a decidedly more alarming reason: Incomes have fallen.”
They continue with, “Here, we walk through the trends in some detail. There is no universal definition of middle class, of course. Some definitions are based on occupation or wealth; others take regional cost of living into account. We have chosen a simple one starting at about 50 percent above the poverty level for a family of four ($35,000) and topping out at six figures of annual income ($100,000), adjusting for inflation over time. We realize many households making more than $100,000 consider themselves middle class, but they nonetheless are making considerably more than most households — even in New York or San Francisco.”
Within the details, some very distressing additional information is found, further refuting the braggadocio of delusional Democrat politicians. “ Younger households have borne the brunt of the slowdown. Those headed by people aged 30 through 44 are more likely to be lower income — and less likely to be middle income — than in 2000.
Education matters more than it used to. In the 1970s, high school graduates who did not have a four-year college degree were well represented among the middle and upper class. They no longer are, as high-paying, blue-collar jobs have become rarer. College graduates have not suffered as much, though they are also less likely to be high income than they were in 2000.”
Which means that the core of the Democrat party, blue collar America, has fared worse than most in the downturn, but that’s not the very worst because, “Fully half of black households were lower income in 2013, while 43 percent of Hispanic households were; both numbers have risen 5 percentage points since 2000. Asian households, by contrast, are slightly less likely than white households to be low income.”
Therefore, with a 5% rise in their numbers, the black and Hispanic groups continually focused on in Democrat rhetoric, especially that of the president, have not only not been helped, they’ve been significantly harmed economically.
As far as those who are doing better, the results indicate a two-edged sword, whereas, “In recent years, the fastest-growing component of the new middle class has been households headed by people 65 and older.” Which on the surface looks like a good trend, until you dissect the reasons because, “Today’s seniors have better retirement benefits than previous generations. Also, older Americans are increasingly working past traditional retirement age. More than eight million, or 19 percent, were in the labor force in 2013, nearly twice as many as in 2000.”
Thus, some senior’s financial well-being results from retirement income benefits established and begun before many of today’s Democrat politicians were even born, while the economic downturn Democrats caused is forcing 8 million of them to remain in the work force because they have to.
In summation, “The share of the American population that is middle income has been shrinking for several decades. Until fairly recently, that was because more people were entering a higher-income bracket. Now it’s for the opposite reason. Until 2000, the reason was primarily because more Americans moved up the income ladder. But since then, the reason has shifted: There is a greater share of households on the lower rungs of the economic ladder.”
So, perhaps, it might do Joe Biden and company well if next time, before making a speech, he did some homework in advance. But, considering who his audience is, that might just be a waste of time. Because it’s quite obvious that to them, facts don’t matter now and, obviously, never did.
That's it for today folks.