• Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
  • FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!

Poll Shows Voters Don’t Know GDP Grew With Obama Tax Cuts

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-10-29/poll-shows-voters-don-t-know-gdp-grew-with-tax-cuts.html

Oct. 29 (Bloomberg) -- The Obama administration cut taxes for middle-class Americans, expects to make a profit on the hundreds of billions of dollars spent to rescue Wall Street banks and has overseen an economy that has grown for the past five quarters.

Most voters don’t believe it.

A Bloomberg National Poll conducted Oct. 24-26 finds that by a two-to-one margin, likely voters in the Nov. 2 midterm elections think taxes have gone up, the economy has shrunk, and the billions lent to banks as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program won’t be recovered.

“The public view of the economy is at odds with the facts, and the blame has to go to the Democrats,” said J. Ann Selzer, president of Selzer & Co., a Des Moines, Iowa-based firm that conducted the nationwide survey. “It does not matter much if you make change, if you do not communicate change.”

The Obama administration has cut taxes -- largely for the middle class -- by $240 billion since taking office on Jan. 20, 2009. A program aimed at families earning less than $150,000 that was contained in the stimulus package lowered the burden for 95 percent of working Americans by $116 billion, or about $400 per year for individuals and $800 for married couples. Other measures include breaks for college education, moderate- income families and the unemployed and incentives to promote renewable energy.

Not Getting Through

Still, the poll shows the message hasn’t gotten through to Americans, especially middle-income voters. By 52 percent to 19 percent, likely voters say federal income taxes have gone up for the middle class in the past two years.

“He’s all about raising taxes,” says poll respondent Jeanette Bagley, 74, a retired home health aide in a suburb of St. Paul, Minnesota. “He’s all about big government and big spending.”

The view that taxes have gone up is shared by a majority of almost all demographic groups, including 50 percent of independent voters, among the linchpins of Obama’s victory in the 2008 election.

Even a plurality of Democrats, 43 percent, holds this misperception. Overall, 63 percent of those who earn $25,000 to $49,999 say taxes have gone up, compared with 45 percent of those who earn $100,000 or more.

Republican Advantage

The poll demonstrates the tough odds for Democrats heading into the midterms. Republicans are poised to retake the U.S. House next week with a 47 percent to 44 percent edge among likely voters. Independents are driving the Republican advantage.

The heart of Obama’s voting base and the group he’s tailored most of his policies to, middle-income earners -- or those who make $25,000 to $49,999 -- feel more pinched by taxes, are gloomier about economic growth and more pessimistic the tax dollars lent to Wall Street banks will ever be repaid than their higher-income-earning counterparts.

In an October report to Congress, released as TARP turned two years old, the Treasury said it had recovered most of the $245 billion spent on the Wall Street bank part of the rescue, and expects to turn a $16 billion profit. In the Bloomberg poll, 60 percent of respondents say they believe most of the TARP money to the banks is lost and only 33 percent say most of the funds will be recovered.

‘Go After the Middle Class’

“Anything that ever needs to be paid back it’s ‘let’s go after the middle class,’” says poll respondent Judith Ann Micone, a 55-year-old cosmetologist and Republican from Kalispell, Montana.

Women are slightly more skeptical than men that the funds will be recovered. Independents and Republicans are overwhelmingly skeptical. Even Democrats are mostly doubtful, with 48 percent saying the money will be lost, compared with 41 percent who say it will be recovered.

Separate from the aid for the Wall Street banks, the Treasury says the payouts for insurers such as New York-based American International Group Inc. will end with a small loss on investment, as will the bailout for automakers. Only the assistance to mortgage lenders, projected to reach about $45 billion, will never be repaid, Treasury says.

The perceptions of voters about the performance of the economy are also at odds with official data. The recession that began in December 2007 officially ended in June 2009, making the 18-month stretch the longest since the Great Depression.

Economy Grows Again

Today, the Commerce Department reported the economy grew at a 2 percent annual rate in the third quarter as consumer spending climbed the most in almost four years, a sign the expansion is developing staying power. In the past year, the economy has grown 3.1 percent.

