Are you better off now than you were four years ago?
 

When I first voted for a President (wow, back in 1984), I can remember hearing Ronald Reagan use those words in the 1980 Presidential debate against Carter, and that is how I based my vote-the 80's were a great decade of greed and excess, and boy, did I take advantage of that! I wasn't concerned about "the evil empire" or Star Wars defense, or even Iran-Contra; no, all I cared about was making and spending money. So, screw you Mondale, and four more years of Ronnie!

As I have gotten older, my priorities have changed considerably, but I ALWAYS ask myself before I cast my vote, "...Am I better off today than I was four years ago?" In 1988 I was, but in 1992 I wasn't. 1996 yes, and 2000, also yes.

For me, looking back at presidental elections since WWII, it seems that the element of fear has always paid a prominent role in deciding who gets elected on both sides-Harry Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Reagan have all used the "fear factor" to persuade voters to vote for them. Whether it was the "Red Scare" or the "Cubans" or the Vietcong, our lives have always been in danger from outside forces. While I am certainly very thankful that we do have a strong military, I am also very cognizant of the fact that we are never truly safe, a fact that 9/11 brought to the forefront for all U.S. citizens.

Since I am not a fearful person by nature, for me, the threat of enemy attack is not my number one priority for casting a vote for a particular candidate. I personally feel that I face far greater risks to my life on a daily basis than what might happen if either Bush or Kerry is elected, and I am alright with that. However, I am sure that everyone has certain issues that mean more to them than others-whether it is national security, the economy, jobs, heathcare for all Americans, or whatever. So for me, and me alone, when I choose (and yes, I am really one of the "undecided" voters-although I am now leaning a particular way), I am going to ask myself, "...Am I better off in November, 2004 than I was in November, 2000?", and that is how I will vote.

I sincerely hope that others will be able to say the same...

I personally am.

But I finished my bachelor's degree program, so that'll happen.

Big fat no on that one.
While I have finished two BS degrees, I can't find a job that will put my skills to use. Basically, I can work the same jobs for the same hourly wage that I could have gotten without a college degree. I ended up taking a position in Americorp for lack of finding something that will pay well...hoping that after a year of service, I will be able to gain connections and get a "real" job. Very depressing that unless I participated in the Americorp program, I would still be answering phones and doing secretarial work.

Nice philosophy though..."Am I better off?" I'll have to remember that one to tell my friends.

Yes. 4 years ago we inherited an economy that scared me. Now I'm not exactly excited about the economy, but there is low volatility and I hope it gets exciting soon - or at least exciting by the time I go to and come out of grad school and whatnot.

In terms of personal wealth, my equity portfolio is up and that is tied to Bush really. If I get heavier into bonds and debt, then maybe I'd have an interest in Kerry. Now I am worried and feel as if I have to hedge.

-Rudey

What does the President have to do with the economy?

The Pres. has the ability to replace Alan Greenspan who has the ability to raise and lower interest rates. That's about it for a direct connection. There's a larger connection between policies and legislation going through congress and how they affect businesses and corporations.
As for tariffs... that's a whole other boat.

What did Bill Clinton do to promote the strong economy of the 90's?

So nothing? Even what you mentioned about someone like Greenspan isn't right.

-Rudey

Ahem, before you use strong economy, let's not forget the economy faltered towards the end of his term, before Bush came into office.

-Rudey

Agreed. But what did Clinton do to get the economy where it was before he left office?

This is an interesting question. I wish that I had an answer.


Personally, I don't know too many people who are better off now than they were in 2000 unless they increased their education during that time. A person has more opportunities with a degree than without one.

Yes I would like to know also. I learned in 9th grade Econ that the economy will always be on a cycle - it's good then it goes down then it goes back up. I have not heard anything to convince me that Clinton is really the one to thank for the good economy in the 90's or that Bush is the one to blame for the economy not doing well in the 00's.

I like it when people consider things that belong to someone else theirs.