The third-quarter growth matched the median forecast of economists surveyed by Bloomberg News and followed a 1.7 percent gain the prior three months. Household purchases, about 70 percent of the economy, rose at a 2.6 percent pace, the best quarter of the recovery that began in June 2009.

Voters aren’t seeing the better climate: 61 percent of poll respondents say the economy is shrinking this year, compared with 33 percent who say it is growing.

Charlene Miller, a 58-year-old unemployed nursery worker from Waterview, Maryland, said her impression is shaped by the state of jobs and wages and the fact that she’s been unemployed for two years.

“We’re sending too many jobs overseas and not paying Americans for their work,” says Miller, an independent who voted for Obama.

Obama Message

The president today sought to remind voters that the economy has grown for nine consecutive months.

“As we continue to dig out from the worst recession in 80 years, our mission is to accelerate that recovery and encourage more rapid growth,” Obama said after a tour of Stromberg Metal Works Inc. in the Washington suburb of Beltsville, Maryland.

Older voters are more likely to view the economy negatively, with 69 percent of those age 55 and older saying it is shrinking, compared with 48 percent of voters under 35 who say so. For those 65 and older, it’s 71 percent. Those who earn less than $50,000 are more likely to view the economy negatively than those who earn more.

The Bloomberg National Poll, which included interviews with 1,000 likely voters in the November 2010 general election, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

The impressions of these voters also are dissonant with other signs of economic improvement.

Stocks Rising

A year and a half after U.S. stocks hit their post- financial-crisis low on March 9, 2009, the benchmark Standard & Poor’s 500 Index has risen 75 percent, and it’s up 15 percent for this year.

The unemployment rate that’s hovered at or above 9.5 percent for 14 months is crowding out any positive news, said Bruce Oppenheimer, a political science professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.

“It spreads a dark cloud across anything else that you’re doing,” Oppenheimer said. “This won’t be a good election for Democrats.”

The poll reveals the failure of the Democrats to communicate their achievements even within their own party and the opposition’s triumph in painting the Obama administration as a failure, particularly on economic issues.

“The administration has said for a long time that the best politics was doing the right thing,” says Steve McMahon, a Democratic strategist. “It requires a lot more. These numbers show that the best politics is selling what you’re doing.”
 
That's the fault of Obama, his mouthpieces and other Demos.:dunno:

Do you think for a moment had this been the case under GWB every GOPer talking head, politician, sycophant, etc. wouldn't have plied their zombie electorate with that talking point if there were a similar perception/reality gap during his terms?

If there is the narrowest reality that can be pushed out of a circumstance (even if anecdotally misleading) GOPers DO NOT let a negative perception persist if there is even the slightest mechanism to steer it positive.

Most people understand at some level the unemployment rate is bad...But most Americans see that they either have a job or they don't. Most have no clue what the rate represents in relative terms.

Do you think for a second if Reagan's term was substituted for a Demo POTUS and Obama's term was a GOPer that GOPers wouldn't be pointing out at every turn unemployment being 10.8 pct. Nov. '82, 1 yr. 9 mos. into that term and that unemployment is 9.6 in Nov. '10, 1 yr. 9 mos. into their party's prez's current term?

They would be absolutely correct in pointing this out...not because it will solve a single problem in getting unemployment down. But because it would lend perspective under the circumstances to those who don't have a perspective on it.

Most people think health care reform was "rammed" through and don't know it was offered for debate for a year. GOPers stood around with their usual playbook - delay and smear. But the perception now is Demos 'rammed' this instead of GOPers had a year to offer meaning solutions...(in fact YEARS to do so when they defeated it in '93) but did nothing but delay, mislead and filibuster like they did in '93.

And on and on and on and on.....
 

vodkazvictim

Why save the world, when you can rule it?
People not paying attention to the big picture of how their country is run? This is new...
 
Obama may have cut taxes, but federal deficit is skyrocketing and that debt burden will eventually lead to higher taxes. Somebody does have to pay for all that stimulus and government programs at the end of the day.
 