That being said, I'm substantially worse off, considering I'm now 5 figures deep in student loan debt. That doesn't really matter though.

My parents are better off, but their wealth increase was not proportionate to the increase they experienced under the Bush I or Clinton administrations. My mom's employer is going down the toilet fast and is outsourcing like crazy. My dad's employer is so global that I don't foresee it being a problem.

All three of us are voting Kerry, however.

What do you mean?

Like if I ride in my friend's Corvette and then say I have a Corvette. I don't, she does. She just lets me ride in it.

what are you referring to? :confused:

(check your PM box :))

How do they not? 2000 wasn't that great a year.

-Rudey

Why does that not surpise me?;)

It's actually the first time either of my parents have ever decided so early - and the first time they've been so involved in an election. Normally they just vote, do their thing, and that's the end of it - this year my mom is phone-banking for Kerry (as am I) and we have matching Kerry stickers on our matching cars.

The weirdest thing is that the three of us have three very different reasons for voting for him, but whatever works. :)

What does that mean?

How do they not what? What's your question?

2000 wasn't a great year, but it wasn't that bad. There have been worse years since at least among people I know.

It means don't say you have something you don't.

Further example: My family owns a lake home. I do not own a lake home. I get to use the lake home by priviledge of my surname, but I did nothing to purchase or obtain the lake home.

Comparing now vs 2000, how do they not feel that now is much better than in 2000?? In 2000, GDP and employment went down hard. After that they sorta flattened a bit and started to rise.

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/...4schul.750.gif

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...nomy+inherited

-Rudey

That's fine, and I agree... I think the question is what does that have to do with this thread?

That many people of my genre are saying they are better/worse off based on the performance or obtainment of assets that are not in fact their assets.

Excatly. IMO, this thread is most pertinent to people who were out of school and working in 2000. If you were in college then and are a senior or just out now.. it is a harder question to answer.

I am about the same, frankly, as my company put a FREEZE on salaries in late 2000. I hear rumors that will be made right late this year, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Have you been receiving cost of living adjustments? 'Cause if not, then that really does suck.

Right and I think most people would have known where they would have been financially in 2000. For me, getting an internship was difficult - when in normal years most kids were getting 10-15 for each summer, this year it was more unstable. And when I looked at my friends who were taking job offers comparable to mine when I graduated in 2003, their offers were less, bonuses were less or nothing, and a VERY low number were getting hired and often those that were hired were laid off within a couple months with a nice cutoff amount.

In terms of personal finances, my portfolio grew in 2003, and took a hit in 2000. People are allowed to invest in college right?

-Rudey

Whew, then I can stop being paranoid :) I really thought GP's comment was about me somehow and I didn't get it (me=vain)

(I was out by then, so I leave my comment as is :))

Some personal observations
 

Many people that I know have spent a portion of the last three years unemployed, underemployed, or temporarily employed. Their income has decreased as has the value of their 401K and other retirement funds. The question was "Are you better off now that you were four years ago?" My answer is "No." The answer for many of my friends, colleagues, and relatives is also "No." Maybe personal anecdotes aren't important when it comes to economics, but the question was a personal one.

Perhaps the economy of New York is different from other places because of September 11th. That was when I noticed that so many people were getting pink slips and were not able to find comparable jobs in a reasonable period of time. Those charts reflect the lives of the people I am talking about. They lost jobs in late 2001, 2002, and 2003. Personally, the last three years felt like the early 1990s all over again.

In the last three or four months many of my friends have found full-time permanent jobs with benefits and potential for growth, but that doesn't erase the last few years.

I do agree that problems with the economy began in 2000. I noticed many dot coms were downsizing, but it seemed to be limited to a very specific field. Also the value of the dot com and tech stocks began to decrease which made many people's portfolios decrease. I think that September 11th made the economy much worse.