Obama may have cut taxes, but federal deficit is skyrocketing and that debt burden will eventually lead to higher taxes. Somebody does have to pay for all that stimulus and government programs at the end of the day.

Theoretically if the tax cuts for the top 2 pct. are left to expire in addition to the economy growing the debt and deficit will shrink. Look at the history of these things...

As a percentage of GDP our deficit is not has high as it has been before in our history and we've survived.:2 cents:
usgs_line.php
 

xfire

New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
Republicans don't understand how the economy works they're just worried about extending those fucking tax cuts for the rich and they've got the religious sheeple bamboozled into following them off the cliff. Another good percentage of the motherfuckers just can't stand having a black president. For the rest, the libertarianfags, they're just going to bitch about whoever is in office with no alternative solutions. They're really the worst of the bunch; all the bitching none of the responsibility. Stupid is as stupid does.
 
Three thoughts.

The last section is the main problem. With the high unemployment rate, in addition to not knowing, I think voters don't care about GDP, taxes, etc. Not only do you have people currently unemployed, but you also know someone who has been trying to get a job for a long time. In this scenario it becomes more about personal economics than national or global economics.

Second, it is Obama and the Democrat's fault that this is not being communicated better, although I know it is hard. Liberals and Democrats were beating Bush over the head when he was in office, and now the tables have turned. I sometimes think it is better to be the party not in power. The economy is improving. That is a fact (growth over the last 5 quarters), but it is climbing out of a deep recession. It is going to take time.

Third, there is no criteria to be a registered voter (except not being a felon). There is no IQ test or Civics class required. America has a mob mentality about almost everything (sports, celebrity scandals, pop culture) and it carries over in to politics.

There are going to be a bunch of Tea Party candidates who get elected this year. And everyone who supports them is going to find out that they are beholden to special interest groups just like every other politician before them. I just wonder if they are going to still try to run as "Washington Outsiders" during the next election cycle.
 
Three thoughts.

The last section is the main problem. With the high unemployment rate, in addition to not knowing, I think voters don't care about GDP, taxes, etc. Not only do you have people currently unemployed, but you also know someone who has been trying to get a job for a long time. In this scenario it becomes more about personal economics than national or global economics.
I don't know about this. It's a stretch to believe the 9.5 pct of those unemployed are going to trump the 90.5 who are...if this was the case..:dunno:
Second, it is Obama and the Democrat's fault that this is not being communicated better, although I know it is hard. Liberals and Democrats were beating Bush over the head when he was in office, and now the tables have turned. I sometimes think it is better to be the party not in power. The economy is improving. That is a fact (growth over the last 5 quarters), but it is climbing out of a deep recession. It is going to take time.
Truth.
There are going to be a bunch of Tea Party candidates who get elected this year. And everyone who supports them is going to find out that they are beholden to special interest groups just like every other politician before them. I just wonder if they are going to still try to run as "Washington Outsiders" during the next election cycle.

Or..they make shit worse because most everything I've heard from them shows they are either ignorant of the facts or know them but are deliberately ignoring them. And don't really understand much of the constitution.
 
Theoretically if the tax cuts for the top 2 pct. are left to expire in addition to the economy growing the debt and deficit will shrink. Look at the history of these things...

As a percentage of GDP our deficit is not has high as it has been before in our history and we've survived.:2 cents:

That's true, both the deficit and public debt were once higher than they are now, but look at this graph: http://gregdekspeaks.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/if-i-ever-run-for-political-office/ (personal taxation) and this figures: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=64&Topic2id=70 (corporate tax). Then compare them with this graph, showing the US public debt as a percentage of GDP: http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/askville/4889596_8620368_mywrite/us_debt_from_1940.gif .

Now I'm not saying that the US is overindebted; in fact it's public debt is lower than that of most of EU countries. And USA can finance it's debt cheaply due to it's AAA credit rating. But there are no guarantees that USA will be able to hold such a position indefinitely.
 