Re: Some personal observations
 

Right, but 2004 and 2001 are very different, even in NYC. The Tech sector wasn't the only one to take a dive (in NYC there was Silicon Alley), but also so did the finance sector which is incredibly huge in NYC. I don't know what your friends did or do, but that sector has seen a rise in hiring and employment and the fear of 2000 is no longer there.

-Rudey

I know for my parents the answer of "are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" the answer is no- the medical field in Iowa is seeing budget shortages due to the medicaid/medicare gap- Iowa hospitals last year lost over a billion dollars because Congress is screwing them over. My father was layed off because of the budget problems at the last hospital he worked for. Took about a year for things to settle.

Yes
 

Yes

Four years ago I was making almost twice as much money as I am now.

Corporate merger, downsizing, recession effects on broadcasting (and everything else) and maybe throw in a little age discrimination in the mix.

The good news is that with all the kids out of the house, we don't need nearly as much and are doing OK.

(Thank goodness for National Merit and additional scholarships which pay nearly 100% of our son's college costs, though)

no, not at all

thanks for bringing that up, god

I should ask my parents that question.

Hmmm...if Mr. Munch had MANBOOBS, would I consider those mine?

I'm definitely not. Raises have been less than the rate of inflation and one year there weren't any at all. I saw 10 to 12 of my coworkers get laid off (those are the people I knew personally.. there were 500 layoffs altogether). I saw three neighbors go for a year without work and they are trying to catch up on bills that they couldn't pay during that time. They are all making about half what they had been making. The escrow portion of my mortgage payment has gone up $160 a month (they say due to 9-11 and the stock market problems). I'm paying at least $.50 more a gallon for gas. I'm spending twice as much on my prescription co-pay and doctor visit co-pays. My ER co-pay increased from $5.00 to $50.00. I am now paying part of the premium for health care insurance (for an HMO that the health care system I work for OWNS). One year(2002), our raises were 2% and didn't cover the increase in the cost of our benefits, so I brought home less money that year even though I'd gotten a raise. On my drive to work, there are 5 "mini-apartments" set up under freeway overpasses. In 20 years of working in Detroit, I had never seen that before until this year. My retirement plan at work is no longer increasing. I don't expect the 110% return I had in 1999, that was a fluke, but 5% would be nice. The price of beef has skyrocketed. My car insurance has almost doubled (granted I had one accident). My car is 4 years older and I can't afford a new one so I'm pouring tons of money into that one to keep it going. Day care costs have also increased tremendously. Back then, I was paying $40 a day for summer day care, now it's $50 a day. My cell phone plan is the same cost, but I get less minutes than I used to. My monthly cable bill goes up $10 every year. So, in the past 4 years, my monthly expenses have increased by about $800 and my take home monthly pay has gone up by about $400. And, that's a problem.

My mom is not. I am in shock today as I picked up 10 of my mom's 14 prescriptions yesterday and wrote a check for $531 for her. I am totally in shock. She gets $793 in Social Security and $650 from her pension and 10 of 14 prescriptions cost $531. She only has to buy the other 4 every other month. I shudder to think what those cost. I wanted to cry for her. She traded a mortgage payment for prescription payments.

Now I'm depressed.

Dee

Does the President have anything to do with any of the above items?

The Republican President with a Republican Congress.. not the President alone.

Failing to address health care issues? yes. Proposing and passing a far less than adequate Medicare prescription coverage plan? yes. State taxes going up due to cuts in federal allotments to the states? yes. Lack of funds for road improvements? yes. The insurance increases due to stock market problems and 9/11, not as directly. Failure to make affordable child care available? yes.

Whether the president was directly responsible wasn't the question though. The question was whether I'm better off than I was four years ago, and the answer is no. Another question to add to it would be.. is the president going to make it better over the next four years or will you feel a continual downward spiral? With the national debt increasing as it is, I don't see how it's going to get better. We're going to get to a point where all the money goes to paying interest on the debt and there is no money for anything else. From what I see in my day to day life, society in general is taking a nose dive and nobody is doing anything about it. We're so worried about what other countries are up to that our own needs are being ignored.

Dee