The Tea Partiers certainly don't know truth from fiction.


This vid says it all.There are a lot of people that actually talk and think like this,some of them post here.:1orglaugh

They are dangerous ignorant idiots and at some point something is going to have to be done to curtail their ability to influence america and its policys both domestic and foreign.
 
The Tea Partiers certainly don't know truth from fiction.


This is really odd... these bears, or whatever they are, take totally different tacts in this video here...



Its like they switched sides? Now I don't know who to believe??
 
That's true, both the deficit and public debt were once higher than they are now, but look at this graph: http://gregdekspeaks.wordpress.com/2010/09/15/if-i-ever-run-for-political-office/ (personal taxation) and this figures: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=64&Topic2id=70 (corporate tax). Then compare them with this graph, showing the US public debt as a percentage of GDP: http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/askville/4889596_8620368_mywrite/us_debt_from_1940.gif .

Now I'm not saying that the US is overindebted; in fact it's public debt is lower than that of most of EU countries. And USA can finance it's debt cheaply due to it's AAA credit rating. But there are no guarantees that USA will be able to hold such a position indefinitely.

:dunno:Okay...:confused:

But you were asking how does it get paid down and I was just explaining the theory and citing examples of the history.:2 cents: As GDP grows...revenues increase exponentially and the deficits and debt go down like it did under Clinton.

BTW, the biggest problem was the previous administration financing EVERYTHING and paying for nothing ...from the wars to the tax cuts. Remember, they inherited a 'surplus'.
 
:dunno:Okay...:confused:

But you were asking how does it get paid down and I was just explaining the theory and citing examples of the history.:2 cents: As GDP grows...revenues increase exponentially and the deficits and debt go down like it did under Clinton.

BTW, the biggest problem was the previous administration financing EVERYTHING and paying for nothing ...from the wars to the tax cuts. Remember, they inherited a 'surplus'.

Well I was merely trying to show that the large public debt acquired during World War II was paid back with high taxes afterwards.

I understand that the percentage of debt will go down if GDP grows and future budgets are balanced.... but you should not ignore the fact that US government has to pay interest every year for all that debt... I'm curious, how big are the interest rates that the US pays now?

I'm not from US and I'm not into the Bush vs Obama vs Tea Party thing... I'm from Europe and here fiscal irresponsibility and mounting public debt is quite an issue lately.
 
Well I was merely trying to show that the large public debt acquired during World War II was paid back with high taxes afterwards.

I understand that the percentage of debt will go down if GDP grows and future budgets are balanced.... but you should not ignore the fact that US government has to pay interest every year for all that debt... I'm curious, how big are the interest rates that the US pays now?

I'm not from US and I'm not into the Bush vs Obama vs Tea Party thing... I'm from Europe and here fiscal irresponsibility and mounting public debt is quite an issue lately.

Actually our war debts were paid for during and after. I wasn't really trying to draw this into a debate over Bush/Obama blah blah blah...but you seemed to jump ahead to suggest that Obama's stimulus and g'ment programs are the genesis our fiscal indebtedness right now when you missed the trillion dollars + in war funding and deficit financed tax cuts which took us from a budget surplus to large deficits....Not only did we not pay for a war while we undertook it for the first time, not only did we take the equally unprecedented step of cutting taxes during war (actually boots, bullets and bombs in action) but we deficit financed the tax cuts.

It just seemed to me you completely ignored or glossed over that to attach the lot to Obama's stimulus, etc.:dunno:

Obama would say let the tax cuts on the top 2 pct. expire so that we can begin to AT LEAST start paying pay for the wars. His opponents would run around parroting talking points for the purposes of gaining power... about Obama being tax and spend ...raising people's taxes, etc. Then every goober who wasn't getting their taxes raise would get all up in arms while the top 2 pct. would be saying...let and let us pay...because to not do so is just costing us anyway in the devaluing of the dollar.

But all Sam the Plumber who's making maybe $40k per...and listening to Glenn Beck and other losers like Hannity would be saying is Obama is raising 'our' taxes.
 
Top